My Response to the Grognardia Essay "More Than a Feeling"

[Ariosto]

System matters. The question is, how much?

Enough not to dismiss preference for an old approach as "just nostalgia."

Are Necromancer Games 3e adventures and Goodman Games Dungeon Crawl Classics part of the old school renaissance? If yes, then that shows the limitation of system as a means of categorisation.

Sure: it's limited to categorizing system!

NG and GG have published new editions of old material, and GG has published the Random Esoteric Creature Generator. GG at least has also published scenarios that in their linearity are the antithesis of OS -- which was true of some classic TSR tournament modules as well!

One could even say 3e itself was part of the old school renaissance with its 'Back to the Dungeon' after the more setting and story focused 2e.

One could say that, but one would be wrong. "What the game was like before 3E" is pretty much the operative definition of OS. The big issues with 2E are not to do with the core rules.

One could also say 4e is old school in several respects.

That's dubious, and in any case the game as a whole manages to make 3E look good by comparison, from an OS perspective.

And yet sites such as Grognardia or Dragonsfoot seem to be very anti-d20. But Castles & Crusades is widely recognised as being both d20 *and* old school.

There's a coat of "d20 system paint" in ascending AC and the "SIEGE system" (which is not really a system at all, but provides an illusion that may comfort some). What's underneath is pretty OS. Some folks have "history" with it from development that left a bad taste in their mouths, because it had been billed as a new AD&D. It's not AD&D.

So there's a definite problem in defining what is and isn't part of the old school renaissance.

There may be a problem you have chosen to make for yourself, but that's easily solved by letting the OSR speak for itself.

 

[Remathilis]

Ok, for the LAST time...

I'll list the game, you tell me if its OSR or not.

OD&D (core)
OD&D (+ Supplements)
Basic (Holmes)
Basic (B/X, Cook/Molvay)
Basic (BECMI/Rule Cyclopedia)
AD&D 1e (core)
AD&D 1e (+ Supplements/Unearthed Arcana)
AD&D 2e (core)
AD&D 2e (+ Supplements)
AD&D 2e (Players Option line)
D&D 3e/v3.5 (core+ Supplements)
D&D 4e (core + Supplements)
Hackmaster
Labyrinth Lord
Castles & Crusades
Basic Fantasy RPG
Swords & Wizardry
OSRIC 2.0
Pathfinder
True d20

Simple yes/no would be appreciated.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I'll list the game, you tell me if its OSR or not.

I don't see how the original 70s + 80s games could be part of the OSR, they're just straight OS aren't they? Playing one today would be OSR, the game itself is OS. Or perhaps that's too fine a distinction.

To me OS refers to D&D before Gary left TSR, associated play styles, and other games that resemble D&D of that period.

Dragonlance? Not OS, even though it's not quite post-Gary. 2e? Not OS. Roleplaying? Not OS. The word 'milieu'? OS. PCs with no personality or name? OS. Sandbox-style play? OS. Massive dungeons with different monsters in every room and the whole thing is controlled by a mad wizard whose name is an anagram of the DM's name? OS.

 

[rounser]

OD&D (core) yes
OD&D (+ Supplements) yes
Basic (Holmes) yes
Basic (B/X, Cook/Molvay) yes
Basic (BECMI/Rule Cyclopedia) yes
AD&D 1e (core) yes*
AD&D 1e (+ Supplements/Unearthed Arcana) yes*
AD&D 2e (core) yes*
AD&D 2e (+ Supplements) yes/no**
AD&D 2e (Players Option line) no**
D&D 3e/v3.5 (core+ Supplements) no
D&D 4e (core + Supplements) no
Hackmaster yes***
Labyrinth Lord yes
Castles & Crusades yes
Basic Fantasy RPG yes
Swords & Wizardry yes
OSRIC 2.0 yes
Pathfinder no
True d20 no

But that's just my opinion. And certain systems get a free ticket for reasons of attitude and pedigree, or don't qualify for the same. And oldschool status doesn't imply an assessment of quality or lack thereof.

*1E has a lot of rules which no-one ever used (e.g. survival guides) or Gygax regrets putting in there (e.g. psionics) which could be considered un-oldschool in philosophy. 2E core has some of these oft-ignored convolutions too. For me, old school also encompasses the way things end up getting played, not just the RAW.

**Depends how much and which rules are used. Although elegant in places, skills and powers toys with madness, and is generally regarded as 2E's tipping point of no return. You can also jam up 2E's works with weird optional rules that would quickly render it unoldschool - the game bending psionics rules, for instance.

***It's an AD&D 1E parody, so must belong to the category at least in spirit if you consider 1E AD&D to be oldschool.

 

[Ariosto]

If you use products from the OSR in your game -- whatever it is -- then I would call that playing a part in the OSR! The old game books themselves are obviously not products of the "renaissance", but people dusting them off to play may be. Products of WotC are products of WotC. Some people might conceive of the OSR primarily (or wholly?) in terms of initiatives by hobbyists, but I don't know. It's certainly possible for something to have some OS design elements without being seen by designer or users as part of the OSR.

 

[ggroy]

OD&D (core) yes
OD&D (+ Supplements) yes
Basic (Holmes) yes
Basic (B/X, Cook/Molvay) yes
Basic (BECMI/Rule Cyclopedia) yes
AD&D 1e (core) yes*
AD&D 1e (+ Supplements/Unearthed Arcana) yes*
AD&D 2e (core) yes*
AD&D 2e (+ Supplements) yes/no**
AD&D 2e (Players Option line) no**
D&D 3e/v3.5 (core+ Supplements) no
D&D 4e (core + Supplements) no
Hackmaster yes***
Labyrinth Lord yes
Castles & Crusades yes
Basic Fantasy RPG yes
Swords & Wizardry yes
OSRIC 2.0 yes
Pathfinder no
True d20 no

But that's just my opinion. And certain systems get a free ticket for reasons of attitude and pedigree, or don't qualify for the same. And oldschool status doesn't imply an assessment of quality or lack thereof.

*1E has a lot of rules which no-one ever used (e.g. survival guides) or Gygax regrets putting in there (e.g. psionics) which could be considered un-oldschool in philosophy. 2E core has some of these oft-ignored convolutions too.

**Depends how much and which rules are used. Skills and powers toys with madness, and is generally regarded as 2E's tipping point of no return. You can also quickly jam up 2E's works with weird optional rules that would quicly render it unoldschool - the game bending psionics rules for instance.

***It's an oldschool parody, so must belong to the category at least in spirit.

Which of these would be considered "old school" (OSR)?

RuneQuest
Chivalry and Sorcery
Tunnels and Trolls
Traveller
Dragonquest

 

[rounser]

Which of these would be considered "old school" (OSR)?

RuneQuest
Chivalry and Sorcery
Tunnels and Trolls
Traveller
Dragonquest

I don't know these games, so can't comment.

 

[Ariosto]

Whether they are "old school" is different from whether they are part of the "old school renaissance".

Bear in mind that the OSR, and the OS definition associated with it, comes primarily from a D&D perspective.

Tunnels & Trolls and Traveller are widely recognized as fitting that definition "to a T", to the extent that it applies to games other than D&D.

Chivalry & Sorcery, Runequest and Dragonquest likewise embody design elements departing from the definition. C&S seems simply to lack enough popularity to come in for much analysis, but the first edition would be less of a departure than the second (which C&S fans in my experience judged the better game). The skill system in RQ is the main thing that stands out; that, using the same characteristics for monsters as for characters, and the "resistance formula" struck me in the 1970s as significant innovations. SPI's games stood out even further with detailed rules and attention to fine points of game balance.

Note, however, that 1st/2nd edition RQ in particular is a game with a significant following among people who also enjoy old-style D&D.

 

[ggroy]

How much different is a d100 percentile based system (ie. RuneQuest, DragonQuest, etc ...) from a d20 based system (ie. D&D, AD&D, etc ...)?

Or for that matter, any other probability based system executed via dice rolls (ie. 3d6, etc ...).

The main obvious difference is the d20 has a probability granularity in steps of 5%, while the d100 percentile has a probability granularity in steps of 1%.

I doubt "old school" or OSR has anything to do with specific probability granularity in the systems used for combat, skills, etc ...

 

[Ariosto]

No, but the addition of skill ratings is by itself regarded skeptically in the OSR. I think RQ comes in for more flak than Traveller on that count partly because it is more often (if inaccurately) seen as a "D&D wannabe", and partly because more D&Ders are ignorant of it and imagine it to be more like 3E than it really is. (The new Mongoose version is another matter.)

Boot Hill and Top Secret are established as OS, and they use percentile rolls for most things.