Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gus L" data-source="post: 9727543" data-attributes="member: 7045072">I think there's a bit of a tension here - while certainly one aspect of the OSR project was to look at old rules, in general the approach to this I recall and still think is great is to play with the rule and try to consider how it works, why it's there, and what fun it offers.So with this you get things like Philotomy's musings (go read it if you haven't).&nbsp;&nbsp; The tension is that this sort of exploration and experimentation with what I think Grognardia called the &quot;D&amp;D is always right&quot; principle, can easily get simplified down to&nbsp; becoming &quot;how did Gygax play&quot; (etc) and the interpretation then becomes an argument about historical lineage and validity with the goal of play being nostalgic recreation.&nbsp; Instead I find it best to consider these things as new or at least reinterpretations, acknowledging that they are an &quot;OSR&quot; (or post OSR) invention and saying why one likes the result. In a way this is the same issue as &quot;OSR maxims&quot; which are more harmful then not these days because the original understanding as a nuanced and tentative consensus among an active community have been lost.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gus L, post: 9727543, member: 7045072"] I think there's a bit of a tension here - while certainly one aspect of the OSR project was to look at old rules, in general the approach to this I recall and still think is great is to play with the rule and try to consider how it works, why it's there, and what fun it offers. So with this you get things like Philotomy's musings (go read it if you haven't). The tension is that this sort of exploration and experimentation with what I think Grognardia called the "D&D is always right" principle, can easily get simplified down to becoming "how did Gygax play" (etc) and the interpretation then becomes an argument about historical lineage and validity with the goal of play being nostalgic recreation. Instead I find it best to consider these things as new or at least reinterpretations, acknowledging that they are an "OSR" (or post OSR) invention and saying why one likes the result. In a way this is the same issue as "OSR maxims" which are more harmful then not these days because the original understanding as a nuanced and tentative consensus among an active community have been lost. [/QUOTE]

Verification