Quote from: Batman;855543I've never played those games, so I cannot really comment on them. For certain there are systems completely devoted to the Old School style but I still feel it's far more fundamental than specifics mechanics.

Style of play is one thing, but a system itself is going to have a built in style. Look at 4E.

Quote from: S'mon;855556BFRPG and OSRIC kicked things off, but I think AD&D (eg OSRIC) is a pretty small part of the current OSR, which centres around clones and derivatives of OD&D and B/X.

One thing I've noticed about lots of AD&D/OSRIC GMs is that they have largely abandoned the idea of rules as binding law that AD&D was originally marketed with as a means of unifying the player base and cutting Arneson out of royalties.

I listen to a ton of actual play podcasts and noticed most GMs very quickly adopt an off the top of their head approach rather than going with the described method in the rules.  Many times you can't immediately tell whether they are playing OD&D, B/X or AD&D.

Quote from: S'mon;855556BFRPG and OSRIC kicked things off,

For those that are interested Hoard and Hordes is fairly complete listing of all OSR Product targeting classic D&D to April of 2012 along with their publication date.

After that date it whatever the author takes notice of.

Quote from: EOTB;855542Bullshit.  Where have you ever seen Stuart Marshall (OSRIC), Matt Finch (OSRIC, S&W) or Dan Proctor (Labyrinth Lord) say anything remotely close to that?

Promotion doesn't need to shouted from the rooftops, it can simply be how the product is designed.  In this case it can be inferred that if you're not playing the above games, then you're not playing OSR style.

After all, without those games, there would never have been a movement at all, now would there?

Quote from: S'mon;855555Module-based play is the standard on eg Dragonsfoot, and OSRIC was originally to support that mode with new published modules, but the current OSR tends to emphasise the pre-module do it yourself approach rather than use of published adventures.

So according to Nikita, OSRIC is too new school for cool.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;856096Promotion doesn't need to shouted from the rooftops, it can simply be how the product is designed.  In this case it can be inferred that if you're not playing the above games, then you're not playing OSR style.

And exactly what is it about those games that makes you infer that they are enforcing a OSR Style of Play. Don't be coy spell it out it for the rest of us.

Frankly you are blowing smoke out of your ass. There isn't single element about style of play you can point too that isn't found in 90% of the RPGs on the market.

Of course if you are talking about Matt Finch's Primer for Old School Gaming then perhaps you have a point about Matt Finch's tone about modern mechanics. However the Primer for Old School Gaming is found in neither Swords & Wizardry or OSRIC both works he had a direct hand in.

So again point out the specifics that support your contention that OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, and Swords & Wizardry imply there only one approved style of play for the OSR. And please enlighten us how that some inhibited the release of products like Death, Frost, Doom, Vornheim, and my own Scourge of the Demon Wolf.

Quote from: NathanIW;856079I listen to a ton of actual play podcasts and noticed most GMs very quickly adopt an off the top of their head approach rather than going with the described method in the rules.  Many times you can't immediately tell whether they are playing OD&D, B/X or AD&D.

Ah, I always ask, do you have any personal recommendations (for or against)?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;856096Promotion doesn't need to shouted from the rooftops, it can simply be how the product is designed.  In this case it can be inferred that if you're not playing the above games, then you're not playing OSR style.

After all, without those games, there would never have been a movement at all, now would there?

So you're one of those guys that just goes around spreading stupid stuff on the internet, depending upon people running with your opinion after assuming that your conclusion is backed up by something rational.

Quote from: EOTB;856132So you're one of those guys that just goes around spreading stupid stuff on the internet, depending upon people running with your opinion after assuming that your conclusion is backed up by something rational.

The notion that "old school" and "Old School Runnysnots" are not the same thing seems to escape many people.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;856096So according to Nikita, OSRIC is too new school for cool.

Yeah, I think the stuff the cool kids (Raggi, Zak S et al) are doing is quite different from the Dragonsfoot style of 1e modules, which OSRIC commercialised.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;856071Style of play is one thing, but a system itself is going to have a built in style. Look at 4E.

Like I mentioned earlier you can, with some ease, make 4E old-school. It's not very difficult so long as the players going in know what they're in for.

Quote from: Batman;856145Like I mentioned earlier you can, with some ease, make 4E old-school. It's not very difficult so long as the players going in know what they're in for.

How would you do that? I mean, it wouldn't be "4E" anymore if you changed it enough.

Quote from: estar;856105And exactly what is it about those games that makes you infer that they are enforcing a OSR Style of Play. Don't be coy spell it out it for the rest of us.

The game is built with certain expectations, the various blurbs on how to play in the books/PDFs are meant to evoke this certain style of gaming, which they have dubbed OSR.  Which again, is supposedly how people played uniformly back in the 70's.

Personally, I think it's bullshit.  I've never played that way, in fact, what people call OSR, I would claim is 'New School' simply because until about 2010-2012, all these experiences of that particular style were boogeyman stories.  And varied so wildly depending on the person playing, telling the story of their experiences, that it's sure as hell not anywhere near unified.

And frankly I know I'm going to offend someone here, each and every single gamer's play style is unique anyway that labeling it in any way is both laughably pretentious and just plain sad.  It's caused me to roll my eyes, metaphorically pat people on the head and wish them Happy Gaming, because frankly, this OSR bullshit is just another tribe of Gamers usually trying to look special to everyone else for playing a way that others say they may have.

At the end of the day, to me, you're One of Us.  A gamer and that's good enough for me.

So rock on you crazy squirrel, enjoy playing your way!  Because I will enjoy playing mine.  Be yourself, I say.

YMMV.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;856152The game is built with certain expectations, the various blurbs on how to play in the books/PDFs are meant to evoke this certain style of gaming, which they have dubbed OSR.  Which again, is supposedly how people played uniformly back in the 70's.

I've never seen any OSR fans make this claim about uniformity.

Quote from: Batman;855526Old School isn't a specific system or even game, it's a style of play.

That is the gist of it, though different people draw lines placing different elements of "style of play" beyond the pale.

The objections to WotC's treatment (and even to late TSR treatment) of the D&D brand stemmed from perceptions that the handbooks and scenarios implemented a different ethos and thereby made it hard to play the old way.

To the practical encumbrance of game systems -- for increasing numbers enough of a turnoff in its own right --  was added a game culture that sought to press even further away.

Quote from: S'mon;856153I've never seen any OSR fans make this claim about uniformity.

Every time someone buys OSRIC or LL or S&W, they do so with the expectation of an OSR experience, because that's how the game system has been billed.  And each copy of each book (or PDF as the case may be) is identical and thus 'uniform', and a lot of gamers do not have Gronan's or Chirine's experiences with the devs, and humans in general don't like to think 'outside the box'...

Fucking hell, we CALL IT Old School Revival for a reason, because it's supposedly got some similarities to how the older games were (meant to be, to some) played.

Humans don't group and label something that doesn't have similarities to something else for shits and giggles.  C'mon man, don't pretend to be obtuse.  PC's (computers) are called that because they use the Windows operating system, which generally works the same way, no matter what version, they all have the same icons that have the same functions.  We call Apple computers Macs for the same reason.  Uniformity breeds labels and names, it's how humanity has worked for generations.

You know what?  I'm done.  This is a silly, silly, silly, pointless topic because the beliefs in here are built on mostly erroneous assumptions.

Play RPGs your way, who cares what it's called.  Just HAVE FUN!

I do.