OSR What does OSR mean to you? What do you value most in an OSR game?

[junsey]

Hey everyone,
I’m curious to hear different perspectives from the community about what OSR really means to you. The term gets thrown around a lot, and depending on who you ask, it can mean old-school rules, a certain style of play, a design philosophy, or just a general vibe.

So I’d love to know:
What defines an OSR game for you?

And more importantly:
What do you personally look for when you play one? What aspects do you value the most?

Is it the minimal rules? The high lethality? The focus on player skill over character abilities? The open-ended exploration? The impartial GM? Or maybe it’s the aesthetics and tone?
Also curious to hear thoughts on games that feel OSR in spirit even if they don’t use classic mechanics.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts and experiences. Thanks in advance to anyone who shares.

 

[payn]

So I’d love to know:
What defines an OSR game for you?

I dont have any general arguments with the wiki entry.
"The Old School Renaissance, Old School Revival, or OSR is a play style movement in tabletop role-playing games which draws inspiration from the earliest days of tabletop RPGs in the 1970s, especially Dungeons & Dragons"

And more importantly:
What do you personally look for when you play one? What aspects do you value the most?

Definitely a focus on skill play. Leaning more towards sword and sorcery with simple plots and episodic play. I tend to prefer one shots and short campaigns. Note, I dont think OSR is only these things, but they are what I look for when I play an OSR game.

 

[The Soloist]

1) The 70s and 80s games are not OSR. When I play D&D BX, I don't consider myself playing an OSR game. I'm playing the original games.

2) When I play a retro-clone or a simulacrum of the original 70-80s game, then I'm playing an OSR game. Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lords, Dark Dungeons and the BX versions of Gammaworld, Gangbusters, Star Wars, etc, go here.

3) When I'm playing a game that tries to emulate the original 70-80s games with contemporary rules, then I'm playing a NuSR game. Dungeon World is one of them. Shadowdark is another. Castles & Crusades also goes here.

 

[jdrakeh]

The two big ones for me are:

Rulings, not rules. A game that does not attempt to provide a rule for every conceivable situation, but rather light set of rules that provides for common situations expected to arise in play and acknowledges that a referee's judgment (and consistent application thereof) is the best tool in the box for most situations that will arise during actual play.

Implied setting. A trait that I associate with most OSR rule sets is that they don't have a large, detailed, official setting attached to them. There have been exceptions, of course, but many (most?) OSR rule sets follow in the footsteps of early RPGs and only have implied settings conveyed through rules options (e.g. races, classes, etc), adventure modules, and occasionally a very brief primer.

[Edit: Also, I agree with all of The Soloist's points above.]

 

[Morrus]

The two big ones for me are:

Rulings, not rules. A game that does not attempt to provide a rule for every conceivable situation, but rather light set of rules that provides for common situations expected to arise in play and acknowledges that a referee's judgment (and consistent application thereof) is the best tool in the box for most situations that will arise during actual play.

This has always interested me. Basically, 'rulings not rules' and 'rules lite' are synonyms under this description and it feels like 'rulings not rules' is just a fancy way of saying 'rules lite' -- but there are many rules lite games which are definitely not OSR.

 

[junsey]

1) The 70s and 80s games are not OSR. When I play D&D BX, I don't consider myself playing an OSR game. I'm playing the original games.

2) When I play a retro-clone or a simulacrum of the original 70-80s game, then I'm playing an OSR game. Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lords, Dark Dungeons and the BX versions of Gammaworld, Gangbusters, Star Wars, etc, go here.

3) When I'm playing a game that tries to emulate the original 70-80s games with contemporary rules, then I'm playing a NuSR game. Dungeon World is one of them. Shadowdark is another. Castles & Crusades also goes here.

Completely agree with the first point, there is a tendency to put as great OSR classic games like Stormbringer 3rd/4th and games from the 80's, when that is exactly what OSR are inspired by in theory.

On the other hand, I haven't seen that term NuSR before.

 

[jdrakeh]

This has always interested me. Basically, 'rulings not rules' and 'rules lite' are synonyms under this description and it feels like 'rulings not rules' is just a fancy way of saying 'rules lite' -- but there are many rules lite games which are definitely not OSR.

"Rules light" and "rulings, not rules" games aren't quite the same thing, to me. They do inhabit a lot of the same space in a Venn Diagram, though. Games that focus on "Rulings, not rules" are, to me, packed with good advice on how to implement the rules that do exist or how to be a better/more effective gamemaster using those rules. Rules light games tend to have little or none of that. They just have minimalist rules and leave it to the reader to learn through trial and error how to be a gamemaster. I've written a number of both kinds of these games.

 

[junsey]

The two big ones for me are:

Rulings, not rules. A game that does not attempt to provide a rule for every conceivable situation, but rather light set of rules that provides for common situations expected to arise in play and acknowledges that a referee's judgment (and consistent application thereof) is the best tool in the box for most situations that will arise during actual play.

Implied setting. A trait that I associate with most OSR rule sets is that they don't have a large, detailed, official setting attached to them. There have been exceptions, of course, but many (most?) OSR rule sets follow in the footsteps of early RPGs and only have implied settings conveyed through rules options (e.g. races, classes, etc), adventure modules, and occasionally a very brief primer.

[Edit: Also, I agree with all of The Soloist's points above.]

“Rulings, not rules” is interesting, I understand the concept, and what do you think about the use of tables classic style, several OSR make use of tables of reusltados, effects, wounds or own character creation, releasing a burden on the narrator, and in my opinion, giving a role more of a player to the narrator himself, but at the same time, it would be contemplating more use cases and that the game controls more situations.

 

[jdrakeh]

“Rulings, not rules” is interesting, I understand the concept, and what do you think about the use of tables classic style, several OSR make use of tables of reusltados, effects, wounds or own character creation, releasing a burden on the narrator, and in my opinion, giving a role more of a player to the narrator himself, but at the same time, it would be contemplating more use cases and that the game controls more situations.

Tables can be good, labor-saving, tools, but relying on them too much often makes for random, non-sensical, game play in my experience. This is obviously less of an issue in games designed to be weird/gonzo (e.g. Troika, Into the Odd, etc).

 

[The Soloist]

Completely agree with the first point, there is a tendency to put as great OSR classic games like Stormbringer 3rd/4th and games from the 80's, when that is exactly what OSR are inspired by in theory.

On the other hand, I haven't seen that term NuSR before.

It's not new. Sometimes also spelled NSR or Nu-OSR. It should be used more often. It would avoid a lot of confusion and miscategorizations.