OSR Why does OSR Design Draw You In?

[GMMichael]

simpler mechanics

simplicity

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

 

[EthanSental]

Nostalgia, mostly. It reminds me of the days as a kid learning to play RPGs. I will say I dont like OSR games in the long term. I dont like OSR campaigns, but I do like one shots and short runs a lot. It sort of reminds me of firing up a NES simulator and getting that Nintendo hard fix where a little goes a long way.

Since this is more like a rare treat for me, im probably not the best to ask about OSR.

Same for me, a nice one shot at a con but long term style campaign I’d rather not. Maybe 3-5 sessions tops.

 

[The Firebird]

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

Ime the OSR systems in vogue now are all rules light. Shadowdark, Mork Borg and variants, OSE, are the first three that come to mind. Does DCC count? All of those are simpler than D&D24.

 

[Retreater]

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

Many OSR systems have abandoned negative AC completely - or at least present positive AC (like D&D 3e-5e) as the primary option. These include Dolmenwood, Old School Essentials, Shadowdark, Swords & Wizardry, Castles and Crusades, DCC, and probably other systems.

For me, I can like classic rock and stream it on my phone. I don't have to use an 8-track.

 

[Basic Expert]

Modern D&D is about the characters. OSR is about the adventure.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

People typically are referring to OD&D and the Basic series when they say Old School was simpler, not AD&D and definitely not AD&D second edition. If they do use ad&d as a reference point, they ignore like 90% of the rules as optional.

Old school was birthed in 1974 and died at your choice of (pick one or more):
-when Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman ruined everything
-when Greyhawk added thieves
-when Frank Mentzer ruined everything
-when they added non-weapon proficiencies to d&d
-when Lorraine Williams ruined everything
-when players started actually learning the rules
-when WotC ruined everything

 

[Willie the Duck]

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

Well, there's a reason BX has dominated OSR projects rather than AD&D. That said, there is complexity and then there is complexity. Regardless of how you adjudicate attack success, a BX or AD&D or OSR fighter generally has 3 modes of attack: attack, switch weapons and attack, or run away (or get creative and do something with the DM adjudicating outcome).

That's often the kind of lack of complexity people mean -- classes didn't need new class features at every level, they just got better at hitting/saving/not-dying. If you want to make a character more durable, you give them better armor or HP, not add features like second wind. If you want them to be more dangerous, up the to-hit or damage, not add maneuvers (except again with adhoc actions gated by DM). If there are codified maneuvers, they are generally open for use (or level gated). More decisions are about what you choose in the moment rather than as you level. Characters are generally omnicompetent -- anyone can start a fire or ride a horse (possibly they shouldn't do some things based on attributes or typical armor warn, but even a 3 dex character in plate mail could try tightrope walking).

Now. Spells obviously violate that, and always have. But you get a lot fewer of those per day, and they are vancian (and you may have scrolls to fill out your contingency cases, but not nearly as consistently or conveniently as say 3e), so you really have to plan right for them all to come into play in a given day. And maybe (system dependent) you'll have to pick up new spells as treasure themselves, and magic items have also always violated this but you get a random assortment of those.

 

[Scribe]

Its clean, it doesnt bother going into detail that should be reserved for a technical design or legal document, it understands that the DM can and will work with the players to run the game, and the DM's job is to answer questions that the rules do not outline fully.

The art style is preferable, the tone is vastly preferable, world and adventure > player characters focus.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Are you seeing a different Old School than I am? I thought it was about armor classes that required understanding negative numbers and endless tables. In part.

Or should it be called OSRL - Old School Rules Light?

As @Retreater said, most OSR games embrace increasing AC over decreasing (if I recall correctly, OSE has both as an option). As far as endless inscrutable tables, other than Hackmaster, I can't think of any like that, and for Hackmaster I'd say that's definitely part of the schtick.

 

[John Quixote]

1d20 + ascending attack bonus ≥ ascending AC starts as single-digit addition compared to a double-digit target number and only turns uglier as levels get higher.

1d20 + descending AC ≥ THAC0 starts out as single-digit addition compared to a double-digit target number, but as the levels go up, the numbers get smaller. They don't consistently turn negative and involve subtraction until very high levels indeed.