OSR OSR Gripes

[Monayuris]

I don't think that they do. How you think about and prepare to play a game is entirely different than the rules you use to adjudicate it. OSR doesn't have a monopoly on style, or challenge, or opened ended games. You don't need to use an OSR rules set to have a proposition filter on your game that validates players making highly improvisational, open ended, and fiction specific propositions. "I carefully push aside the curtain with my 10' pole." is not a rule set specific proposition. It's just a way of approaching playing a game.

All the rules do for you - all any rules do for you - is provide a tool kit for handling how those propositions turn into new fictional positioning. You don't need old and busted ideas about doing that in order to run an old school game. I don't need another table argument about how infravision works. I don't need another table argument about what the chance to detect an invisible creature should be. I don't need to wrack my brain for whether or not the PC should drown. None of that is essential to running an old school game. That's warts of an old school game. That's the part I'm more than willing to leave behind. But the parts that I love, I can totally take with me. I don't need to give up any of that to use a rule set with functional skills and environment rules and a clear set of general fortune tests that are applicable to generic situations.

When someone says "old school games play absolutely fine" it really makes me wonder if you played them. Like as soon as I read the 'scent' rule in 3.0e, I smelled the 1980's and the old pizza and the table arguments as we tried to get realism and the rules to mesh into something everyone at the table agreed to. And if that didn't happen for you, where you even there?

Oh they most certainly do.

I still play them (I run a B/X game every Tuesday to a full table). I enjoy them. I'm perfectly happy running and playing B/X and its clones. They work perfectly fine for me.

I don't know why you have to come in and tell me the game i enjoy is old and busted or I don't actually play them.

You are certainly welcome to enjoy the games you like. As I said there are tons of games that fix the problems you have with OSR games.

Happy gaming.

 

[5ekyu]

Throw yourself into combat early and often. Be reckless. You will either get very lucky and make 2nd level or die. Then you can roll up a new, hopefully more robust PC. In other words, create your own character funnel.

Being crazy reckless with a PC can be fun.

Hah.

Sounds like the slow motion version of traveller's death in chargen, only here you may get to take other PCs folks like with you!!!

 

[Celebrim]

Oh they most certainly do.

I still play them (I run a B/X game every Tuesday to a full table). I enjoy them. I'm perfectly happy running and playing B/X and its clones. They work perfectly fine for me.

I don't know why you have to come in and tell me the game i enjoy is old and busted or I don't actually play them.

You are certainly welcome to enjoy the games you like. As I said there are tons of games that fix the problems you have with OSR games.

Happy gaming.

Naked contradiction is fine, but you'd be a lot more convincing if you were willing to tackle any of the issues I'm bringing up. If I started bringing up the problems with a having narrow wheels on an all steel body car with a high center of gravity, and you just told me, "It always worked for me." you wouldn't really convince me you had a lot of experience with the car no how matter how you told me you still drove one weekly.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I run S&W in a meat grinder dungeon. Stats don't matter much, there aren't any skills to speak of, and the rules are pretty sparse. Awesome! Tell me what your PC is doing and I'll adjudicate according to the rules we have and if there aren't any I'll use my best judgment and try to be consistent. Its a more player focused game IME, less fiddling about with the knobs and dodads on your character sheet, and more engaging with the game environment. One thing I've realized over the decades is rules can only get in the way of fun, for the most part. None of the more rules heavy systems I ran or played in, were more fun due to the heavier rules systems. The fun was always from how a player tried to approach a situation. But my group isn't a bunch that likes too tweak PC builds and work away from the game table. Its pretty casual beer and pretzels gaming group and a system like S&W works just fine for us. Some you can do all that and more with 5e, 4e, PF, etc. And if so bless you! For dungeon bashing D&D style gaming S&W works perfectly for me without having to house rules it up a lot.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Your suspicion is incorrect.

I like my cars like my RPGs. Old and gorgeous.

Preferences are an interesting, and personal, thing. It’s usually not helpful to assume others share yours.

I can't reply to him because I assume he has me on ignore, but I can see your quote. I have a 1968 Camaro. That I restored myself. And he's wrong. Well, his experiences aren't wrong of course, but the implication that an old classic car constantly breaks down is. Every "new" car I've owned frequently needs repair. The more things to go wrong, the more things that do. My Camaro? Going strong and almost never needs anything other than routine maintenance. Why? Because there's nothing to break. It's a frame, engine, and drivetrain. Pretty much it. Greatest car I've ever owned. Love it.

 

[Celebrim]

Your suspicion is incorrect.

This is what I actually said: "My suspicion is that if you haven't actually owned a classic car that you rebuilt out of the junk yard, you probably shouldn't tell me how great it is to own one."

What part of that is incorrect?

Are you saying that you haven't owned a classic car, but you should tell me how great it is to own one?

Because if you are saying you do own a classic car, then by what I said you can tell me how great it is to own one. Is that the part that is incorrect?

Preferences are an interesting, and personal, thing. It’s usually not helpful to assume others share yours.

I find it's usually not helpful to not respond to what people actually say.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sacrosanct]

Saying it’s only because of nostalgia infers that we never really had fun with them, or if we did, we weren’t smart enough to know better. Obviously that’s a flawed argument. There are plenty of strategy games, but lots of people still enjoy chess.

And even setting that aside, they act like nostalgia is a bad word. If something makes you feel good when playing it, that’s what’s important.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I thought the point of OSR play was to use lateral thinking to bypass the rules???

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Tahoma,Calibri,Geneva,sans-serif]https://archives.erfworld.com/Book%201/147[/FONT]