Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 8279852" data-attributes="member: 15700">Coincidentally enough, when I was asked this question in the interview, this is how I answered:Q) I don't think there's a right answer to this... but you've mentioned rulings over rules, danger and zero to hero. Is that how you define OSR? Is there an accepted definition?I don't think there is any "one true way" to define the OSR, because the OSR above all else is meant to emulate the feel and/or mechanics of many games from the 70s/80s.  Since there were so many games even then, there is no real way one could define the OSR objectively.  That said, I think most fans of the OSR would agree on common themes.  Those being rulings over rules, zero to hero, mechanically more lethal of a system, sandbox play, etc.  Because gaming was still new back then, and we didn't have the internet where you get an instant answer to a question by the design team, most tables were coming up with stuff on the fly.  That fostered a lot of creativity and homebrew.  Players were encouraged to come up with their own stuff.  I know this is anecdotal, but it seems that there are fewer GMs today who are creating their own game worlds and adventures than in the 80s, where nearly everyone I met was doing that.So not the best answer, but at least I mentioned how there isn't any one true way of defining it, which I think is the important part.</blockquote>