Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6844694" data-attributes="member: 996">You want statistical proof that the whole OSR phenom happened.  I don't think that's necessary.  If you have any proof that there was something else going on in the hobby at the same time that completely overshadowed it, go for it.I don't think any version of D&D deserves the title 'simple,' not even 0e and certainly not 5e - it's always been a relatively complicated game, so, yeah, I'd agree it's off.  But, even if we grant that 0e & 5e are simple and other eds aren't, looking back to 0e 'simplicity' is still backwards-looking, that intermediate backwards steps aren't necessary less complex, notwithstanding - it's just looking /way/ backwards.When 5e was being developed, Mearls &co said, repeatedly, that they were looking back to the prior editions and trying to achieve a 'classic feel.'  So, yes, 5e was backwards-looking, at past editions of D&D.  What Traveler or RQ or WoD were doing in the past not being relevant.  Likewise, whatever other games were doing in the 70s & 80s, recent re-boots of RuneQuest have harkened back mainly to RQ2.  Storyteller has gotten high-profile 20th anniversary editions. Nor are they the only two classic games getting re-boots.  The whole OSR thing is backwards-looking.  Sure, there are forward-looking indie games out there, but the big trend has been backwards-looking - and, probably, what industry growth that has been reported is being driven by that.  It probably would be.  And it would have a lot of OSR games on it.  But there's also the question of what games make a big splash - which is generally going to be biased towards new/innovative/surprising ones - and at what games are leading the market.  Leading the market, right now, is 5e (backwards looking), PF (3.5 retro-clone), two of those '______ Age' games, also on the OSR 'simple'/old-school bandwagon, AFAIK, and the latest Star Ward licensee (and, even though it's not backwards-looking at Star Wars d6, mechanically, the Star Wars franchise, itself, has marginalized the extended universe and is harkening back to the original 3 movies in a lot of ways, too).They are both crystal-clear examples of backwards-looking games.  The only difference is how far back they look.  PF looks back to 3e, a mere 8-16 years, while 5e looks back to the 20th century.I see the point you're trying to make.   I don't think you've come anywhere near supporting it."Old school" is usually used to refer to the methods, maybe even mores, of a time in the past.  In the context of gaming, that's the way we used to play D&D, not the details of the rulebook.  And, it was a less connected world back then, so you didn't have a monolithic 'way everyone played D&D back in the day,' it varied with things like region and age group.   But, even if people don't have a clear or accurate or consistent vision of the past, looking back at it is a big trend right now.  As demonstrated by the prevalence of that very argument you site.</blockquote>

Verification