OSR Why B/X?

[Parmandur]

I would say that OD&D, which includes monsters from Barsoom, and in which Gygax famously sent Nazi tanks against his players' characters, is probably weirder than BD&D.

But BD&D us more clearly written, so the weirdness is more clear to the average reader, pwrhaps?

 

[overgeeked]

I would say that OD&D, which includes monsters from Barsoom,

OD&D also included hobbits, which TSR was sent a cease & desist over.

and in which Gygax famously sent Nazi tanks against his players' characters, is probably weirder than BD&D.

A particular referee doing something weird doesn't really count as the game itself being weird.

 

[Malmuria]

I can definitely see how OD&D partakes in and is the precursor for the weirdness of B/X. The point of differentiation there is that B/X is clearer and simpler and tastefully edited. Moldvay, Cook, and Marsh made some brilliant choices and did a great job. But both strongly support Weird.

I absolutely agree that AD&D went down the path of rationalizing things much more. The AD&D DMG is stuffed to overflowing with details trying to ground and limit and restrict and restrain, to categorize and organize and define. Look at the description of the ogre treasure hoard, or the details on how different monster or NPC lairs or settlements will defend themselves, the notes on taxing PCs' wealth to get gold out of their hands, or the bit Willie mentioned about Thieves skills- all the restrictions and caveats on Thieves actually being any good at their skills, all grounded in realism.

Greyhawk as a setting and certainly some of the modules in AD&D continue to be weird. But AD&D was all about rationalizing and circumscribing the game, and as such feels much more grounded, less open and free.

I feel that to play AD&D by the book you would need to keep track of things in a detailed spreadsheet. And nothing kills weirdness like spreadsheets.

 

[Reynard]

I think we might be crossing our definitions here: when I say "weird" I don't necessarily mean "gonzo." I mean weaird as in weird fantasy: sci-fi elements, horror elements, inexplicable creatures. All those things can exist in a world that otherwise feels grounded -- and in some cases, that grounded world helps enhance the weird. AD&D treads thisline really well.

Gonzo is fine too, but I think it can actually make the weird feel mundane when everywhere you go there are tootsie-pop people at war with the owl folk.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

OD&D also included hobbits, which TSR was sent a cease & desist over.

And how does that relate to weirdness?

 

[Geekrampage]

I feel that to play AD&D by the book you would need to keep track of things in a detailed spreadsheet. And nothing kills weirdness like spreadsheets.

I ran AD&D by the book a few years ago (by God, that was 2014! where did the time go?) and I did, indeed, need a detailed spreadsheet to keep track of things.

Then we played 5E for nine years.

Now I'm running Old School Essentials (with Moldvay B/X and Rules Cyclopedia) and OSE/B/X is indeed much simpler and more fun for me and my players. Although I do sometimes let some of the arcane complexity of AD&D creep in here and there.

The only part of OSE/B/X I would change is the combat round phases. My players are just so used to individual initiative and actions, switching to combat phases was an awkward adjustment.

 

[bulletmeat]

I have wanted to try running combat phases (one of my previous LL DMs ran it and it seemed interesting) but decided to stick w/side to group initiative instead. to me it keeps players engaged w/other players when planning their actions, freaks them out when enemies go first, and quickens combat a decent amount.

 

[Geekrampage]

I will say this, however. Whenever I ask a rule question about B/X/OSE on the OSE Facebook group, I will get answers quoting rules from every edition all over the map. It seems no one on the OSE FB group actually plays OSE RAW. People start quoting rules from AD&D, Rules Cyclopedia, Mentzer, or rules that just don't exist but everyone THINKS they exist because that's always been the way they played.

 

[Geekrampage]

I have wanted to try running combat phases (one of my previous LL DMs ran it and it seemed interesting) but decided to stick w/side to group initiative instead. to me it keeps players engaged w/other players when planning their actions, freaks them out when enemies go first, and quickens combat a decent amount.

Its actually pretty quick.

It usually goes like this:

Before initiative: any spells being cast?
Each side rolls 1d6 initiative.
Side with initiative:
1. All characters check morale (NPCs only)
2. All characters move (advance or withdraw only, no fancy maneuvers)
3. All characters resolve missile fire
4. All characters resolve spell casting
5. All characters resolve melee attacks
Side without initiative repeats 1-5 above.
On a tied initiative, all characters (PC and NPC) go through 1-5 together

It tends to sound like this:

"Movement phase - GO! Okay, everybody where they want to be? Missile phase - GO!" and everyone rolls to attack and I apply damage. Then I say: "No spells. Melee phase - GO!" and everyone rolls to attack and I apply damage.

The only time it gets bogged down is with tied initiative. Then I have to proceed through each phase, character by character with the NPCs/monsters mixed in. I could just move monsters at the same time as player characters in one big group, but it can become chaotic, so I proceed down the list alphabetically or however characters are ordered in Foundry.

 

[overgeeked]

Its actually pretty quick.

It usually goes like this:

Before initiative: any spells being cast?
Each side rolls 1d6 initiative.
Side with initiative:
1. All characters check morale (NPCs only)
2. All characters move (advance or withdraw only, no fancy maneuvers)
3. All characters resolve missile fire
4. All characters resolve spell casting
5. All characters resolve melee attacks
Side without initiative repeats 1-5 above.
On a tied initiative, all characters (PC and NPC) go through 1-5 together

It tends to sound like this:

"Movement phase - GO! Okay, everybody where they want to be? Missile phase - GO!" and everyone rolls to attack and I apply damage. Then I say: "No spells. Melee phase - GO!" and everyone rolls to attack and I apply damage.

The only time it gets bogged down is with tied initiative. Then I have to proceed through each phase, character by character with the NPCs/monsters mixed in. I could just move monsters at the same time as player characters in one big group, but it can become chaotic, so I proceed down the list alphabetically or however characters are ordered in Foundry.

A few times we mixed things up and ran it more integrated than the books suggest. Go in initiative order through the phases. Winning side moves, losing side moves. Winning side missile, losing side missile. Keeps people more engaged throughout, generally.