D&D General Why is "OSR style" D&D Fun For You?

[Shardstone]

So there is no BadWrongFun...

But OSR and Modern do have a huge gap between play styles. And, really they have been their from the start of RPGs. But one of the following play styles is much more common for OSR...and one is Much More Common for Modern 5E D&D.

Style 1:
DM: You enter the under ground chamber. The stone floor tiles are old, some of them already decaying and breaking. A large unlit metal brazier in the middle of the room dominates the chamber. There are six stone pillars spaced throughout the room. There is a wooden table with manacles stained with dry blood next to the north wall. Two wooden benches sit in front of an altar in an alcove in the west wall.
Player: "Ok, I carefully move towards the brazier looking for any movement, and shine my torch on it. Then...(continues)


Style 2:
DM- "You enter the under ground chamber and it looks just like level 11 of Tomb Raider Sever"
Player-"Wow, cool. Um, I roll a Whatever Check of 17 for my character to find things and stuff."
DM- "Your character finds a loose rock in the wall with a scroll and a gold ring behind it!"
Player- "Wow, my character is so cool!"

Of course Style 1 is more common for OSR "old school" games, and Style 2 is more common for 5E D&D.

False binary. I've done a lot of the former almost entirely in 5E. I don't get posts like this, truly. You make up these weird scenarios that are obviously 1.) Fake and 2.) Clearly moralized and then act like you're just stating some honest opinion on reality.

The main reason the OSR is hamstrung is because of stuff like this. Instead of reaching across the isle to understand another style of play, you just make up stuff to justify an irrational disrespect for it.

 

[soviet]

So there is no BadWrongFun...

But OSR and Modern do have a huge gap between play styles. And, really they have been their from the start of RPGs. But one of the following play styles is much more common for OSR...and one is Much More Common for Modern 5E D&D.

Style 1:
DM: You enter the under ground chamber. The stone floor tiles are old, some of them already decaying and breaking. A large unlit metal brazier in the middle of the room dominates the chamber. There are six stone pillars spaced throughout the room. There is a wooden table with manacles stained with dry blood next to the north wall. Two wooden benches sit in front of an altar in an alcove in the west wall.
Player: "Ok, I carefully move towards the brazier looking for any movement, and shine my torch on it. Then...(continues)


Style 2:
DM- "You enter the under ground chamber and it looks just like level 11 of Tomb Raider Sever"
Player-"Wow, cool. Um, I roll a Whatever Check of 17 for my character to find things and stuff."
DM- "Your character finds a loose rock in the wall with a scroll and a gold ring behind it!"
Player- "Wow, my character is so cool!"

Of course Style 1 is more common for OSR "old school" games, and Style 2 is more common for 5E D&D.

For about 3.5 paragraphs (ironic number) I was agreeing with you. It felt weird.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Its easy enough to do that with skill levels instead. Its not a thing limited to character levels.

True, although there is a larger spread in values depending on ruleset.

 

[Minigiant]

OSR is fun when you want to play one of those iconic character types the OSR game supports.

The big, dumb, brawny, heavy infantry, fighter never feels better to play when its the only type of fighter you can play.

 

[Jack Daniel]

The big, dumb, brawny, heavy infantry, fighter never feels better to play when its the only type of fighter you can play.

I've never known a game where that's actually the case.

One of the nice things about the OSR style is that feats are called magical items, and you "build" what kind of fighter you want to be by deciding what cool stuff to keep.

 

[Minigiant]

I've never known a game where that's actually the case.

One of the nice things about the OSR style is that feats are called magical items, and you "build" what kind of fighter you want to be by deciding what cool stuff to keep.

That's kinda the point.

In OSR, the DM is kinda sorta guilted into giving the fighter the suite of magical armors, arms, and gear they want. Because that is how the game is designed around. The game rules are typical designed for a some sort of set to be heavily recommended as treasure. And it's heavily recommended to give a fighter player stuff of their wishlist to keep them happy.

So being a big dumb, brawny, heavy fighter is a blast in OSR.

Now if the "feats" you want don't exist as magic items, or your DM ignores your wishlist, or the mechanics doesn't support your build...

 

[TwoSix]

That's kinda the point.

In OSR, the DM is kinda sorta guilted into giving the fighter the suite of magical armors, arms, and gear they want. Because that is how the game is designed around. The game rules are typical designed for a some sort of set to be heavily recommended as treasure. And it's heavily recommended to give a fighter player stuff of their wishlist to keep them happy.

So being a big dumb, brawny, heavy fighter is a blast in OSR.

Now if the "feats" you want don't exist as magic items, or your DM ignores your wishlist, or the mechanics doesn't support your build...

I think the bigger point is that in OSR games (especially ones that are heavily OD&D derived), the concept of build, and creating a character around a particular concept or vision, is heavily deprioritized. Having your character evolve through diegetic events and acquisition of items, even in ways you didn't initially intend, is the real goal.

 

[Reynard]

So there is no BadWrongFun...

What a weird way to start a post that is 100% badwrongfunning.

 

[Reynard]

OSR is fun when you want to play one of those iconic character types the OSR game supports.

The big, dumb, brawny, heavy infantry, fighter never feels better to play when its the only type of fighter you can play.

I don't know, I feel like part of thevethos of old school play (not necessarily the OSR) is that simulation is at least part of the equation. The guy who puts himself in front of the teeth and claws and spears is going to want the heavy armor. The dashing swashbuckler in a poets shirt is going to die

 

[Hussar]

I think the bigger point is that in OSR games (especially ones that are heavily OD&D derived), the concept of build, and creating a character around a particular concept or vision, is heavily deprioritized. Having your character evolve through diegetic events and acquisition of items, even in ways you didn't initially intend, is the real goal.

Sort of. Because, frankly, those diegetic events and acquisitions of items are often suspiciously specific to the classes being played. As in, funnily enough that fighter will always find magic armor and magic shield and a magic weapon. And a few levels later, will find slightly more powerful versions of those same armor, shield and weapon. And a little later, slightly more powerful versions yet again.