OSR Opinions wanted and help getting started (primarily for 1st ed AD&D OSR)

[Lord Mhoram]

Why don't you just play 1E? It's true, there is a ton of great OSR stuff, but if you already own all the 1E stuff, just fire it up for a few games and see how it goes. Or is there a reason you specifically don't want to run with 1E that's pushing you to try the OSR games?

More than anything I want to know what is out there, so I can decide if I want to use that as written or as supplementary rules. Also, while I love reading Gygaxian prose, I don't like the organization of the original books; part of why I like Osric. It really is, for me right now, a survey of the "what else is out there and new that I can use" more than anything. That and finding modules my wife and I haven't played or GMed multiple times.

Edit - this is sort of thing with me - when playing Pathfinder 1st ed, I use material from Dreamscarred, Legendary, Rogue Genius games, Drop Dead Studios and many others. I am a voracious consumer and reader of rules.

 

[Voadam]

There are also lots of original D&D variants from before d20. Palladium FRPG is basically AD&D with a dodge and parry system, add your Physcial Endurance (Con) score to your hp, a percentile skill system, its own variant classes, xp awards, alignments, and such.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

There are also lots of original D&D variants from before d20. Palladium FRPG is basically AD&D with a dodge and parry system, add your Physcial Endurance (Con) score to your hp, a percentile skill system, its own variant classes, xp awards, alignments, and such.

I played a lot of those back in the day - I never liked the Palladium system. But thanks for the recommendation.

 

[Celebrim]

I DMed 1st AD&D for like 15 years back in the day. It was my primary system and I had a lot of fun. There are still parts of me that really love and miss some of the style of the 1st AD&D game, and that style definitely informs my modern gaming.

I think I can present solid evidence of my love of 1e AD&D in some of the threads I've started over the years, such as the one where I try to reimagine dragons using 1e AD&D rules and conventions but throwing out some sacred cows in order to have a richer and more interactive experience in a typical combat between a party of 1e AD&D PC's and a dragon. (Thread here.)

But I have on several occasions tried to run 1e AD&D in the years since then, and it's just too painful of an experience for me as a DM to try to run an exceptions based system where nothing is codified and everything depends on rulings. The cognitive burden of running a OSR style game is for me much too high compared to running more modern systems. The mental stress I'm under to try to be fair and consistent and keep the game pacing going while running 1e AD&D or an old school inspired game is just more than I enjoy these days. I'm pretty sure back in the day I had the same problems, because I can remember being unhappy with various aspects of the system, it's just I didn't have good alternatives then.

What I think you'll find is that the game works OK when it sticks to the kick the doors down cycle, but as soon as you start experimenting with more imaginative games that require more interaction it gets to be a bog. Some modern OSR's clean up some of the rules for you to make common tasks like surprise and initiative easier to handle, but I've yet to see an OSR that addresses the really deep problems in the rules. So while certain styles of DMs will probably be OK running and OSR and may even favor it, if you find you are the sort of GM that really values your referee hat and doesn't like to just decide everything by fiat in accordance to what you think is 'good for the game' and if you really value protagonizing the players without recourse to heavy illusionism, then I suspect you are going to run into lots of problems with OSR rules sets.

The hold out the idea that they are actually simpler to run than modern games, but in practice I find them much more complex. Rulings are rules. They are just rules you have to make up and remember. If designing a game as you go is something you find easier than running one, then chances are your motives aren't what you think they are.

 

[Nikosandros]

As a counterpoint, I'm currently playing in an AD&D game and I've run a lot of it in the recent past. I still greatly enjoy it. My style has never been of "kicking the door".

 

[amethal]

More than anything I want to know what is out there, so I can decide if I want to use that as written or as supplementary rules. Also, while I love reading Gygaxian prose, I don't like the organization of the original books; part of why I like Osric. It really is, for me right now, a survey of the "what else is out there and new that I can use" more than anything. That and finding modules my wife and I haven't played or GMed multiple times.

In relation to modules, are you familiar with tenfootpole.org? There are reviews of all sorts of modern "old school" adventures (and some other ones e.g. 5th edition).

Expeditious Retreat Press have an Advanced Adventures line for OSRIC over at drivethru. Some of them are better than others, although the only one I've actually run is Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom, which was good (you can't really go wrong with adventures written by Matthew Finch). They also publish Halls of Arden Vul, which is a megadungeon and looks amazing but is very long (and priced accordingly).

Another long-ish adventure that looks good (but I've never had a chance to run) is the Bone Hilt Sword 5-part campaign from Usherwood Publishing.

If you're interested in running 1st edition AD&D I'd also recommend Anthony Huso's blog (thebluebard.com)

 

[Mannahnin]

In relation to modules, are you familiar with tenfootpole.org? There are reviews of all sorts of modern "old school" adventures (and some other ones e.g. 5th edition).

Expeditious Retreat Press have an Advanced Adventures line for OSRIC over at drivethru. Some of them are better than others, although the only one I've actually run is Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom, which was good (you can't really go wrong with adventures written by Matthew Finch).

If you're interested in running 1st edition AD&D I'd also recommend Anthony Huso's blog (thebluebard.com)

Seconding all of these recommendations.

 

[Nikosandros]

If you're interested in running 1st edition AD&D I'd also recommend Anthony Huso's blog (thebluebard.com)

I wasn't familiar with The Blue Bard. Thanks a lot for mentioning it, I love it!

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

OSRIC is one of the early pillars of the OSR, of course, being a rules reference for (slightly clarified) 1E AD&D.

Just a note to add - it's a bit misleading to call OSRIC an "early pillar". It was the FIRST retroclone and there were no others to compare to it or compete with it. OSRIC isn't one pillar out of many rising from some other foundational movement - it's really the whole foundation. Unless you want to consider the Open Gaming License itself as the foundation, which simply by applying it to the original 1E rules instead of 3E rules permitted OSRIC to be created at all. OSRIC came out of seeing that the OGL enabled what we now know as retroclones to even be created, and most importantly, to be distributed or sold. However, only after OSRIC came into existence did others eventually see that the OGL permitted lots of other "old school" clones and alternatives to also be made.

The OSR owes its entire existence to OSRIC. OSRIC owes its existence to the OGL.

 

[Mannahnin]

Just a note to add - it's a bit misleading to call OSRIC an "early pillar". It was the FIRST retroclone and there were no others to compare to it or compete with it. OSRIC isn't one pillar out of many rising from some other foundational movement - it's really the whole foundation. Unless you want to consider the Open Gaming License itself as the foundation, which simply by applying it to the original 1E rules instead of 3E rules permitted OSRIC to be created at all. OSRIC came out of seeing that the OGL enabled what we now know as retroclones to even be created, and most importantly, to be distributed or sold. However, only after OSRIC came into existence did others eventually see that the OGL permitted lots of other "old school" clones and alternatives to also be made.

The OSR owes its entire existence to OSRIC. OSRIC owes its existence to the OGL.

I appreciate you expressing more completely how important and significant OSRIC is/was.

By calling it "an early pillar of the OSR" I did not mean OSR to be synonymous with the retroclone movement. To my mind the retroclones are one part of the OSR movement, and as such the original retroclone is thus one of the big pillars of the movement, along with influential resources like Philotomy's Musings, key blogs like Grognardia or Jeff's Gameblog, or Finch's Quick Primer for Old School Gaming.