• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

OSR OSR ... Feel the Love! Why People Like The Old School

Yardiff

Explorer
B/X didn't have weapon proficiency. Although BECMI and AD&D I believe did.

I like my fighters to be good at all weapons. I generally follow a rule put in place by another retro-clone, where I just give fighters a damage bonus (to melee and missile) that scales by level. It's simple tweak and it doesn't shoehorn a character into a specific weapon.
Personally I hate fighters, especially low level fighters, knowing all weapons. It should take lots of time to learn the use of 40+ weapons, even when some weapons for very similar. This is why I liked 1e's weapon proficiencies and really disliked the 'newer' martial, simple, etc weapon groups. .

Of course this is just my opinion.
 

Campbell

Relaxed Intensity
B/X D&D as a wonderfully tuned focused sandbox dungeon crawling game that provides clear guidance on how to play is one of the better designed role playing games ever made. It does what it does very well. It's character options are remarkably well balanced (better than any edition barring 4e). I say this as someone who did not have the joy of playing or running B/X until the 4e era. My opinions on AD&D are less favorable.

Beyond that the OSR has delivered two remarkable sandbox games built off of B/X that I dearly love: Stars Without Number and Godbound
 

Sacrosanct

Slayer of Keraptis
Sarcosanct you did a good job with Felk More, printed it out and got it bound up.
Thank you for the kind words. I definitely wanted to go with a heavy OSR and 80s pop culture theme lol. Lots of lessons learned though, as it was written during the playtest in 2013-14, and then hurriedly updated in 2016, so some things may be a bit outdated on a pure 5e context.
 

Zardnaar

Adventurer
Thank you for the kind words. I definitely wanted to go with a heavy OSR and 80s pop culture theme lol. Lots of lessons learned though, as it was written during the playtest in 2013-14, and then hurriedly updated in 2016, so some things may be a bit outdated on a pure 5e context.
Yeah you big boss is a bit on the east side.

Still about ten times better than what I can put together, I don't have the desktop publishing skills.

Haven't got around to running it as megadungeons don't seem to be to popular these days.
I didn't realise you put it together until after I bought it and saw it in your signature.
 

ccs

39th lv DM
I don't care if people don't like OSR games. I play 5E as that's what everyone plays. Happy the play OSR and would sign up.

Not going to stand on a soapbox and claim it's the greatest thing ever. Don't like it that's fine don't play. My D&D KGB aren't going to turn put a gun to your head and drag you off to the OSR gulag and make you play.

It's not for everyone and that's fine.
That should so be a faction/place in a less-than-serious game.
 

Cleon

Adventurer
I think your forgetting weapon proficiency. WP was very limited in 1e not sure how it worked in B/X. In 1e a fighter only had 4 weapon proficienies at first level, then gain another every 4 levels so 7th, 10th etc.
In AD&D the issue wasn't Weapon Proficiency per se but, as Sacrosanct mentioned, Weapon Specialization, which was introduced in the Unearthed Arcana.

This allowed a Fighter to spend two of their weapon proficiency slots on the same weapon to become "specialized" in it, granting them increase rate of attack, a +1 to hit and a +2 damage, plus additional perks for some types of weapons.

A 1st level fighter using weapon specialization was roughly twice as deadly as one using the same weapon without specialization. It was rather unbalanced.

Plus, once a fighter got to higher level they could invest three slots in a weapon to become "double specialized" which was even better!

The Basic-Expert-Companion-Master-Immortal rules had something similar in the Weapon Mastery rules which, if I recall correctly, were introduced in 1984's Companion Set. Those had five levels of skill - Basic/Skilled/Expert/Master/Grandmaster depending on how many "proficiency slots" the fighter invested. The higher levels had really substantial bonuses - i.e. +6 attack bonus and 2d8+4/2d6+4 damage for a Normal Sword at master level, plus additional defensive perks that increased AC and allowed attempts to deflect weapon attacks. The rules also appear in the Cyclopedia.

At least with the BECMI version a fighter couldn't start out specialized in a weapon at 1st level, but had to have "basic" skill in their four weapon choices.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Personally I hate fighters, especially low level fighters, knowing all weapons. It should take lots of time to learn the use of 40+ weapons, even when some weapons for very similar. This is why I liked 1e's weapon proficiencies and really disliked the 'newer' martial, simple, etc weapon groups. .

Of course this is just my opinion.
I think the groups should be different entirely myself End Balanced weapons like axes and hammers are used very similar 1handed are pretty similar 1handed endbalanced has 2 similarities. Not certain exactly what ones to have but you could have thrusting vs slashing (a lot of weapons have a primary and secondary though many could and would use all three so it was even more how you used a weapon ie what maneuver - grabbing a greatswords blade and striking with the pommel was in the knights martial arts arena for instance and it was very effective, as were trips, throws and grabs mixed in with weapon strikes)
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
I thought I would say I like this much better than the other one which was just dissing although there were informative bits brought out by people on it too.
 

5ekyu

Explorer
[MENTION=6799753]lowkey13[/MENTION]
"So, what do y'all think?"

I think that's a list of preferences you have and that are thus fine, even tho I disagree with all 10 which might be a record for consistency.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Just devil's advocate here - Nostalgia's definition does involve personal experience, but there's a great deal of work in the psychology field on this very topic, and there's no definitive answer - too many contradictory inputs. Wistfulness and Yearning are often related - and there's a Portuguese word (Saudade) which is basically pseudo-nostalgia, and C.S. Lewis used sehnsucht of course. So, many people feel 'nostalgia' for things that aren't their personal memories, and in English, for lack of a better word, it just has to fit.
I do think might have beens are in there... its potentials lost and never experienced not just putting rosey eyed glasses on some experience you did have.

Beyond nostalgia elements however my experience has been that games have been improved in some fundamental ways but things were also lost in the trade. I like the feel of simultaneity of action in 1e yes it was all dm adjudicated with all the negative implications but it could be very action immersive to use modern language
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
@lowkey13
"So, what do y'all think?"

I think that's a list of preferences you have and that are thus fine, even tho I disagree with all 10 which might be a record for consistency.
Yeh its a hilarious me too I also like Paladins with old school flavor which I think are prominently on lowkeys negative list
 

lowkey13

Exterminate all rational thought
@lowkey13
"So, what do y'all think?"

I think that's a list of preferences you have and that are thus fine, even tho I disagree with all 10 which might be a record for consistency.
Wait until you see my list of favorite ice cream flavors!

Mmmmm..... Lobster ice cream in Bar Harbor.
 

Advertisement

Top