Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="robconley" data-source="post: 7680823" data-attributes="member: 5636">"The OSR wasn't about "rapid, constant improvement in the quality of rules" but rather what rules they could remove to mimic the feel of earlier editions. The OSR ended up looking more backward than forward."So if you are playing chess, publishing chess, and promoting chess you are looking backwards? The heart of OSR has been is always been about playing older games and making new material for those game.In a Very similar to a chess club, bridge club or any number of groups or organization devoted to a popular game.And actually the OSR had and I quote "rapid, constant improvement in the quality of rules", some of the OSR rulesets are better presented, and better organized than the rules they are cloning. For example Swords & Wizardry White Box, Delving Deeper, etc compared to the original 3 books of OD&D. OSRIC was presented as a full rulebook in its 2nd edition (edition in the sense of a book edition) instead of the publisher's reference of its 1st edition because people found it useful as a quick reference to AD&D during play.The idea of progress in the design of RPGs is a false one. What happens is that RPGs and games diversify. Over time people come up with new mechanics that later designer can use or combine to create other new games. But is Settler's of Catan is "better" than Chess? Is Chess better than Dominion? No it all about personal preference and taste. Tabletop Games are not like software dependent on the state of technology at a particular time to make it happen. Chess is as fun or not as it was in 1300 AD. OD&D is as fun (or not) as it was in 1974. What does improve are ways of presenting the game and it's concepts. It reasonable to look at OD&D of 1974 and say "Yeah it's presentation makes it difficult to learn." And look at Delving Deeper or White Box and say "Yup it's OD&D but way easier to learn." In the case of OSRIC "Yeah I like Gygax advice and commentary but there are times when I just want more concise to look up rules and items." Last it wasn't the release of the reprints that made the OSR victorious. It's victory as such was already cemented by 2010 when it COLLECTIVE volume of products and sales reached that of a typical 2nd tier RPG publishers. While there are no hard numbers for sales other than what we shared from time to time while blogging Hoard and Horde (<a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LUFmadXbg67pp9dEu_KsLc2-2Gf-0t5mVOvzetAqdFw/edit#gid=0" target="_blank">https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LUFmadXbg67pp9dEu_KsLc2-2Gf-0t5mVOvzetAqdFw/edit#gid=0</a>) is a good reference for D&D related OSR products up to April of 2012. If you tally the numbers things really start to kick off around 2008 and accelerate from there. The reprints along with it's influence on 5e were just icing on the cake. While appreciated by fans of the OSR the reprints were not an important part of why it succeeded.On the other hand the OGL and the d20 SRD were instrumental in the success of the OSR. Because if you omit feats, skills, and other newer mechanics what was left was a hop and a skip from being an older edition of D&D.Rob ConleyBat in the Attic Games</blockquote>

Verification