What do you think of these OSR systems?

[haakon1]

I run 3.5e. For adventures, I most often convert AD&D 1e or use 3e/3.5/PF1 adventures. I also convert some from Basic, 5e, and even Harn and old MERP.

So, if want 3e ish, none of these are it. But if I want Old School feeling (which I do), adventures for any of these will likely have it? And will as easy to understand and convert (without buying, reading, and learning the rules because I’m so done with edition changes) as anything else above, pretty much?

 

[cavalier973]

White Box
Basic Fantasy
OSRIC
For Gold and Glory
Shadowdark
Castles and Crusades
Old School Essentials

To answer your question properly, with regard to the games you presented:

It’s been a while since I looked at White Box, but as I recall it’s a clone of the original D&D rules. I would play that, and use it to run games.

Basic Fantasy I’m not as keen on, and it’s for a probably silly reason: clerics in BF get spells at first level. I prefer clerics who have to spend a level earning the right to cast spells. It’s a narrative thing.

OSRIC is a 1e clone of sorts. I would play in such a game, but probably not try to run it.

I have only the vaguest awareness of For Gold and Glory, but I am intrigued.

Shadowdark I avoid, because I wore Converse instead of Nike in high school.

Castles and Crusades is also a 1e clone, of sorts. Play but not run.

Old School Essentials is almost a word-for-word clone of Moldvay and Cook/Marsh. I have, and like, and study. I will play and run, and have played and run games, using this system. I like the esoteric non-sensical rules of B/X and BECMI.

The problem with OSE is that I own pdf and print copies of the original B/X and BECMI, including the excellent reprint of the Rules Cyclopedia, so I tend to use those rules instead of clones.

I would add that OSE Advanced is a superior product to regular OSE, because the advanced version has dogs.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

I like OSE for its Advanced and CC zine expansions, as well as for at its core being Exactly B/X without a bunch of Author House Rules or changes. I can choose exactly how much extra stuff to add to the Core experience, rather than the changes and tweaks being baked in.

Its extremely usable at the table, which is nice since I play my sessions fully analog and don't have Ctrl-F as a crutch to poor information presentation. The books are manufactured at high quality with good art, which helps the presentation of the whole package. Other retroclones feel like amateur projects - OSE feels like a polished Product.

 

[Monayuris]

I have run extensive campaigns with both OSE and Basic Fantasy, and I am starting up a Shadowdark game shortly.

I think OSE with the Advances Fantasy books is all you ever need to play a fantasy role playing campaign. Although Basic Fantasy provides an accessibility that is hard to beat.

I prefer OSE’a take on ‘AD&D’ style classes… I think they are better realized and balanced compared to Basic Fantasy. I also prefer OSE’s advancement curve (it makes mixed level groups more viable)

Whitebox is a compelling option. I’ve never really considered using it while B/X / OSE is available. I guess if I wanted an even more stripped down system. What i would tend to end up doing would add options to it and it would probably end up like OSE anyway.

OSRIC isn’t my bag. I have zero interest in holding on to the esoterica of AD&D. Advanced fantasy OSE gives me all I need. I’m happy to use OSRIC monsters and adventures in OSE though.

Castles & Crusades looks interesting but again I don’t really see it doing anything different enough to warrant attention.

Shadowdark is interesting to me. I’ll give it a go and see how it runs. I don’t think it will supplant OSE for me, but maybe it’s ties to 5e and it’s marketing as a 5e alternative might make it a gateway game for those to get some experience with OSR games.

 

[Quickleaf]

The Games You Asked About (in my order of experience)

• OSE = I've played over 10 sessions of this between one-shots and an ongoing game, and it feels like a much better design of B/X, however there are definitely gaps in what the rules cover that are... more noticeable to me coming from years of playing modern D&D (3e, 4e, and 5e). I think the creator Gavin Norman is a phenomenal designer, and his work on Dolmenwood is amazing.
• Osric and For Gold & Glory = Feel like 1e and 2e respectively, not the easiest layouts, but vastly better organized than the originals, have only played a little of Osric and only read (not run) For Gold & Glory
• Shadowdark = Only read the playtest, and I know a lot of people are enjoying this. Personally, I am a big fan of Kelsey Dionne's adventure design & videos, but with Shadowdark I didn't feel like it was doing something substantially different from other RPGs... more like taking the ethos of B/X and applying that to a super-lite 5e remix with randomized character advancement & "your light source burns in real time."
• Castles & Crusades = I have not played, but would like to try.
• White Box and Basic Fantasy = I have not played, and don't feel drawn to try.

Other OSR Games: I strongly second several of @overgeeked 's recommendations that weren't on the OP list.

• Dungeon Crawl Classics is wild, embracing chaos and randomness. I've only played a one-shot but am looking to run my own one-shot in the near future.
• Knave is super-pared down where you are what you own. Cairn felt very similar to me. I've played both in one-shots.
• Into the Odd, Electric Bastionland, and now Mythic Bastionland are brilliant, but I've only had the chance to read them, not participate yet.

Additionally, I can recommend from my own play experience:

• Beyond the Wall, a fusion of d20 and B/X with more indie Playbooks/Scenario-books & cooperative setting building with a folkloric / YA / Lloyd Alexander's "Prydain" / Ursula LeGuin's "Earthsea" feel. I've run several one-shots or short games and I really enjoy the cantrip system and collaborative nature of the game.
• Freebooters on the Frontier, is a blend of Dungeon World (PbtA) with very old school D&D and touches of DCC spellcasting, with extremely robust procedural generation of setting/adventures. I really really enjoyed Jason Lutes' design, but it's definitely still being playtested. Only run a two-shot so far.
• White Hack, some real innovations happening in this three-class system that is very much worth a look, only played once so far, but excited to run it myself.

I also found this article by Marcia B. trying to identify a series of OSR game families to be really excellent big picture overview of what's happening in the OSR scene (as of December 2022): https://traversefantasy.blogspot.com/2022/12/osr-rules-families.html Here's her conclusions on the 6 families:

• Faithful D&D-Likes: The most ‘conservative’ of the dataset, being closest to the TSR-era D&D rulebooks. They are characterized by class-based distinctions between characters, and a lack of dependence on individual character abilities. Procedures for underworld and wilderness exploration are simple.
• Modern D&D-Likes: Similar to the Faithful D&D-Likes, except that character abilities tend to be more important than class-based ones (compare to D&D Third Edition and early d20 System retroclones). These have universal resolution procedures. It includes the Whitehack subfamily which is distinguished by having blackjack-style rolls.
• The Black Hacks: This cluster is populated entirely by the two editions of The Black Hack. The ruleset is notable for its simple math, dependence on ability scores, abstract item usage, and real-time encounter checks. The graph does not illustrate how truly influential The Black Hack was across the scene, with there being many hacks and variations in the 2010s.
• The Odd Hacks: Modeled after Into the Odd, a classless ruleset which emphasizes character ability scores and removes attack rolls (in favor of only rolling for damage). The most faithful derivatives only include rules for character interactions, rather than for play procedure or anything else. However, the cluster includes the Mausritter-derived subfamily which does include play procedures.
• The Knave Hacks: Similar to Into the Odd, Knave has no classes, emphasizes individual character ability, and lacks play procedures. However, it retains to-hit rolls separate from damage rolls, and emphasizes random generation for characters, spells, and aspects of the game-world.
• The Old-School Baroque: Although conceptually similar to the D&D-Likes, these rulesets each have their own idiosyncratic approach. They are influenced by other rulesets across the board, especially from the rules-light rulebooks, but are distinguished by a renewed interest in play procedures.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Beyond the Wall is spectacular. The same company also publishes Through Sunken Lands, which takes the same systems and applies them to sword and sorcery, and Grizzled Adventurers, which is about elderly adventurers. GA is tongue in cheek in tone, but has a great dungeon generation system that's worth checking out, IMO.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

So far unmentioned here - what about Kevin Crawford's Without Number rules; which my understanding are built on top of the BX framework (I think)?

 

[overgeeked]

So far unmentioned here - what about Kevin Crawford's Without Number rules; which my understanding are built on top of the BX framework (I think)?

Oh yeah. It is. With a few changes. I've always used the book for the worldbuilding and prompts and basically never looked at the system.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

Oh yeah. It is. With a few changes. I've always used the book for the worldbuilding and prompts and basically never looked at the system.

D20 for combat, 2d6 for skill checks