OSRIC is actually pretty great in that it's notably easier for new players to comprehend and reference than AD&D 1e. I'm currently running a game that blends it as the core engine with some AD&D and Dragon optional character expansion stuff. A lot of the players ignored a fair bit of the latter when building their characters out of a preference for OSRIC's comparative simplicity. They've also said that AD&D is written and organized in a headache inducing fashion for them, much though I kinda like the prose more for that side of things, myself.

Quote from: Brad on March 16, 2025, 03:14:33 PMOSRIC was specifically written to publish AD&D modules though, wasn't it? That's my problem with some of those games, they were never intended to be played, only referenced and used to circumvent copyright law. And it shows.

Only OSRIC was released as a publisher's reference. When reports filter back to Stuart Marshall that people were using it as their primary reference he did version 2 as a standlone as RPG.

As for the copyright status, OSRIC is not a verbatim copy but its own expression of the ideas behind AD&D 1e, using the combination of terms made available by Wizards as open content under the OGL. With OSRIC v3 on the horizon, based on the Creative Common version of the 5e SRD with the same combination of terms, the remote chance that the OGL will be "revoked" is a non-issue going forward.

In short, give it a rest. That argument has been lost. In addition, the changes wrought by digital technology, print on demand, and the Internet are available to anybody with their own ideas of "what ought to be" within the time and budget of a hobby. Take advantage of that to show the rest of us how we are doing it wrong.

Quote from: KindaMeh on March 16, 2025, 04:00:18 PMOSRIC is actually pretty great in that it's notably easier for new players to comprehend and reference than AD&D 1e. I'm currently running a game that blends it as the core engine with some AD&D and Dragon optional character expansion stuff. A lot of the players ignored a fair bit of the latter when building their characters out of a preference for OSRIC's comparative simplicity. They've also said that AD&D is written and organized in a headache inducing fashion for them, much though I kinda like the prose more for that side of things, myself.

OSRIC v3 will be launching on Backerkit fairly soon.
https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/mythmere-games/osric-3/launch_party

Quote from: estar on March 16, 2025, 07:55:45 PM

Quote from: KindaMeh on March 16, 2025, 04:00:18 PMOSRIC is actually pretty great in that it's notably easier for new players to comprehend and reference than AD&D 1e. I'm currently running a game that blends it as the core engine with some AD&D and Dragon optional character expansion stuff. A lot of the players ignored a fair bit of the latter when building their characters out of a preference for OSRIC's comparative simplicity. They've also said that AD&D is written and organized in a headache inducing fashion for them, much though I kinda like the prose more for that side of things, myself.

OSRIC v3 will be launching on Backerkit fairly soon.
https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/mythmere-games/osric-3/launch_party

Thanks for the heads-up!

If the author says it is OSR.  Doesn't  mean I will like it, though.

Quote from: estar on March 16, 2025, 07:54:56 PMIn short, give it a rest. That argument has been lost. In addition, the changes wrought by digital technology, print on demand, and the Internet are available to anybody with their own ideas of "what ought to be" within the time and budget of a hobby. Take advantage of that to show the rest of us how we are doing it wrong.

What argument? I literally said OSRIC existed initially to publish modules for AD&D and you agreed.

Quote from: Brad on March 17, 2025, 10:31:14 AMWhat argument? I literally said OSRIC existed initially to publish modules for AD&D and you agreed.

Quote from: Brad on March 16, 2025, 03:14:33 PMThat's my problem with some of those games, they were never intended to be played, only referenced and used to circumvent copyright law. And it shows.

Yeah...exactly. They are dry reference books. For instance, OSE is devoid of any flavor that makes B/X actually interesting to read.

Are you just butthurt or something because I think OSRIC is boring? Sure seems like it.

I mean, I do think OSRIC is a game. Even one that my players prefer to AD&D (the heathens XD). Tastes will differ, I suppose.

Heck, also arguably a game with better layout than its inspirations, though I feel the relative lack of options/unique prosaic feel compared to AD&D are a thing.

Like most games, it's a mixed bag.

Honestly, some of what was great about the old games layouts from my perspective were the unique weird stuff and conversational vibe. That said, I can also empathize with those who want the product to be more to the point, so to speak.

This thread has unfortunately made me want to A: pull out and run Labyrinth Lord again, and B: eat a BLT.

On non D&D RPGs, I would suggest the more generic category of "Plain old Old School" rather than OSR. Runequest, GURPS, Tunnels & Trolls, BRP, Traveller, etc. have for the most part weathered the big changes that made D&D deviate over time. They are all decidedly Old School but there's no revolution to them, because they never revolted from their source games. I think this is the best way to look at why OSR is a distinctly D&D thing. From that angle, the chart should really focus on those games that appear to be trying to mimic one or more of the older editions of D&D, and reflect how closely or far that variant spins from it. The bottom right of the chart (imo) should have oddities like Torchlight or Dungeon World or something; stuff like Vampire and Star Wars D6 are all, ultimately, either old school or 90's era (Vampire is definitely not Old School in my book, nor does it have anything to do with OSR).

Quote from: KindaMeh on March 17, 2025, 03:47:47 PMI mean, I do think OSRIC is a game. Even one that my players prefer to AD&D (the heathens XD). Tastes will differ, I suppose.

Heck, also arguably a game with better layout than its inspirations, though I feel the relative lack of options/unique prosaic feel compared to AD&D are a thing.

Like most games, it's a mixed bag.

Honestly, some of what was great about the old games layouts from my perspective were the unique weird stuff and conversational vibe. That said, I can also empathize with those who want the product to be more to the point, so to speak.

This is why I always prefer to grab actual 1E AD&D (or 2E) books and run with that than something like OSRIC....which is an excellent utility, but mainly there to let 3PP keep printing 1E compatible stuff.

Quote from: estar on March 16, 2025, 07:55:45 PMOSRIC v3 will be launching on Backerkit fairly soon.
https://www.backerkit.com/c/projects/mythmere-games/osric-3/launch_party

And just to troll you some more, I signed up to back this...because even though OSRIC is boring as fuck, it's a good AD&D reference. You need to lighten up, sir.

Quote from: Ruprecht on March 12, 2025, 10:38:16 AMAnyone familiar enough with  RuneQuest, Legend, BRP or Gurps communities want to comment on what those folks think about the games being OSR or not?

According to some. Thats all OSR.

According to some 5e is OSR.

According to some watching grass grow is OSR

It lost its meaning really fast and even near the start no one could agree on what it was.

Quote from: Omega on March 19, 2025, 06:47:01 AMIt lost its meaning really fast and even near the start no one could agree on what it was.

Well at the beginning some folks wanted it to mean more than the group of hobbyists that played, promoted, and published for classic editions of D&D.

My experience the above is an accurate summation of what has been defining the OSR for the past 18 years. Most of what gets labeled as OSR can trace a creative path to a classic edition either in terms of mechanics or theme. Sometimes both.

But if someone wants it to be more than that like a design ethos or encompassing all RPGs published back in the day, then they will be frustrated.

In the beginning, the meaning and purpose of the OSR were clear and simple.  It was people using the OGL to recreate older editions of D&D that were no longer officially available.  They were made for people who wanted to play those older editions and use content made for them without paying through the nose on the secondary market for out of print books.  Later OSR games took those basic idea and applied them to other genres.  They were not reproductions of older D&D editions but kept the basic mechanical concepts and, to some extent, play style.  I think OSR works best when defined this way.  If it's stretched much beyond that, it ceases to be a meaningful term.  I don't mean just for marketing purposes.  I mean in general.  At the extreme in the bottom right of that chart, it becomes an entirely meaningless term that describes anything, everything and nothing.  Every rpg ever is an OSR game.

There's a certain degradation of subculture terminology that happens when these terms become more widely used by people who don't know or care how or why they were coined in the first place.  The distinction between low and high fantasy is a common example.  Originally, it was coined to distinguish fantasy series that take place in a fantasy version of the real world (low fantasy) from ones that take place in a made up world (high fantasy).  People saw low vs high and assumed it meant the amount of fantastic stuff in the setting.  They couldn't be fucked to understand why the terms were coined or what they actually meant.  Now we have something like the Black Company being called low fantasy because magic is scarce.  The term OSR has undergone the same sort of degradation.  Now it means any old game or anything that calls back to them in some way or anything that has a vaguely defined old school "vibe" or pretty much anything.  I have seen Dungeon World called an OSR game because it has dungeon crawling in it.