The opposite of OSR

[Warpiglet-7]

Earlier than AD&D is lighter. B/X seems pretty smooth but also bare to some.

my friend and I are looking at playing BECMI with our kids. I am excited about how little fiddling there is with basic and expert.

I love 1e AD&D and 5e but feel neither are really old school at all.

I've never understood the claims about earlier D&D being "rules light". Good grief. You have to take how many steps to determine whether an attack hit or not in AD&D? Something about fifteen if you actually do the steps and don't ignore them. How in the world can a game which actually details the exact space you require to swing a sword possibly be considered "rules light"?

 

[Marc_C]

So, spells?

No, spells are not an extra-diegetic resources.

 

[darjr]

I think this is hard to pin down because there are a lot of reasons people left other games for OSR style gaming.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Stardew Realms: soothing farmcore game set in Faerun. Drizz't works for Joja.

Great, now I want to do a FRP version of Ooblets!

"You meet an Orc in the woods. Do you challenge him to a dance battle, between his Kobold and your Pixie? His demand is one pie."

 

[Ovinomancer]

No, spells are not an extra-diegetic resources.

The diegetic-ness of spells is pretty arbitrary, though. It's just "magic is unquestionable" by habit, not by strength of explanation. Given that "magic" is just whatever the game needs it to be, and has no consistent or coherent standards to which it must adhere, claiming magic is diegetic is just saying that "what I make believe is fine is fine."

Spells are the acceptable metacurrency of D&D, with entire classes built around the concept of "I get to dictate fiction in discrete chunks," while any other arrangement of such is viewed as unacceptable and wrong and gets labeled as non-diegetic when there's ample diegetic descriptions available that have at least as much explanatory power as "but magic."

Let's be honest, there's are lots of metagame aspects (spells, hitpoints, AC) that are grandfathered in as acceptable, it's just new applications that get the sideways looks.

 

[Yora]

Spells are not a meta-currency because they exist within the fiction of the game.

Spell points, slots, and such are just currency.

 

[Marc_C]

The diegetic-ness of spells is pretty arbitrary, though. It's just "magic is unquestionable" by habit, not by strength of explanation. Given that "magic" is just whatever the game needs it to be, and has no consistent or coherent standards to which it must adhere, claiming magic is diegetic is just saying that "what I make believe is fine is fine."

Spells are the acceptable metacurrency of D&D, with entire classes built around the concept of "I get to dictate fiction in discrete chunks," while any other arrangement of such is viewed as unacceptable and wrong and gets labeled as non-diegetic when there's ample diegetic descriptions available that have at least as much explanatory power as "but magic."

Let's be honest, there's are lots of metagame aspects (spells, hitpoints, AC) that are grandfathered in as acceptable, it's just new applications that get the sideways looks.

Predictable answer. I don't agree with you on this. Sorry I'm not doing this dance with you. Find another partner.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Predictable answer. I don't agree with you on this. Sorry I'm not doing this dance with you. Find another partner.

Yes, it is predictable... oh, you're not talking about your response. Sorry, thought that first period was a colon. Okay, cool, we can leave it here.

 

[RealAlHazred]

I originally read this as "4th Edition, but only with ducks" and I'm kind of into it.

View attachment 140322
View attachment 140323
View attachment 140324
View attachment 140325

Reminds me of RuneQuest 2nd edition and the all-duck party. I think I followed "Hueymakt, Death Drake" as a god. Good time!

 

[Aldarc]

Predictable answer. I don't agree with you on this. Sorry I'm not doing this dance with you. Find another partner.

If you didn’t won’t to dance with him on this, then why did you bother “correcting” him in the first place?