Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="trancejeremy" data-source="post: 6404132" data-attributes="member: 924">I would strongly disagree with the 1st premise. OSR = TSR era D&amp;D/AD&amp;D. Not 3rd, not 4th, and certainly not 5th which IMHO, is less easy to convert than 3rd edition, thanks to bounded accuracy completely changing the ranges for AC and to hit rolls. Up to a certain point, 3e monsters have the same HD (albeit with bigger bonus hp) and AC and even damage that pre 3-e monsters do. And then, again, because of bounded accuracy, the power curve is different. A group of 6-8 kobolds is a fair challenge for a 1st level party in TSR era D&amp;D, but soon becomes trivial unless you get cute with traps and stuff. In 5E, it's still a fair challenge for mid level parties. (Not saying that is good or bad, just different)And the 2nd part smacks of general elitism. I.e, if I don't like it, it's &quot;roll-play&quot; while what I like is &quot;role-play&quot;. Some people like combat, some people like adventuring and exploration, some people like telling stories. System can play a role, but in reality, it's the players that decide that, not the system. And ultimately it's a game, so rolling dice does matter, just as much as playing a role. How much of each type should really be up to what suits the group.And I'm not sure about the 3rd part either. Most recent Swords &amp; Wizardry products are just re-statted Pathfinder or 3e products. You have Lamentations of the Flame Princess which is probably more Werner Herzog than anything else. You have things like Spears of the Dawn or Arrows of Indra which are fairly serious attempts at playing in non-European cultures. There's a handful of gonzo stuff, a smattering of attempts at swords &amp; sorcery (Crypts &amp; Things for instance). There are westerns and space games and steampunk and cyberpunk games. I don't think there really is one esthetic, other than a sense of &quot;do it yourself&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="trancejeremy, post: 6404132, member: 924"] I would strongly disagree with the 1st premise. OSR = TSR era D&D/AD&D. Not 3rd, not 4th, and certainly not 5th which IMHO, is less easy to convert than 3rd edition, thanks to bounded accuracy completely changing the ranges for AC and to hit rolls. Up to a certain point, 3e monsters have the same HD (albeit with bigger bonus hp) and AC and even damage that pre 3-e monsters do. And then, again, because of bounded accuracy, the power curve is different. A group of 6-8 kobolds is a fair challenge for a 1st level party in TSR era D&D, but soon becomes trivial unless you get cute with traps and stuff. In 5E, it's still a fair challenge for mid level parties. (Not saying that is good or bad, just different) And the 2nd part smacks of general elitism. I.e, if I don't like it, it's "roll-play" while what I like is "role-play". Some people like combat, some people like adventuring and exploration, some people like telling stories. System can play a role, but in reality, it's the players that decide that, not the system. And ultimately it's a game, so rolling dice does matter, just as much as playing a role. How much of each type should really be up to what suits the group. And I'm not sure about the 3rd part either. Most recent Swords & Wizardry products are just re-statted Pathfinder or 3e products. You have Lamentations of the Flame Princess which is probably more Werner Herzog than anything else. You have things like Spears of the Dawn or Arrows of Indra which are fairly serious attempts at playing in non-European cultures. There's a handful of gonzo stuff, a smattering of attempts at swords & sorcery (Crypts & Things for instance). There are westerns and space games and steampunk and cyberpunk games. I don't think there really is one esthetic, other than a sense of "do it yourself" [/QUOTE]

Verification