TheRPGSite

Like it says on the tin.

I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

A strong component of the OSR was a return to a basic game.  Enough so that the new version of D&D is returning to a more basic game (Three cheers for the OSR!)

But it looks like the people who actually stay with the OSR now are doing so either:

1) for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say).

2) for nostalgia only.

What do you guys think...

Um, maybe some people simply will continue to prefer 0e D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, 1e AD&D, etc., over D&D 5e?

And some people might find themselves liking both OOP A/D&D and 5e.

Quote from: gonster;753265for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say)...

I doubt that 5e will affect my fondness for Crypts and Things... :D

Quote from: Akrasia;753266Um, maybe some people simply will continue to prefer 0e D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, 1e AD&D, etc., over D&D 5e?

And some people might find themselves liking both OOP A/D&D and 5e.

I think at this point in the game there is a discernible difference between TSR D&D fans and OSR producers/consumers. There is a lot of overlap for obvious reasons but there are a lot of differences as well and what will appeal to one segment of the venn diagram will not necessarily appeal to the other.

I think it will depend on the finished product.  However, I also think the OSR will always be there playing the game the way they've always played it.  That's the whole appeal of the thing.  Nobody played D&D quite the same way and everyone has their own priorities.

D&D is out in the wilds now and I don't think WotC can rope it in and bring it back.

A really strong D&D with a broad appeal might kick start WotC's D&D sales and it might renew the popularity of the core game.  New players coming into D&D might stick around if they like what they see and don't get caught in the shrapnel of edition wars as has happened in recent years.

I hope they can bring back the excitement and sense of community and motion that D&D had back in its early days and put the ugliness behind them.

But I have my doubts.  WotC would have to really hit the sweet spot for an increasingly diverse group of people who no longer need them and their $150 dollars of books.

Gotcha. That's great, it is what the hobby should be then -- people finding something they love and playing the hell out of it.

Got one wild guess (but my wild guesses also led me to believe that WoTC was going to release D&D to the wilds all along.)  PATHFINDER 2 is going to be an expansion of the D&D.

I'm not worried that my Labyrinth Lord books will somehow disappear once 5e is released.

This is actually a good question. I don't have any clear prediction, but there is a pretty solid chance they will vacuum up much of the OSR market. I love all my old games and won't stop fondling and cooing over them, but if there is an in-print, well supported new edition that didn't totally shit the bed when it comes to basic game design, I will buy it and play it more often than 1E or whatever.

There will be absolutely zero change to the player base and frequency of play due to the advent of 5e when it comes to my own OSR offering. None. Zero.

Because it's only available online in one place (by accident actually); it has had no promotion; it is not for sale; and nobody plays it except for those of us who play at my table.

And we're happy with the product we have. Except when we aren't, at which time we change our game rather than changing games.

That last bit is the key to "OSR" I think: the democratization of game design. Everybody can write their own game or house rule an existing one. We no longer need Hasbro to do anything in order for us to play "D&D" or whatever it is.

The OSR will continue to bumble along in obscurity.  One must remember that the OSR is mostly an AD&D Revival and only a fraction of the OSR is looking for product outside of TSR and an even smaller fraction is looking for non-D&D games.

If the finalized 5e looks like the 5e playtests, then 5e will appeal to that segment of the OSR who have been looking for a 2.5 edition that bridges the gap between 2e and 3e better than Castles & Crusades.

How big is that fraction? We will see.

I am a 0e and 4e fan so 5e isn't looking promising. I love 0e for the near-invisible mechanics, my ability to make stuff up on the fly, the skeletal framework from which I can build each new campaign and the 0e community which is very cool with DIY. 5e has made it clear that won't be what I am getting either so I don't see leaving the OSR for the 5e camp.

I never judge an edition until I read it and run it, so perhaps 5e will do something amazing for me that other RPGs do not. We will see.

I've never figured that the OSR partisans are about "simple" rules.  If that were the case, everyone'd be all over GURPS Ultra-Lite, which takes up one side of a 8 1/2" x 11" page.

It's about games that look like they did when the partisans first got into RPGs.

Quote from: gonster;753265Like it says on the tin.

I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

A strong component of the OSR was a return to a basic game.  Enough so that the new version of D&D is returning to a more basic game

So Pundit has crowed. But 4e gave us,

(http://www.rpgmusings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/100_3905.jpg)

So I ain't holdin' my breath.

Quote from: Ravenswing;753313It's about games that look like they did when the partisans first got into RPGs.

What an original and insightful comment.

Quote from: Ravenswing;753313It's about games that look like they did when the partisans first got into RPGs.

The games I played back in the day didn't look anything like LotFP or DCC. My attraction to them IS partially the 'simple' rules as well as the interesting bend that some have taken on. They seem fast and fun and easy to modify... they exult the DIY aspect that I enjoy. No huge tomes of wall-to-wall full color distractions.
But really nothing to do with the implied nostalgia.

Scott Anderson where can I get your rpg?

Quote from: Ravenswing;753313It's about games that look like they did when the partisans first got into RPGs.[/COLOR]

You're right. AD&D 1e isn't rules light compared to a plethora of rules light games currently in existence, many of which have only one page of rules. You can run whole campaigns from the free Exalted Quickstart or free Trinity Quickstart and they have 1/20th of the rules of AD&D.

However, when talking with people in the OSR regarding actual play, what's interesting is that very few of us use AD&D's rules, but instead play a version that is much more akin to Basic D&D with AD&D bits. What bits we use fluxes from DM to DM, so that's why you see different stuff emphasized in different retroclones.

Even the OSR designers who are making "new" OSR games aren't going particularly "rules light" and certainly cranking out a lot more than one page rules.

Quote from: gonster;753265Like it says on the tin.

I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

A strong component of the OSR was a return to a basic game.  Enough so that the new version of D&D is returning to a more basic game (Three cheers for the OSR!)

But it looks like the people who actually stay with the OSR now are doing so either:

1) for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say).

2) for nostalgia only.

What do you guys think...

I don't play/run OSRIC/1e or Labyrinth Lord/BX for nostalgia, no (I never actually played BX when it was available!). I play them because:
a) I sometimes want a simple, fast playing version of D&D.
b) If I want to GM online, the Dragonsfoot chatrooms suit me very well, and I have to run an old school game if I'm GMing there.

But I do expect there may be less OSR played going forward, that 5e may well attract some of that market.

I'm pretty happy with Microlite 75, Castles & Crusades, and Palladium Fantasy 1e to scratch that itch. I'm happy WotC seems to be making some good decisions these days, but honestly, the impact on my gaming is probably minimal.

The attitude to 5e here is really puzzling to me.  I don't get why anyone cares what game other people play.  I don't mind what you play, I only mind what I play.

I guess if I was selling my game for money instead of giving it away*, I might feel differently.

* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

The way I see, interest in the OSR is built on 5 planks:

1: People who want a simpler D&D than the skills-plus-feats exception-based mechanics of 3E and 4E.
2: People who are nostalgic for the way TSR-era D&D worked (either TSR D&D in general or a specific iteration of it from OD&D to 2.5 AD&D).
3: People producing adventures and support material for fantasy games operating under the above assumptions and who want a legal figleaf to do so.
4: People producing retro-clones of old editions.
5: People who want to repurpose old mechanics to produce entirely new games working along the lines of the simpler pre-Wizards iterations of D&D, rather than direct clones of TSR-era editions.

Now, those are going to overlap to an extent, but even so, there's clearly going to be some planks that are more weakened by the new D&D than others - and I think Basic 5E is going to be the real killer here.

The new Basic D&D, provided it works as we all hope it's going to work, is going to vampirise plank 1 hard - it's basically a type of D&D those customers have been crying out for, and it's a type of D&D you can use to run any new adventure or setting material that Wizards bring out in the future too. Yes, the class and race selection might be sparse, but I reckon if you bought the PHB you wouldn't have too much trouble cooking up basic versions of the paladin and the tiefling and whatnot.

Plank 2 might also be hit hard, depending on how reminiscent Basic D&D is of TSR-era D&D. Certainly, if you take 3E and peel away feats and skills you end up with something that's reasonably close to TSR-era D&D, and people who've paid more attention to the playtest than me have said that its simpler iterations feel like an updated 2E or RC. At the same time, I don't see Basic D&D going quite as far as returning to, say, the old saving throw categories (since the 3E update is in many respects more intuitive) or descending AC. So whilst I don't think Basic 5E is going to win over anyone who is so passionately devoted to little mechanical quirks like descending AC, weird save categories, race-as-class or whatever that they refuse to countenance any alternative, I think it has the potential to grab the attention of most of the more moderate nostalgia crowd - and since it's typically easier to find games of the latest edition of D&D than it is to find games of more elderly editions, I think you may see a lot of TSR holdouts saying "Eh, it's close enough that I'm willing to live with it in return for more regular gaming."

As far as Plank 3 goes, the coming of Basic 5E means that they potentially have one more option when it comes to choosing which of the many D&Dalike systems they can stat up their modules for. Some might choose to dual-stat for Basic 5E and their retro-clone of choice, but dual-statting in general is cludgey and makes layout awkward. (Precious few dual-stat for the various different retro-clones available, or even for a retro-clone and 3E, for example.) Some may choose not to support Basic 5E, either because they don't like the terms of the new OGL, or because they have ideological objections overriding the obvious commercial advantages of being able to market to such a big userbase, or because they happen to publish one of the significant retro-clone systems and feel that supporting their biggest competitor isn't a move they can stomach.

At the same time, though, unless the new OGL for this edition is deeply obnoxious, the big fat customer base Wizards can offer 3rd parties access to is going to be so tempting that a hell of a lot of adventure and supplement producers are going to write for Basic 5E, and the more Basic 5E is able to support an old-school style of play, the more will make that leap. Some publishers - folks who only put stuff out on PDF, for instance - might happily put out multiple versions of their works for different systems, and some may bite the bullet and dual-stat, but many will simply jump on the 5E bandwagon - and if it's reasonably easy to translate 5E stuff to earlier editions, the number who hitch their wagon to Basic 5E will only grow.

Plank 4 will shrink more or less directly in proportion to how much Plank 2 shrinks, for obvious reasons - if less people are on the TSR nostalgia bandwagon, less people will want to use a retro-clone of a TSR-era edition rather than just using Basic 5E.

Plank 5 is the unpredictable one. Those producing games which are a lot like D&D but have a few tricks of their own, like ACKS or LotFP, may be able to refocus their product lines on the stuff that's unique to their games in order to better adapt to what's coming. In that sense, they may be hurt by 5E, but they are at least in a better position than those producing purist retro-clones, since the purist can't adapt their games accordingly because the whole premise of their offerings is to stick as close to the editions they are cloning as they conceivably can. At the same time, those producing games that are very divergent from D&D - Stars Without Number and Woodland Warriors spring to mind - probably aren't going to be affected that much. And if the new OGL includes a new SRD with new mechanics for people to borrow, if anything the coming of a new edition may enrich this plank by expanding the range of things that people can borrow and tinker with. Having new tools for the toolbox is never a disadvantage, after all.

In short, provided that the new Basic isn't botched, I think 5E is going to utterly shake up the commercial basis of the OSR, and those who expect to be able to keep going as they have during the 4E era are in for a rude awakening. At the same time, I do think there's a future for the OSR not so much as an independent commercial force, so much as it can be one voice within 5E's big tent, producing third party adventures and settings and sourcebooks and DMing advice which advocates old school play within the framework of the present edition as much as (and probably more than) it plays around with reviving old editions. Ultimately, if the new Basic plays like TSR-era D&D, then tinkering with OD&D/BX/BECMI/RC/AD&D 1 and 2 becomes more a matter of exploring the game's history rather than keeping a particular play style alive - because that play style will be alive and well within the Basic 5E community.

Quote from: P&P;753366* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

:rotfl:

Quote from: gonster;753265Like it says on the tin.

I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

A strong component of the OSR was a return to a basic game.  Enough so that the new version of D&D is returning to a more basic game (Three cheers for the OSR!)

But it looks like the people who actually stay with the OSR now are doing so either:

1) for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say).

2) for nostalgia only.

What do you guys think...

The point of the OSR is to play the original editions not something like them. Surrounding that are things like Majestic Wilderlands, Arrows of Indra, Lamentations of the Flame Princes, Blood & Treasure, and many fine other games that offer a different take on classic edition themes.

This can exist along other interest including the latest edition of D&D. And if the latest D&D is similar to how the playtest rules went then interest in OSR products will only rise especially adventures and supplements. This is because unlike GURPS, Fantasy Hero, Savage Worlds, the difference between classic editions and the 5e playtest are inches.

Quote from: Warthur;753368Plank 4 will shrink more or less directly in proportion to how much Plank 2 shrinks, for obvious reasons - if less people are on the TSR nostalgia bandwagon, less people will want to use a retro-clone of a TSR-era edition rather than just using Basic 5E.

Actually, lemme go further than that - I think that unless Basic 5E is botched, the growth of purist retro-clones (in which I could S&W, Labyrinth Lord and OSRIC) is going to be cut short.

There are basically three sources of customers for such games:

1: People who played the editions they cloned back in the day who want to keep playing them and need replacement books, and who keep playing those editions because they love them to bits.

2: People a lot like the guys in category 1, except they aren't passionately devoted to a specific pre-Wizards edition of D&D - they just don't like 3E or 4E.

3: People who are new to D&Dalike games, are interested in playing them, but don't find 3E or 4E very appealing.

People from category 1 are a cinch to grab: just make sure your retro-clone is as close to the original as the law allows, make an effort to recapture the aesthetic these veterans fell in love with, and they'll be happy. They aren't going to be tempted away by 5E because for whatever reason - whether it's a love of Erol Otus-styled weird fantasy aesthetics or a hatred for ascending AC which approaches religious proportions - these guys have their hooks dug well into their edition of choice and for the most part aren't budging, though you may get some slippage if they find the new 5E (or Basic 5E) really presses their buttons.

People from category 2 or 3, however, are going to be more difficult to keep. They want to know why your game is offering them something which the current version of D&D can't deliver. Now, at the moment that's an easy pitch - you point to the distinction between exception-based mechanics and stacks of feats/powers on the one hand and the rulings-based mechanics and simpler characters and monsters on the other, you talk about old school play styles and how they're supported by your system and undermined by Wizards' approach, and so on.

Once 5E is in play, suddenly your pitch is going to be much more difficult. If the customer just wants something simpler than 3E and 4E, then Basic 5E is going to offer that (and full-blooded 5E might even offer that too if a lot of the major complexities are just optional rules), and it's also going to provide the advantage of a wider player base thanks to Wizards' extra reach. If 5E or Basic 5E support old school playstyles too, then your pitch is really in trouble, because you're basically left with pointing at the differences between your game and Basic 5E, and customers in categories 2 and 3 are substantially less likely than those in category 1 to really care about ascending AC vs. descending AC or differing experience tables or other such things. You may get some mileage out of having classes beyond Basic 5E's limited number, but that's about it. (Even then, that advantage goes away if Basic versions of those classes become available down the line.)

In short, you'll keep your customers for whom the big advantage of your game is that it's Moldvay/Cook (or Mentzer, or Gygax, or Gygax/Arneson, or Holmes, or Allston) with the serial numbers filed off. You'll struggle to snare new customers who don't care about that and are just after a simpler, free D&D, and you'll also struggle to keep customers who came to you looking for that but are happy to switch to Basic 5E if that'll get them more game.

What's gonna happen?

We will continue playing AD&D and OD&D at our dead FLGS same as always.

Quote from: Warthur;753368In short, provided that the new Basic isn't botched, I think 5E is going to utterly shake up the commercial basis of the OSR, and those who expect to be able to keep going as they have during the 4E era are in for a rude awakening. At the same time, I do think there's a future for the OSR not so much as an independent commercial force, so much as it can be one voice within 5E's big tent, producing third party adventures and settings and sourcebooks and DMing advice which advocates old school play within the framework of the present edition as much as (and probably more than) it plays around with reviving old editions. Ultimately, if the new Basic plays like TSR-era D&D, then tinkering with OD&D/BX/BECMI/RC/AD&D 1 and 2 becomes more a matter of exploring the game's history rather than keeping a particular play style alive - because that play style will be alive and well within the Basic 5E community.

Dear [Producer of OSR retro-clone material that has talked about online],
Can I use it with D&D 5E? If not, I no buy your books!

Arrows of Indra via D&D 5E? Can we, could we, should we?

Quote from: P&P;753366I guess if I was selling my game for money instead of giving it away*, I might feel differently.

* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

>inb4 TBP 4vengers "THE PUNDIT KILLED 4E! WE WANT HIS HEAD!"

All I can say is I'm unlikely to continue buying OSR products once 5E comes out. I may buy 5E content from proven OSR producers. But until 5E gets old and creaky, I'm not likely to even touch OSR products.

I think the OSR worked because it hit a the time where D&D was in a edition that felt unlike D&D, the old books weren't in print / legal .pdfs, and there was an internet presence who had already gathered up old school enthusiasts.

We're stepping into a new era. A new edition of D&D, out on the market, with a basic version that will be "the core" and free. Even if the OSR completely dies, some other "support/contrast" movement will crop up.

I play the old games.  Why should I care what these folks wrote? The new game would have to be pretty amazing for me to even be convinced to sit in on a session once.

And I very much doubt that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Personally, I'm a Johnny-come-lately to the OSR scene, and I don't have much interest in the pure retro-clones (I have the originals on my shelf, after all). On the other hand, I've fallen in love with a couple of the neo-clones (ACKS and DCC, specifically), along with some of the adjunct material being produced (Sine Nomine's stuff, some of Frog God's adventures, etc.) by various OSR vendors. I'm not so sure D&D 5e is going to pull away that many people, although I expect it to become the lowest common denominator for an awful lot of D&D gamers of every stripe. Far more people I've encountered playing OSR stuff are doing so because of exactly what their neo- or retro-clone of choice is and does, not simply because they don't like 3e or 4e (though that may have been the catalyst). Plus, if D&D 5e actually expands the market, it may actually benefit many of the OSR games as some fraction of these new players will eventually fall into other games, which is the biggest reason a healthy D&D is good for the hobby as a whole.

Quote from: Akrasia;753266Um, maybe some people simply will continue to prefer 0e D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, 1e AD&D, etc., over D&D 5e?

And some people might find themselves liking both OOP A/D&D and 5e.

This is pretty much what I think will happen. New games don't really kill off old games- even if they go out of print. They can sometimes take over a large part of the fanbase, but there are almost always people to keep a game going.

Quote from: Baron;753423I play the old games.  Why should I care what these folks wrote? The new game would have to be pretty amazing for me to even be convinced to sit in on a session once.

And I very much doubt that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Genuine question: is the same true of any new game? Are you similarly reluctant to try out what Bobloblah calls a "neo-clone" (thanks Bob!) where there's substantial deviations from the way your preferred edition(s) did things, or other systems entirely?

If that is the case and you're generally very reluctant to try any new game because you're very satisfied with what you currently have, that's great as far as your gaming goes, but at the same time it wouldn't make any sense for any publishers to pay much attention to your preferences because there's nothing they can really sell you (as far as core rules go) except a carbon copy of the game you already use and like.

If that's not the case, and you're specifically reluctant about 5E in a way you aren't reluctant about, say, ACKS or DCC, then... why? Why would you spurn at least trying out the free Basic game but at the same time give time to other D&D-like games put out by other publishers?

Quote from: Monster Manuel;753430This is pretty much what I think will happen. New games don't really kill off old games- even if they go out of print. They can sometimes take over a large part of the fanbase, but there are almost always people to keep a game going.

I tend to agree. I think it's possible that the OSR will slow way the hell down, but it won't vanish completely.

Then again, a game's fanbase can get very, very depleted and commercially inactive and still keep ticking over. Jorune has a tiny number of fansites and the barest trickle of material produced but it manages to hang in there. And whilst an individual might be equally happy with OD&D, ACKS, DCC and 5E, at the same time if they end up with 5 offers of a 5E game for every 1 offer they get of the others, they're going to spend much more time playing 5E than anything else.

That last point is very true, but is 5e going to change the current dynamics of that situation (i.e. probably 5 games available of anything other than the preferred retro-clone)?

How is the OSR going to fare with D&D coming?

Just fine-and-dandy. Thanks for asking.

Quote from: Akrasia;753266Um, maybe some people simply will continue to prefer 0e D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, 1e AD&D, etc., over D&D 5e?

And some people might find themselves liking both OOP A/D&D and 5e.

Yeah, that's not like you have to play one single version, or have to like just material for one game. If 5e lives up to its nigh backwards compatibility promise, then it's win-win for old schoolers too.

People forget that the OSR has been going on long enough for the various publishers to have established their own reputation. Many OSR publishers are for all intent and purposes are in the same business situation as any other third tier publisher of RPGs.

The main question will be how successfully WoC manages to get all the talent in the smaller companies to shift focus toward making products for 5e.

The motivation for this switch will be great simply because of the large customer base they will have right out of the blocks. Some people making OSR products will continue to do so out of devotion to their preferred platform, but I'll bet many will want to participate in the larger market, particularly if they can do it without compromising their basic 'brand'. I.e., if 5e really is compatible with a style of play resembling pre-3e games, it won't be much of a stretch to turn your attention to it.

Companies like Troll Lord games, etc., may well ask whether they would rather be a sort of modern Judge's Guild, participating directly in the D&D marketplace, or more like a FGU, focusing on their own line of games. This doesn't have to be a black-and-white choice: a company can do some of both. But there are only so many people writing print-worthy adventures and other products, and I'll bet a significant fraction of them will want to support, directly or indirectly, the 5e market.

Isn't 5E just an OSR product with better support?   If it succeeds, I believe the OSR will have it's first legitimate blockbuster.

Quote from: Larsdangly;753444Companies like Troll Lord games, etc., may well ask whether they would rather be a sort of modern Judge's Guild, participating directly in the D&D marketplace, or more like a FGU, focusing on their own line of games. This doesn't have to be a black-and-white choice: a company can do some of both. But there are only so many people writing print-worthy adventures and other products, and I'll bet a significant fraction of them will want to support, directly or indirectly, the 5e market.

I can only speak for myself, but yes I would seriously consider supporting 5e IF it supported the same style I been using and of course if it had a usable third party license.

Majestic Wilderlands for 5e, instead of wrapping itself around Swords & Wizardry it would wrap itself around the Basic D&D rules.

Scourge of the Demon Wolf, would use the above along with 5e stats.

Blackmarsh, 5e has the least impact on this type of product considering I use minimal stats at best. What matters more is whether the buyer can easily look up the things I include.

Quote from: Gunslinger;753450Isn't 5E just an OSR product with better support?   If it succeeds, I believe the OSR will have it's first legitimate blockbuster.

That will depend on the adventures more than the rules. If they don't make it easy for third party to support it then the adventures and organized play will set the "tone" of 5e.

If they do make it easy for third party support then it will be a big tent with a variety of styles to choose from.

Unless 5E has integrated domain-level play options in the core-book, and other assorted cool bits (rules about creating monsters, turning into undead, building golems etc), I can hardly see it replacing ACKS for me.

The other two "retro-clones" I like are Mongoose Traveller - essentially an official retro-clone of Classic Traveller - and Stars Without Number, an OD&D/Classic Traveller hybrid neo-clone. I can hardly see 5E replacing either.

That said, I think that 5E has a good chance of replacing 3.5E for my group.

Having seen nothing even resembling third party support in any of the pre-release buzz, I have to ask...

What makes you think there's going to be anything like the OGL?

At a minimum wouldn't we have seen OGL notices on preview products?   Or logos on the trade dress?   Something?

Because if there's not, the OSR is losing a lot of market share to a powerful competitor without being able to tag along.  So that'd be bad.

Quote from: Warthur;753368Ultimately, if the new Basic plays like TSR-era D&D, then tinkering with OD&D/BX/BECMI/RC/AD&D 1 and 2 becomes more a matter of exploring the game's history rather than keeping a particular play style alive - because that play style will be alive and well within the Basic 5E community.

It comes down to how many people are active in the OSR because they want a system and adventures that support old-school style D&D. Because yeah, it's looking like a lot of those folks (myself included) will find what they need with 5E. Especially if WotC (or licensed partners) can turn out some half-way decent adventures.

However, I've always doubted how much the OSR is an active play movement. It seems more of a design club along the lines of the Forge. Like-minded people exploring certain game sensibilities, publishing vanity press RPGs, and downloading and talking about them among themselves. There has to be tremendous overlap between owners of Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, ACKS, and Dungeon Crawl Classics. I also suspect most copies of those games are played once or twice, or not played as all - which is true of all indie RPGs.

Then then there's the publishers who are trying to actually run a business. If  WotC welcomes third-party support, it's hard to imagine old-school publishers eschewing the far larger market of 5E to publish an adventure that sells 600 copies. If Frog God and Goodman Games could hold their noses to publish adventures for 3E and Pathfinder, I can't see why they wouldn't want to publish for a game far closer to the sensibilities of their customers (and owners).

So the OSR will survive as a movement of like-minded enthusiasts. But I suspect we've seen the high-water mark commercially.

They'll be fine in fact the smart ones will find a way to make money off the whole deal if 5e is any good at all.

Quote from: golan2072;753474Unless 5E has integrated domain-level play options in the core-book, and other assorted cool bits (rules about creating monsters, turning into undead, building golems etc), I can hardly see it replacing ACKS for me.

I can't see 5e Basic replacing anything for me either. It's certainly not going to play like DCC and it's modules aren't going to be like the LotFP stuff.
I like the relatively 'punk' attitude of the OSR contingent.
To me D&D Basic will be just another OSR product, which I'll take a look at and mine for ideas. The Brand Name and the corporate bullshit attached have no draw for me... but a cheap/free Basic set is low-commitment enough for me to take a look.

Quote from: Haffrung;753479There has to be tremendous overlap between owners of Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, ACKS, and Dungeon Crawl Classics. I also suspect most copies of those games are played once or twice, or not played as all - which is true of all indie RPGs.

S&W and LL, so far as I can tell, get a reasonable amount of play. But sometimes they're called OD&D and B/X. ;)

ACKS/DCC I suspect don't get as much play as self-contained games in themselves so much as they get raided for ideas to incorporate into existing campaigns with D&Dish rules sets.

QuoteSo the OSR will survive as a movement of like-minded enthusiasts. But I suspect we've seen the high-water mark commercially.

I agree. To run with the Forge analogy, we'll still see retro-clones bubbling up from time to time whenever someone decides they have found a superior way to replicate OD&D (or whatever), just like there's still a steady trickle of storygames being published. But the OSR's had its moment of maximum prominence, just as the Forge did back in the 3E days.

Allow me to officially assure the reading public that I will continue to produce whatever madness my fevered brain constructs regardless of whatever the hell happens to come out of Redmond this month, just as I always have.

Frankly, I consider it a personal failing that Arcana Rising was as market friendly as it was.

5th Edition really has no more relevance to my continued output than any other game.

At the moment, I'm actually more threatened by the new ICONS and Valiant Universe ...

It's not like gaming is zero sum. People who like OSR games will continue to play them, and people who are interested in Next will check it out.

Quote from: J Arcane;753508Allow me to officially assure the reading public that I will continue to produce whatever madness my fevered brain constructs regardless of whatever the hell happens to come out of Redmond this month, just as I always have.

Frankly, I consider it a personal failing that Arcana Rising was as market friendly as it was.

5th Edition really has no more relevance to my continued output than any other game.

At the moment, I'm actually more threatened by the new ICONS and Valiant Universe ...

I demand you lower your standards then! One more mistake like Arcana Rising out of you will surely have the Game Police hunting you down.

Quote from: Warthur;753499ACKS/DCC I suspect don't get as much play as self-contained games in themselves so much as they get raided for ideas to incorporate into existing campaigns with D&Dish rules sets.

I don't have hard data and I don't think anyone does. But if I had to guess I'd say DCC is probably the most successful stand-alone non-clone game to come out of the OSR. I'd say it's probably older editions and their clones (OSRIC, LL, S&W) > DCC and/or LotFP > ACKS, AS&SH, Mutant Future, SWN, Crypts & Things, Hulks & Horrors and others, God only knows in what order.

As for whether the OSR will still be a Big Thing. Well, I'm not so much skeptical of the idea that current OSR fans will adopt 5e, I just don't believe that the people who currently support the OSR will cease to do so with 5e, even if they buy into 5e. Unless maybe WotC puts out adventures that can compete with offerings as varied as Dyson's Delves, Stonehell, Anomalous Subsurface Environment, Carcosa, Jim Raggi's Grand Guignol takes on "rocks fall, everyone dies" and the DCC modules.

Quote from: Kaiu Keiichi;753514It's not like gaming is zero sum. People who like OSR games will continue to play them, and people who are interested in Next will check it out.

The TL;DR version of what I've just posted. Scooped. :D

If the new *Free* 5th edition is compatible enough with my OSRish campaign we'll likely make the switch. Some of my players will want to "upgrade", some others won't care, and new players we haven't met yet will be easier to meet simply because everyone will be playing the new shiny thing.

Going forward i think the OSR will continue to be a great crowdsource of  modules and house rules.

My only interest in 5e is at the Basic level. I don't see myself embracing the complexities of the full system... feats and whatnot. It also seems like most non-OSR folks who are drawn to it will quickly move past Basic, if they ever engage with Basic at all. So that divide will still be there... me and what remains of the OSR folks... even if we play Basic... vs. the updated D&D crowd with their bright and shiny hardbacks and rules I have no interest in.
The divide between simple and 'advanced' D&D players seems like it would favor a continuance of the OSR feed.

Ha ha.

Someone said that OSR

Quoteseems more of a design club along the lines of the Forge.

on this BBS.. ha ha..

If 5e is able to easily run old modules, then it's likely it'll run all the OSR stuff.

So maybe OSR will become an adventure style rather than a rules movement, which in many ways was secondary, if the talk of "style" over "rules" was/is valid.

Quote from: tzunder;753554If 5e is able to easily run old modules, then it's likely it'll run all the OSR stuff.

And visa versa... OSR folks will be able to make easier use any good modules WOTC puts out... for S&W, LotFP or whatever. Seems like win/win to me.

Quote from: tzunder;753554Ha ha.

Someone said that OSR  on this BBS.. ha ha..

If 5e is able to easily run old modules, then it's likely it'll run all the OSR stuff.

So maybe OSR will become an adventure style rather than a rules movement, which in many ways was secondary, if the talk of "style" over "rules" was/is valid.

Works for me. It would a win/win situation for both.:)

The OSR will chug along till the sun burns out. You can't say the same thing about Dungeons & Dragons. If Hasbro doesn't like the bottom line, they could shelve it at any time. Which is why the OSR exists in the first place.

I need some caffeine.

Quote from: Endless Flight;753560The OSR will chug along till the sun burns out. You can't say the same thing about Dungeons & Dragons. If Hasbro doesn't like the bottom line, they could shelve it at any time. Which is why the OSR exists in the first place.

I need some caffeine.

What if there's no money in it?  Still chugging along?

Quote from: mcbobbo;753561What if there's no money in it?  Still chugging along?

Dude, there's already no money in it.

Quote from: mcbobbo;753561What if there's no money in it?  Still chugging along?

I don't think there's much money in it now. The guys doing the various DCC zines (I can think of three)... they're certainly not making any dough off of it and I don't see signs they expect to.
Alarums and Excursions is still going, that's not a cash cow either.
It's the 'punk'/hobbyist attitude that it's tapped into... something missing in my gaming for a long long time... that's what caught my attention and attracted me to the OSR... not the 'nostalgia for D&D' angle.

Quote from: J Arcane;753563Dude, there's already no money in it.

Okay that's probably fair...  Let me try this...

Even in the Bad Old Days ala T$R?

3e was really open and it spawned a whole submarket of deritives via the OGL.  What if 5e doesn't?

Quote from: mcbobbo;753569Okay that's probably fair...  Let me try this...

Even in the Bad Old Days ala T$R?

3e was really open and it spawned a whole submarket of deritives via the OGL.  What if 5e doesn't?

Dude, 3e is STILL spawning a submarket of derivatives via the OGL.

How do you think the OSR can even exist?

I'll check out the free PDF, of course, but I'm not terribly optimistic about it being something I'd choose instead of my current editions of choice.  We'll see.

Quote from: J Arcane;753571Dude, 3e is STILL spawning a submarket of derivatives via the OGL.

How do you think the OSR can even exist?

I think 4e blowing goats was a big part of it.  Or at a minimum it was VERY different from what OSR stuff offered and thus not a competitor.

5e is going after the OSRs niche directly.  It seems more of a threat, unless they open it up and share the pie.

Quote from: mcbobbo;753576I think 4e blowing goats was a big part of it.  Or at a minimum it was VERY different from what OSR stuff offered and thus not a competitor.

5e is going after the OSRs niche directly.  It seems more of a threat, unless they open it up and share the pie.

I agree. I, and a lot of other people, were totally fired up and ready to roll with 4E but, for various reasons, it just didn't connect with much of its intended audience. The 'aiming point' of 5E is centered on a part of the market that is bigger, more generically into 'lite' table top gaming, and at least casually interested in OSR type games. Setting aside the couple dozen zealots out there, I think their strategy will work. They'll certainly get my business, unless they somehow failed to understand the basic structure of accessible, playable versions of D&D.

Quote from: Haffrung;753479However, I've always doubted how much the OSR is an active play movement. It seems more of a design club along the lines of the Forge. Like-minded people exploring certain game sensibilities, publishing vanity press RPGs, and downloading and talking about them among themselves. There has to be tremendous overlap between owners of Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, ACKS, and Dungeon Crawl Classics. I also suspect most copies of those games are played once or twice, or not played as all - which is true of all indie RPGs.

Labyrinth Lord and DCC get played a fair bit at the London D&D Meetup, not exactly a hotbed of Indie hipsters - those guys congregate at the aptly named London Indie Games Meetup* instead. My impression is that because D&D is a very playable game, the games based on it are likewise very playable, and do get played. If I include online chatroom sessions then I've run 50 or so sessions of OSR games (LL & OSRIC) over the past few years, and about the same number of actual 1e AD&D and BX - not that it's particularly easy to tell sometimes whether I'm using '1e' or 'OSRIC'; in my current OSRIC campaign I'm pretty sure all the players are just using their knowledge of 1e and have never opened the OSRIC pdf, never mind hardcopy.

So, anyway, my impression is that you are right about Indie nar games, they get played only occasionally, as one-shots, but wrong about D&D clones; unsurprisingly they get played just the same as D&D.

*London Indie Games Meetup meets once a month. London D&D Meetup meets four times a week.

Quote from: The Butcher;753529I don't have hard data and I don't think anyone does. But if I had to guess I'd say DCC is probably the most successful stand-alone non-clone game to come out of the OSR. I'd say it's probably older editions and their clones (OSRIC, LL, S&W) > DCC and/or LotFP > ACKS, AS&SH, Mutant Future, SWN, Crypts & Things, Hulks & Horrors and others, God only knows in what order.

As for whether the OSR will still be a Big Thing. Well, I'm not so much skeptical of the idea that current OSR fans will adopt 5e, I just don't believe that the people who currently support the OSR will cease to do so with 5e, even if they buy into 5e. Unless maybe WotC puts out adventures that can compete with offerings as varied as Dyson's Delves, Stonehell, Anomalous Subsurface Environment, Carcosa, Jim Raggi's Grand Guignol takes on "rocks fall, everyone dies" and the DCC modules.



The TL;DR version of what I've just posted. Scooped. :D

Considering the fact that DCC has gone into a second printing (not counting alternate covers,) the numerous modules Goodman has published for the game and the fact that it's the only OSR (or OSRish) game to have cracked the ICv2 list and yeah, I think it's doing just fine.

Quote from: tzunder;753554.
So maybe OSR will become an adventure style rather than a rules movement, which in many ways was secondary, if the talk of "style" over "rules" was/is valid.

It's funny, but one of the incubators of the OSR was the Necromancer Games forum. And their motto was "3rd Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel". So I could see a publisher picking up the "5th Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel" mantle. But if WotC publishes 5E modules that have a 1st Edition Feel, will there be any need to?

Sure, some OSR enthusiasts despise WotC as the corporate boss-man and want to be indie just for the sake of being indie. And they tend to drive the online tone. But  I don't think more casual old-school gamers really care if the old-school dungeon they play is published by WotC or Goodman Games or Frog God Games. And WotC adventures are far more accessible. They also foster the shared experience that underlies the Paizo community. So if WotC publishes quality old-school adventures to support 5E, about the only distinctions left for the OSR will the indie vibe and free shared material.

Quote from: J Arcane;753508... whatever the hell happens to come out of Redmond this month..

Redmond? I'm guessing you mean Renton.

Quote from: K Peterson;753616Redmond? I'm guessing you mean Renton.

Who can keep all those suburbs straight anyway?

Quote from: Haffrung;753608It's funny, but one of the incubators of the OSR was the Necromancer Games forum. And their motto was "3rd Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel". So I could see a publisher picking up the "5th Edition Rules, 1st Edition Feel" mantle. But if WotC publishes 5E modules that have a 1st Edition Feel, will there be any need to?

Sure, some OSR enthusiasts despise WotC as the corporate boss-man and want to be indie just for the sake of being indie. And they tend to drive the online tone. But  I don't think more casual old-school gamers really care if the old-school dungeon they play is published by WotC or Goodman Games or Frog God Games. And WotC adventures are far more accessible. They also foster the shared experience that underlies the Paizo community. So if WotC publishes quality old-school adventures to support 5E, about the only distinctions left for the OSR will the indie vibe and free shared material.

I'm willing to look at 5E modules if I happen to see any that aren't storyline driven. I don't bother much with Paizo adventures for much the same reason.

Quote from: Spinachcat;753337You're right. AD&D 1e isn't rules light compared to a plethora of rules light games currently in existence, many of which have only one page of rules. You can run whole campaigns from the free Exalted Quickstart or free Trinity Quickstart and they have 1/20th of the rules of AD&D.

However, when talking with people in the OSR regarding actual play, what's interesting is that very few of us use AD&D's rules, but instead play a version that is much more akin to Basic D&D with AD&D bits. What bits we use fluxes from DM to DM, so that's why you see different stuff emphasized in different retroclones.

Even the OSR designers who are making "new" OSR games aren't going particularly "rules light" and certainly cranking out a lot more than one page rules.

Pretty much.  It's why when you ask folks for a comprehensive definition of "OSR," you're likely to get a number of differing answers, mostly boiling down to one or more of Warthur's laundry list.  "Simple rules" just doesn't cut it -- the hobby has always had simple rulesets, and a good number of them.

Just my own two cents.

There has been no indication that 5E will be OGL, but plenty that it will be backwards compatable with an earlier version of D&D (and thus retroclones). So why couldn't an adventure published by a third party say  on its cover "(S&W or LL) compatable product that can also be used with the basic version of the world's most famous RPG".

You were wondering if this could cause the OSR to flounder? It has the potential to cause it to flourish.

EDIT: Ah Hell, scooped. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=29734)

Here's the thing to me.

There's an image of the OSR community as just a bunch of derivatives, pumping out barely distinct clone after barely distinct clone, and one generic adventure after another.

And the thing is, this is "true."

But it's also true of literally every other market too. This is not some unique failing of the OSR, this is what markets DO.

There are DOZENS of superhero games out right now. Especially since the Marvel movies took off, there's been a huge boom in superhero games, settings, and products. DTRPG is running a sale right now where every week they offer discounts on a different game line, and they could probably keep doing that from now until Avengers 3 comes out and not run out of material.

No one game, not even THE game, is going to stop that. DC and Marvel both couldn't stop that. Two names that should've carried every bit as much weight as anyone else on the market, and they flopped.

D&D is not going to magically make the market behave differently. If anything, it is D&D that is going to have to distinguish itself in order to survive, to prove that anyone needs it and not the nearly unlimited options that exist.

Basic seems to be part of it. They seem to be banking on the brand and the market penetration it brings for the rest. They want to be different by being the game that everyone has heard of, those vaunted 'externalities,' while potentially making it easier to get back to playing that game.

I dunno if it'll work. Just don't, not saying that to cast doubt, I'm saying I literally do not know.

What I do know is that they are not going to magically make the existing market not exist by doing that.

The market doesn't exist for you, it exists as a property of human nature, and will continue to do so on those grounds so long as the barrier to entry to the market remains near-zero. There are still going to be eleventy-billion superhero games, or D&D clones, or pretentious games about ennui, or incomprehensible fantasy settings written by ex-folklore professors, and on and on.

Because people are going to keep making them, because they want to, and there's nothing stopping them, and nothing stopping them from trying to sell a few of them in the process.

D&D won't kill the OSR anymore than Marvel killed the superhero game.

One of the most useful things the OSR does is encouraging groups to "do a Rutger Hauer" and put a knife (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tears_in_rain_monologue) in the rules.

OSR isn't about "simple" so much as "simple enough". It's avoiding unneeded complexity. Forget the talk on genre emulation and dewy-eyed nostalgia; the real value in going back to the start is to discover the first principles on which the game was founded. From that point on you can choose or reject the various iterations and forks.

Of course the way it achieves this is by example and showing that 1e AD&D and DCC and LotFP and BECMI (and DW, and Torchbearer...) can be credible alternatives to the current D&D depending on what you want to do. But helping players make that cost-benefit analysis is the best thing it does, IMHO.

The question is, how will 5e fit into this? Will it marginalise this decision making process? How can it? The best thing 5e D&D can do to grab OSR market share is clearly position itself so players can make that decision. Otherwise it will rely on existing D&D fans "upgrading" and newcomers being ignorant of the alternatives. I don't see it reducing the OSR.

As for the drive towards simplicity -- the value of OSR games is the framework they provide beyond the rules (value that also exists in D&D, etc.). So when you point to GURPS UL or FUDGE or USR and say "if OSR really wanted simple they'd be playing XXX" it doesn't account for the additional overhead required to rebuild that framework (e.g. equipment lists in GURPS UL to make it feel "D&D-ish"). All that really says is the "ultra simple" demographic is not the OSR demographic.

Quote from: P&P;753366The attitude to 5e here is really puzzling to me.  I don't get why anyone cares what game other people play.  I don't mind what you play, I only mind what I play.

I guess if I was selling my game for money instead of giving it away*, I might feel differently.

* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

Making the new edition of D&D a basic-core system with add-ons was what I argued for in all my time as a Consultant; and I honestly don't know if I was the one to first suggest an actual basic set of rules or not, but I definitely argued for it from the moment the suggestion first emerged.  
However, to clear up, I was NOT the one who suggested they be on PDF, or who suggested they be free.  Only that they be the CORE rules system, rather than a forgettable optional mod never to be used again.

RPGPundit

Quote from: P&P;753366* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

:rotfl:

Quote from: RPGPundit;753782Making the new edition of D&D a basic-core system with add-ons was what I argued for in all my time as a Consultant; and I honestly don't know if I was the one to first suggest an actual basic set of rules or not, but I definitely argued for it from the moment the suggestion first emerged.  
However, to clear up, I was NOT the one who suggested they be on PDF, or who suggested they be free.  Only that they be the CORE rules system, rather than a forgettable optional mod never to be used again.

RPGPundit

And you deserve full credit for that.  Full credit.  In fact, why not start an onanistic thread about it?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;753797:rotfl:

Can't decide which is funnier, Stuart's original observation or the Pundit not getting it.

Quote from: Gunslinger;753450Isn't 5E just an OSR product with better support?   If it succeeds, I believe the OSR will have it's first legitimate blockbuster.

By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Quote from: P&P;753366* Thanks to the RPGPundit for inventing the idea of a free .pdf rulebook, by the way.  Well done that man!

Quote from: P&P;753800And you deserve full credit for that.  Full credit.  In fact, why not start an onanistic thread about it?

Thread victory to P&P.

Quote from: gonster;753265I see the OSR returning back to its hobbyist roots.

For the most part, the OSR has never left its hobbyist roots. Sure there are some people trying to make money from selling OSR rules and adventures, but for the most part even those people are doing it as a sideline, not as a way to pay their mortgage and other bills. A lot of OSR material is available for free in PDF or for sale at low prices.  Those producing free or low cost material are unlikely to stop just because WOTC publishes 5e Basic for free.

The OSR is all about playing TSR versions of D&D (or clones/modifications thereof). Some GMs/players may decide to play 5e instead, but a lot of us will keep on playing what we have been playing and keep on producing stuff for those games. Those in the OSR for the money only (and there are relatively few of those as there isn't a lot of money in producing OSR materials) may move on if they see more money else, of course.

I will probably not be moving to 5e. It's different enough that I'd have to spend a lot of time redoing parts of my homebrew worlds. That's more trouble than its worth since they work fine with OD&D, AD&D1e, B/X, BECMI/RC, and early 2e (and clones/variants thereof) -- and I already own (and know) those rules and they still work fine. 5e would have to better than what I already have (by my standards of better) by a good amount before I'd move to it. From what I've seen of the playtest and hype on the WOTC site, it will be a nice game, but not "better enough" than what I already have to bother converting to it.

The OSR is going to respond with much pulling of hair, gnashing of teeth, and burning of monks; so no change really.

Quote from: estar;753464That will depend on the adventures more than the rules. If they don't make it easy for third party to support it then the adventures and organized play will set the "tone" of 5e.

If they do make it easy for third party support then it will be a big tent with a variety of styles to choose from.

I see where you're coming from.  The OGL allowed for independent publishers and adventure writers to set their own tone that allowed for unique takes with an instant familiarity.  As a brand, it will be interesting to see how that that works.  Do you dilute the tone of the brand by allowing everyone to support it and allow the consumer to choose or strengthen the tone to a core demographic?  A difficult balancing act to be sure.  

For me, I'd probably choose the latter.  I really love what the "OSR" has done and prefer some of their takes on the game.  On the other hand, it's nice to know what to expect and fine tune it to my preferences given the tools at hand.

Quote from: dragoner;753869The OSR is going to respond with much pulling of hair, gnashing of teeth, and burning of monks; so no change really.

What did the Monks ever do to you?:eek:

Quote from: Marleycat;753874What did the Monks ever do to you?:eek:

It's all that monk-eying around, it makes me triggery.

Quote from: RPGPundit;753837By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Yet, it will be a derivative of D&D that I am hoping will be instantly familiar, it is offering me a free pdf to preview the game, and I would think, it will have a fair amount of community support.  So what will make it distinct from the existing OSR community outside of its immense brand recognition and publishing quality which has narrowed significantly?  Even now I wonder how much different 5E will be from something like BFRPG, ACKS, LotFP, OSRIC, DCC, S&W, LL, or even previous iterations of D&D.  

Will 5th edition be more than another take on D&D?

FYI Raggi just asked on Google+ whether he should make a 5e version of Death Frost or Love Doom.

Quote from: RPGPundit;753837By the very traditionalist definition, 5e, even the Basic version, certainly will not be an "OSR" product.

However, it is seriously informed by Old School, and that's a huge victory.

Well, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so they say.  I won't embed them here (because it will take up way too much screen real estate), but look at the following at just a quick glance, and see if it reminds you of an OSR game

example 1 (https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-nbncv06WmmY/U2kk0HNu0AI/AAAAAAAAAwU/f_U50t44ktM/w612-h792-no/page39.jpg)
example 2 (https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-h6mtqgqu3iE/Uvq0bJesbvI/AAAAAAAAAUQ/b8hM6QgShWo/w612-h792-no/Mrav+preview.jpg)
example 3 (https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-w3TAMCV0vYo/U2Kl0jnAn3I/AAAAAAAAAuA/e9khUu68YBE/w612-h792-no/page32.jpg)
Example 4 (https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-9hQlA-hICkQ/Uvqz7Usc4SI/AAAAAAAAATI/8D9ZxJNOOL0/w612-h792-no/mappreviews.jpg)

Because all of those?  Designed with no requirement of minis, battlemaps, or grids.  Designed for, and written with, the 5e ruleset.  So you all can be the judge if 5e replicates the OSR, or at least has influences from it.

Quote from: Gunslinger;753881Will 5th edition be more than another take on D&D?

That's my question too. I haven't heard a single thing about it that makes me say, "Hey, that's brilliant, I have to play this game." I've watched a few of the live playtests on youtube, and it seemed to me like they were playing more-or-less the same ol' D&D.* Which is great. The same ol' D&D is what I love to play, but I don't see anything that makes me think that this is the edition of it that I should be playing.

*Though it did seem a little overpowered on the players' side.

Quote from: jeff37923;753702There has been no indication that 5E will be OGL, but plenty that it will be backwards compatable with an earlier version of D&D (and thus retroclones).

Has there been any indicator that Next will be backwards compatible? The last playtest was not. The classes, exp progression, and monsters are all different. And WOTC has not mentioned backwards compatibility since early in the playtest?

Sure you can play a 5e module with AD&D. But you have to sit down and convert it. Same goes the other way around.

Quote from: Omega;753903Has there been any indicator that Next will be backwards compatible? The last playtest was not. The classes, exp progression, and monsters are all different. And WOTC has not mentioned backwards compatibility since early in the playtest?

Sure you can play a 5e module with AD&D. But you have to sit down and convert it. Same goes the other way around.

Really???  Well, that IS curious.

Coupled with the 'OGL might only be for fans' possibility, 5e might just maybe be an attempt to put the OGL genie back in the bottle.

If they don't license their new, possibly-incompatible content to publishers, AND aggressively "protect their IP", that would make for a decidedly different landscape.

It seems suicidal to me, but then again so would be enabling another Paizo to outsell you at your own product.

Exciting times!  :)

Quote from: P&P;753800And you deserve full credit for that.  Full credit.  In fact, why not start an onanistic thread about it?

Its my duty, so that all the ultra-jealous pundit-haters pissing themselves in impotent rage at my ongoing success can snark about me.

Every hater's remark, be it outraged, angry, defiant, or of course sarcastic, they're all just delicious treats for me.  And these last few days? Its been Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Mardi Gras all in one.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;753927Its my duty, so that all the ultra-jealous pundit-haters pissing themselves in impotent rage at my ongoing success can snark about me.

Every hater's remark, be it outraged, angry, defiant, or of course sarcastic, they're all just delicious treats for me.  And these last few days? Its been Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Mardi Gras all in one.

RPGPundit

Me also Pundit. You know the old adage of  "don't hate me because I'm beautiful".

Quote from: aspiringlich;753896That's my question too. I haven't heard a single thing about it that makes me say, "Hey, that's brilliant, I have to play this game." I've watched a few of the live playtests on youtube, and it seemed to me like they were playing more-or-less the same ol' D&D.* Which is great. The same ol' D&D is what I love to play, but I don't see anything that makes me think that this is the edition of it that I should be playing.

*Though it did seem a little overpowered on the players' side.

That's pretty much where I am too.

Haters gonna hate.

(http://gifstumblr.com/images/haters-gonna-hate_917.gif)

Quote from: mcbobbo;753909Really???  Well, that IS curious.

Coupled with the 'OGL might only be for fans' possibility, 5e might just maybe be an attempt to put the OGL genie back in the bottle.

If they don't license their new, possibly-incompatible content to publishers, AND aggressively "protect their IP", that would make for a decidedly different landscape.

It seems suicidal to me, but then again so would be enabling another Paizo to outsell you at your own product.

Exciting times!  :)

I think the big one though is that Next modules will have to be geared with an eye on the fact that the PCs can spend their HD during quick rests to get back some HP. Assuming they get such breathers.

Most spells I think you could port over one way or the other without having to alter them actually. Though Next's Magic Missile and Fireball work very differently now. Essentially new spells in a way. That could actually be played up on.

Quote from: mcbobbo;753909Coupled with the 'OGL might only be for fans' possibility, 5e might just maybe be an attempt to put the OGL genie back in the bottle.

As far as I can tell, there's nothing in what I've seen of 5e that could not be cloned via material that is already open game content under the OGL. Unless you radically change D&D into something very different from TSR D&D and WOTC 3.x D&D you are going to likely end up with something relatively easy to clone via material already released as open game content under the OGL. By radically different, I mean something like 4e.

The genie can't really be put back in the bottle (which was one of the design goals of the OGL) without making D&D into something many D&D fans would not consider D&D. Even doing that doesn't put the genie back in the bottle as those who don't like your very different OGL-proof D&D just clone the original. 4e demonstrated the above very nicely. It changed D&D so much that it could not easily/safely be cloned with OGL material, but all the fans who did not want it just played a OGL clone of "traditional" D&D: Pathfinder, Swords & Wizardry, etc.

Quote from: gonster;753265But it looks like the people who actually stay with the OSR now are doing so either:

1) for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say).

2) for nostalgia only.

What do you guys think...

I don't really care for the "more unusual offerings," and I have no nostalgia for older DnD versions.

I play OSR, LotFP specifically, because I like the system better than anything else I've seen in a few years . To me, as I wasn't exposed at all to Basic DnD, it's a new game.

I think there are a lot of people out there like me; not jaded by edition wars and system bias. Therefore, I don't see 5th edition having a long term effect on the OSR. People have been writing their own adventures and campaigns, and making their own rule edits to the official versions of DnD since it started.

5th edition is just marketing hype made to look like a favor to the RPG community. People will play it, some of them will like it, and then 6th edition will come out and we'll be having this same boring discussion all over again. At some point, 5th edition will be considered Old School.

I wonder if OSR is even on their radar as such, besides just some people have made some successful games.

Quote from: gonster;753265But it looks like the people who actually stay with the OSR now are doing so either:

1) for the more unusual offerings of the OSR (Arrows of Indra or Woodland Warriors say).

2) for nostalgia only.

What do you guys think...

I think you forgot

3) for the enjoyment we get from the games we're currently playing, seeing no need to abandon them for a new one.

Quote from: dragoner;753942I wonder if OSR is even on their radar as such, besides just some people have made some successful games.

They aren't trust me. I barely know about 3-4 OSR games and I actually frequent RPG sites when life doesn't intrude. My demographic? Seriously? My personal circle has no clue. They mostly have no clue any game exists beyond what I introduce or what we currently play and care even less unless it's from a company they or our kids know about. (Tier 1 games it's only because of myself they hear about Tier 2).

OSR is Tier 3 at best but more likely Tier 4/5.

Quote from: aspiringlich;753947I think you forgot

3) for the enjoyment we get from the games we're currently playing, seeing no need to abandon them for a new one.

Yep.
Also, those games are pretty much new to me... I never played OD&D in the Wayback... just a brief stint of AD&D 1e. Had a juvenile hate on for TSR/AD&D for years... so no nostalgia for me, just a something new I've found that's interesting... and fun. Much more open to loose and wacky stuff than previous years of trying to be much more plausible/realistic/serious... something. Playing OSR games has loosened up all my other RPG gaming as well.

Quote from: Simlasa;753949Yep.
Also, those games are pretty much new to me... I never played OD&D in the Wayback... just a brief stint of AD&D 1e. Had a juvenile hate on for TSR/AD&D for years... so no nostalgia for me, just a something new I've found that's interesting... and fun. Much more open to loose and wacky stuff than previous years of trying to be much more plausible/realistic/serious... something. Playing OSR games has loosened up all my other RPG gaming as well.

I play and run Mage for that itch. Mage 1/2e is the very definition of GONZO. But good for you Simlasa for finding something you enjoy.

Quote from: Simlasa;753485I can't see 5e Basic replacing anything for me either. It's certainly not going to play like DCC and it's modules aren't going to be like the LotFP stuff.
I like the relatively 'punk' attitude of the OSR contingent.
To me D&D Basic will be just another OSR product, which I'll take a look at and mine for ideas. The Brand Name and the corporate bullshit attached have no draw for me... but a cheap/free Basic set is low-commitment enough for me to take a look.

Exactly. I'll definitely buy 5E unless the reviews will be terrible (which is unlikely - I played through the playtest and it was OK). But it probably won't really fill the ACKS (or Mongoose Traveller or SWN) niche I want to play in.

Quote from: aspiringlich;753947I think you forgot

3) for the enjoyment we get from the games we're currently playing, seeing no need to abandon them for a new one.

Those exist, but as you say they have no interest in migrating to a new system so it is pointless to try to sell 5e to them.

Quote from: Akrasia;753266Um, maybe some people simply will continue to prefer 0e D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, 1e AD&D, etc., over D&D 5e?

And some people might find themselves liking both OOP A/D&D and 5e.

I thought it was only possible to like one game system, and all others are satan spawn.

Like...both...inconceivable!!!