Quote from: AsenRG;1053654Quite the opposite, if you go by the mechanics and the goals they're trying to accomplish:).

Yes, it's doing its best to make the mechanics work for S&S. Exactly like DCC and Crypts&Things, you know;)!

Except that the mechanics are not in the framework of D&D.

So, let's say a bunch of enthusiasts want to start a tangential movement to the OSR... What would you call it? Old school approach but not-D&D mechanics...

Quote from: RPGPundit;1053994Except that the mechanics are not in the framework of D&D.

Better prepare your own arguments to prove that statement, because my rebuttal is ready:).

OK, so what does SS&SS do?

• Use lots of roll-under attribute: not exactly an unknown mechanic in D&D, I remember it from 2e.
• Has a Luck Die, a.k.a. "Save Vs The Setting Hating You". Depending on your archetype (class), you can be more or less lucky.
• Roll 3d6 in order to generate the Attributes (four of them - Str and Con are folded in Physique, Wisdom and Charisma are folded in Willpower). Clearly, renaming attributes isn't a cardinal sin, since DCC also has its own list.
• Choose an Archetype-Warrior, Specialist, Magic-user. Nothing new under the sun again.

*Warrior gets more attacks against low-HD enemies, combat maneuvers (everyone can do those, the Warrior can do them in addition to attacking), improved damage, weapon specialisation, and has the biggest Hit Die per level.
*Specialist has Luck, Sneak Attack, Improved Reflexes and rolls with (what is basically Advantage) to hide, sneak, decipher languages, hear noises, opening locks, climbing. Also, better HD than the Wizard.
*Magic User: Lowest HD per level, but gets Sense Magic, Spellcasting, Blood Sacrifice (Spellburn), begins knowing 3 spells and learns one per level up (presumably could learn more).
If anyone sees anything not in the OSR mold so far, let me know...

• Determining a complication - basically, you can be Hunted by Sinister Sorcerer, or Addicted to Lotus Powder, Indebted, whatever. In-built hooks don't break the D&D mold, unless your game sucks:D! Yes, you can use that to improve your Luck Die once per session...oh, how hard to swallow such a mechanic is!
• You have small, medium and large weapons. The difference is in cost and damage. Bigger weapons deal more damage. Nothing unusual.
• Armour reduces the damage die of your weapon, minimum 1d3.
• Shields give Disadvantage to attacks against you. Bigger shields give Disadvantage to more attacks per round (but large ones give Disadvantage to actions requiring freedom of movement).
• Attacks are roll under attribute for PCs. Enemies must roll over the PC's Agility. Enemies more powerful than the PCs add the difference between HDs to rolls for their attack, and to the roll you make to attack them.
• Spells require a roll (like in DCC). In SSSS you roll under Willpower, and if you fail, you can choose between losing the ability to cast this spell for the day (like DCC again) and the GM giving you a fumble-like result, but you keep the ability to cast it today. There's also fumbling the spells.
• Casting spells in armour heavier than Light gives you Disadvantage. And there's spell lists, of course. You can't get me to pore over them. In fact, I think we're paying too much attention to magic already!
• Magic items - rare and from forbidden civilisations, presumably. Again, too much attention to a meaningless part of the game;)!

In short: totally within the D&D mold!

Quote from: trechriron;1053998So, let's say a bunch of enthusiasts want to start a tangential movement to the OSR... What would you call it? Old school approach but not-D&D mechanics...

OSR, to me, doesn't preclude using the mechanics of other old-school games. It's "old-school Renaissance" (OSR), not "Old-school Dungeons and Dragons Renaissance" (OSDDR).
If you use the general umbrella, you don't get to artificially narrow its scope to just what you like.

Quote from: AsenRG;1054048Better prepare your own arguments to prove that statement, because my rebuttal is ready:).

OK, so what does SS&SS do?


In short: totally within the D&D mold!

But not the actual D&D rules.

Quote from: trechriron;1053998So, let's say a bunch of enthusiasts want to start a tangential movement to the OSR... What would you call it? Old school approach but not-D&D mechanics...

Well, there's the O5R, which is old-school approaches to 5th edition. Presumably you could make similar movements with other new-school games.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1054332But not the actual D&D rules.

DCC and L&D aren't using the actual D&D rules, either. But SSSS is still OSR, and even from the D&D-related part of the OSR.
As evidenced by its mechanics, which don't contain any more changes than the aforementioned DCC and L&D.

Quote from: AsenRG;1054356DCC and L&D aren't using the actual D&D rules, either. But SSSS is still OSR, and even from the D&D-related part of the OSR.
As evidenced by its mechanics, which don't contain any more changes than the aforementioned DCC and L&D.

DCC and L&D both still have 3-18 ability scores, and rolls based on D20 checks. They both still have armor class and hit points and saving throws. They both still use the D&D combat system, whatever the variations they integrate in them.

In other words, there's certain ingredients to what makes up something recognizable as D&D. OSR games must have those ingredients; games that don't have them, stop being OSR.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1054955DCC and L&D both still have 3-18 ability scores, and rolls based on D20 checks. They both still have armor class and hit points and saving throws. They both still use the D&D combat system, whatever the variations they integrate in them.

In other words, there's certain ingredients to what makes up something recognizable as D&D. OSR games must have those ingredients; games that don't have them, stop being OSR.

Pundi, how did you manage to write that after I wrote a fucking summary of the mechanics, above;)?

To summarize, all of your requirements are present in Sharp Swords & Sinister Spells, except armour class, replaced by damage reduction, even d20 checks (which actully aren't necessary, many variants of D&D use d6 checks and all TSR editions use d100 checks).
And since Armor s DR is among the first optional rules ever, I call bullshit on any attempts to declare it non-OSR because of that:D!

(As you very well know, I also disagree with the idea that you need D&D-derived mechanics to count a game as OSR. Mechanics derived rom other old-school games are fine by me.
But that's a theoretical question at best, because we're discussing SSSS, and any non-biased reading would show that it's clearly D&D-derived, whether Pundit likes it or not).

Quote from: AsenRG;1055064Pundi, how did you manage to write that after I wrote a fucking summary of the mechanics, above;)?

To summarize, all of your requirements are present in Sharp Swords & Sinister Spells

Either you or the OP are lying. The OP staes:

Some of the key aspects it stands out for me:
- super simple characters, just 4 stats, HP, gear, luck, Vocation
- monsters have one attribute (hit-dice) and special ability


That's not D&D.


Not to mention that the designer himself admits as much:

ATTENTION! Sharp Swords & Sinister Spells is not a Simulacrum of an older edition of the worlds most famous fantasy RPG! Although inspired by the original game and the OSR movement, the game was designed to be have its own unique system, more suitable to the Sword & Sorcery genre the author has in mind.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1055195Either you or the OP are lying. The OP staes:

Some of the key aspects it stands out for me:
- super simple characters, just 4 stats, HP, gear, luck, Vocation
- monsters have one attribute (hit-dice) and special ability


That's not D&D.

...How is that "not D&D"? Attributes (and don't tell me those are immutable), HP, gear, Action Points, background skills - sounds a lot like an OD&D PC to me. Except for the Action points, but they exist in other editions.

Monsters have just HD and special ability...sounds like OD&D to me, again:). How much more is there in the statblock for kobolds? What about trolls with their "6HD+2 and regeneration, can be circumvented by fire or acid" statblock?
I see no reason that wouldn't be expanded to other monsters. Especially when we keep in mind the goal is S&S play.

QuoteNot to mention that the designer himself admits as much:

ATTENTION! Sharp Swords & Sinister Spells is not a Simulacrum of an older edition of the worlds most famous fantasy RPG! Although inspired by the original game and the OSR movement, the game was designed to be have its own unique system, more suitable to the Sword & Sorcery genre the author has in mind.

"Not a simulacrum" (like LL would be)=/="meaningfully different". DCC and Crypts and Things aren't simulacrums, either, being geared towards S&S...but they're still OSR.
IMO, if the author was really going for an "unique" system, different from the OSR games, he has failed:D!
But of course, he listed "OSR" under the system tags in the description on Drivethru. So I guess he means by that that there are differences, but it's still within the realm of recognisable mechanics for any OSR game;).

Downloaded.  Will read.  But interested in this.  One issue with Barbarians of Lemuria was the group didn't feel there was any room for development.  Just one-shots.

Look, as a grieved victim of the Storygames "movement" I believe distinctions ARE important. I am happy with OSR being a D&D clone revival of D&D things so people can just play old-school D&D. Fucking brilliant.

I just don't like D&D. I've tried, but we're just not compatible.

So, I like old-school games, with a more old-school GMing approach, that are in fact NOT OSR. But goddammit I want my own fucking label! I have a 50 lb medicine ball sized pale white stomach sticking out here that's just screaming for a label!

I like Zweihander. It's a WFRP clone. Been poking at another clone from these folks (various ERA systems...) https://www.shadesofvengeance.com/ - which are VERY much a 1e vampire clone...

So, I ask again, what label can I have for my not D&D old-school gaming revival/renaissance? OSR-Tangent? EAT-OSR (Excellent Alternative Traditional...)?

Quote from: trechriron;1055268Look, as a grieved victim of the Storygames "movement" I believe distinctions ARE important. I am happy with OSR being a D&D clone revival of D&D things so people can just play old-school D&D. Fucking brilliant.

I just don't like D&D. I've tried, but we're just not compatible.

So, I like old-school games, with a more old-school GMing approach, that are in fact NOT OSR. But goddammit I want my own fucking label! I have a 50 lb medicine ball sized pale white stomach sticking out here that's just screaming for a label!

I like Zweihander. It's a WFRP clone. Been poking at another clone from these folks (various ERA systems...) https://www.shadesofvengeance.com/ - which are VERY much a 1e vampire clone...

So, I ask again, what label can I have for my not D&D old-school gaming revival/renaissance? OSR-Tangent? EAT-OSR (Excellent Alternative Traditional...)?

I propose Old School Style (OSS). It flows together fairly well (OSR/OSS). Or just OSR/S

Quote from: jux;1053213There is just spell list and restriction on how many spells can be learned. But it is totally open (not specified) how spells can be researched or picked.

What I like about spell casting is that there are no spell levels. Every spell can be cast on variable strength - it is up to the caster (maybe it is restricted by characters rank). So if character chooses to cast a spell with stronger effect, it is more difficult to pull it off (penalty to willpower check). You can also push-yourself to execute the magic casting by making a reroll, but when failed you get a spell catastrophe from random table. Awesome stuff!

Hmm I love spell miscast tables!

Quote from: Joey2k;1055291I propose Old School Style (OSS). It flows together fairly well (OSR/OSS). ...

I like this, except I worry it could have Nazi-sounding implications...