OSR Is there room in modern gaming for the OSR to bring in new gamers?

[Snarf Zagyg]

So, that may not mean what we think it means.

It means that the explicit rules necessary for play are less, but we've now hidden much of the content inside the skull of the GM. I can engage more quickly, but I know less about what's going on. The new player has a harder time making informed decisions. In 5e, I can look up how far my character can jump if I don't know it off the top of my head. In an OSR game, it may be, "Well, you can try..."

Which brings us around to maybe asking a different question - maybe it is less about whether OSR games are a good entry point, and more about whether OSR Game Masters are a good entry point. And, does the published game prepare GMs to be a good entry point out of the box, without apprenticeship?

Well, I don't know how long it has been for you since you played with people that have never played before, but ... they are not leafing through the rulebook to see how far their character can jump. Instead, after the first two or three games, they say, "Hey, what is this 'second wind' thing I wrote on my character sheet?"*

So, yeah.


*True example.

 

[Retreater]

Which brings us around to maybe asking a different question - maybe it is less about whether OSR games are a good entry point, and more about whether OSR Game Masters are a good entry point. And, does the published game prepare GMs to be a good entry point out of the box, without apprenticeship?

I'm not even sure how well 5e or PF2 do in preparing a new GM. I think apprenticeship is required regardless of the edition. You're going to need to sit through other games, watch them being played in person (or streaming), learn how to be a player. Otherwise, you're just guessing.
I haven't seen a popular, mainstream TTRPG teach it well. I'm curious if others have examples of this being done well.

 

[payn]

Preparing GMs is a good topic. I had a discussion recently on the Paizo boards about how using a bunch of sub-systems makes PF2 ideal for an old school sandbox. These sub-systems or tools or whatever are not clearly described in any material I have come across nor seem all that intuitive.

Also, how many times have folks come across comments about how bad adventure writing leads to people disliking an RPG system? Not every adventure model or campaign needs to go through all the motions to highlight how to run the system, but all systems should have a good intro adventure that does.

 

[jayoungr]

Many OSR products I see don't invoke excitement. They often display dry rules with little explanation for why things are the way they are or what the worlds internals are.

So the onus is put on the DMs and GMs to invoke excitement and understanding

I don't see this as a bad thing, necessarily. I mean, you can certainly make the books flashier and friendlier, and sure, that will pull in some people. But there's really no substitute for the social aspect. It's the single most effective recruitment tool there is, and treating it as a fail state is selling it short, IMVHO.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm not even sure how well 5e or PF2 do in preparing a new GM. I think apprenticeship is required regardless of the edition. You're going to need to sit through other games, watch them being played in person (or streaming), learn how to be a player. Otherwise, you're just guessing.
I haven't seen a popular, mainstream TTRPG teach it well. I'm curious if others have examples of this being done well.

I dont it's a matter of better or worse. I think it's more a case of each era demanding a different skillset from the GM. Clarity and adaption vs preparedness and game knowledge.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I don't see this as a bad thing, necessarily. I mean, you can certainly make the books flashier and friendlier, and sure, that will pull in some people. But there's really no substitute for the social aspect. It's the single more effective recruitment tool there is, and treating it as a fail state is selling it short, IMVHO.

This.

There is something that is ... baffling (?) ... about the number of people who seem to think that enthusiasm and/or experience is a drawback to a social game.

(That said, I do think that attractive and readable products ... and 5e is certainly that ... will do better.)

 

[Neonchameleon]

I dont it's a matter of better or worse. I think it's more a case of each era demanding a different skillset from the GM. Clarity and adaption vs preparedness and game knowledge.

Which are you saying is which? Because I'd have called the modern era of RPGs more about clarity and ability to think on your feet while not holding fixed plans.

And I consider both 4e and Apocalypse World to be excellent teachers of how to GM their style.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I don't see this as a bad thing, necessarily. I mean, you can certainly make the books flashier and friendlier, and sure, that will pull in some people. But there's really no substitute for the social aspect. It's the single most effective recruitment tool there is, and treating it as a fail state is selling it short, IMVHO.

I don't see this as an either-or. You can absolutely do both.

And because of that, you very much should do both. Writing dry books means you have fewer players.

 

[Campbell]

I think there's a very good reason why Worlds Without Number is currently the top product at drivethrurpg. It's a great text with strong layout and design, clearly describes how to run an effective sandbox game without talking down to new GMs, and has flourishes of modern design language while at heart being a game that is meant to be run in the old ways.

 

[Sacrosanct]

One thing about OSR is that is it encouraged looking at the problem ahead of you and not at your character sheet. This pushes humancentric characters with fewer supernatural features in realistic lower fantastic campaigns.

The modern times has popular comics and anime and high fantastical video games and tv shows. Games that don't have superstrength, fire blasts, razor sharp claws, and flight as regular abilities would have to sell their fun to the masses. And many OSR books look like bland textbooks.

Then you get to the heavy Eurocentric focus on many of the concepts in many OSR games.

All those things, video games, cartoons, etc existed when 1e did, so I don't think the correlation is there that you think is. 1e didn't have to hard sell itself to be popular because we also had the Atari and then nintendo, or because Akira, transformers, or thundercats also existed.

I honestly don't see how you think those old games look like old textbooks compared to now because everything you've mentioned, from halflings to media, exists now and also in the 80s. 5e hasn't presented any material today more colorful than it was in the 80s.

In fact, with the rerelease of ravenloft, many complaints are about how it's MORE bland than original

Edit: in fact, not only were comics popular back then, but in the mid to late 80s, they got so popular there was a pricing bubble. Comics out only a month rose to over a hundred bucks in price (like the Adventurer's). So it's not like there are more fantastical powered people are exposed to no that didn't also exist back then