• The window for editing your posts has been extended from 48 hours to about two weeks or so. Please report any problems with this in Trouble Tickets.

Did 5E neuter the OSR movement.

Allandaros

Active Ingredient
Validated User
#41
I think there's a distinction to be made between the OSR as:
-An intellectual movement.
-A style of play.
-A market segment.

As an intellectual movement it's mostly played out which is why you don't hear as much buzz, it's mostly done what it came here for. As a style of play it's still growing by leaps and bounds since a lot of its ideas have infiltrated into 5ed and are being spread around very widely even if generally in a very watered down form. The mainstream is a LOT closer to the OSR than it used to be. As a market segment it's chugging along just fine. OSR games are doing just fine on KS and on Drivethrough RPG.
Yup. Hell, our own Matt Colville's Strongholds Kickstarter? The one that broke all kinds of records and jazz? Fundamentally about ideas that were being championed and discussed mainly by OS/OSR folks for ages. Not part of the OSR, perhaps, but definitely drawing in part from some of the same design ideas and play sensibilities.
 

Lord Crimson

Prophet of Darkness
Validated User
#42
Speaking purely personally, finding out that the author of my fave OSR brand was pro-GamerGate and very active in certain really offensive political scenes cooled a LOT of my interest, especially as it became clear that a rather large number of other creators were as well.

I'm still WAY into OSR stuff, but I no longer have a darling like I used to.
 

Zehnseiter

Registered User
Validated User
#43
Speaking purely personally, finding out that the author of my fave OSR brand was pro-GamerGate and very active in certain really offensive political scenes cooled a LOT of my interest, especially as it became clear that a rather large number of other creators were as well.
Are there infos on what OSR games I should stay away if I don't want to support those peoples digusting agendas with my money.
 

Stacie.Winters1

Registered User
Validated User
#45
Idk. To me I feel like I've seen an increase in OSR games... Dark Places & Denogorgons, Survive This! games, The Black Hack 2e, MCC, Stars Without Number Revised, more stuff for Castles & Crusades and the SIEGE engine, all the various games that adapted The Black Hack...

Plus there have been OSR games that are not based on D&D, like Zweihander.
 

kvltjam

Formerly 'sigma7'
Validated User
#46
I feel like we may be entering a post-OSR era, where games that don’t nexessarily resemble the systems of OSR games still adopt the mindset. DCC definitely feels OSR-ish, even though the rules are wildly different. And looking at the Principia Apocrypha, I was struck by how closely my experience playing in a Dungeon World game (and running Blades in the Dark) mirrors the advice it contains.
 

That Other Guy

Registered User
Validated User
#47
I think the OSR has largely stopped calling itself the OSR outside of a few notable exceptions, cleaving less to a call to tradition that solidified the people initially, and more just a general set of principles
 

Weisenheim

Baroque Space Orc Mage
Validated User
#48
What the OSR was about, in terms of play practices and philosophy, has filtered out into the wider gaming world. So I think the talk about it has cooled off a bit, since OSR "won" in that regard and there's no need to convince people or educate people in those ways like there was before.

I would say that OSR these days is probably used as a term to differentiate the general ethos of a game from other types of design. "Old school" is a term that typically still gets thrown around a lot, but OSR per se I don't hear too often any more unless it's to say something like, "This game is OSR and this game is indie/narrative." And sometimes games try to be both in different levels.

As far as products go, as mentioned here, I don't think the production of stuff that would be considered OSR is going down. The changes in the industry allow for a wider accessibility to publishing stuff, so many more people can release RPG products now than was possible in the past. This is probably partly why what OSR is, in essence, is fragmented. Communities grow up around these different strains, and the particular emphasis of a game line or community shifts to highlight different facets of OSR.
 

Alter_Boy

Post Anything
Validated User
#49
What the OSR was about, in terms of play practices and philosophy, has filtered out into the wider gaming world. So I think the talk about it has cooled off a bit, since OSR "won" in that regard and there's no need to convince people or educate people in those ways like there was before.

I would say that OSR these days is probably used as a term to differentiate the general ethos of a game from other types of design. "Old school" is a term that typically still gets thrown around a lot, but OSR per se I don't hear too often any more unless it's to say something like, "This game is OSR and this game is indie/narrative." And sometimes games try to be both in different levels.
I feel like we may be entering a post-OSR era, where games that don’t nexessarily resemble the systems of OSR games still adopt the mindset. DCC definitely feels OSR-ish, even though the rules are wildly different. And looking at the Principia Apocrypha, I was struck by how closely my experience playing in a Dungeon World game (and running Blades in the Dark) mirrors the advice it contains.
I think Dungeon World (a rules system designed to emulate old-school D&D, mechanically descended from an indie game like Apocalypse World) really speaks to how the OSR and Forge-ist movements have interwoven their interests and product lines in recent years. The investigations into the meanings of AD&D's obtuse rules dovetailed well into Indie Gaming plumbing into what they really wanted from a system. Indie Gaming and its close connection to Narrativism often favours player-driven flavour and simple mechanics, something that the OSR found in abundance in '70s RPGs. Coming from the OSR side, rebelling against the crunch-heavy modern versions of D&D often led designers to scrape off of the mechanically dense parts of AD&D and replace them with simpler mechanics that enforced the playstyle flavour they felt was lost over the years. It also speaks to Gygax's genius in creating something that was many things to many people.
 

Trireme

Registered User
Validated User
#50
As a veteran 2E player who doesn’t really play anything except different versions of TSR D&D anymore (though I doubt diehard purists would consider 2E in particular to be “old school”), I can only speak for myself as an apparent target customer for these products, so here goes:

I played AD&D 2E when it was the current edition years ago, and when I got back into the whole deal years later, finding all the 2E books and sets that are now available as cheap, searchable PDFs was mind-blowing to me. It was exactly what I’d always wanted as a young player/DM, as though I were a foodie who’d hopped in a time machine and arrived in an era with magic Star Trek appliances that made whatever dish you’d want, on demand, for about a third of what you were used to paying for them. Really, it’s even better than that, because as a non-collector, a folder full of PDFs with text search is much more useful to me than a gigantic bookshelf with the same material in print... and 2E has a lot of material.

All of that made OSR products more curios to me than anything else, interesting as labors of love that tweaked different aspects of TSR-era editions in certain ways, but not interesting enough for me to support them in the long term. I’m not a hobbyist in the sense of a psychonautic explorer of the weird nooks and crannies of tabletop games. I play and DM D&D because I like playing with people, and in my experience, folks familiar with 3/3.5, 4E and 5E are often happy to try out AD&D. I understand the appeal of diving deep into a new rules set every other week for some people, but speaking only for myself, that’d be heading in the exact opposite direction from what I value about tabletop games.

Really, the main reason I still play those older editions is because I know where to find things in the books if I haven’t straight-up memorized them by accident, and as a DM, I already know a lot of where I might look in the old products for weirdo options that can expand the game greatly for me and my players in a given campaign (and I can judge pretty well from experience whether they’ll work at the table).

“OSR” revivalist products remove that advantage for me, and since playing games is primarily a social activity in my case rather than an ongoing exploration of the latest thing to hit the online store, if I’m going to learn a new set of rules, it’ll probably be one with a large existing base of players in whatever part of the world I’m likely to spend most of my time in the near future... and I probably still won’t ever know those rules near as well as I know AD&D 2E, just because I played that edition a bunch back when I was younger and my mind was a sponge. There’s not really any way short of telepathy for OSR designers to bridge that gap.
 
Top Bottom