Quote from: Cathode Ray on January 06, 2023, 11:55:13 AM
Forgive my ignorance.
I play exactly two RPGs, my own being one of them.  I follow along best I can, but I sometimes get lost in the jargon.  I see "Old School Rules" a lot.  Is old school rules an actual concrete game system, with a core rule book that you can purchase?  ...Or, is this a concept, a idea of games like D&D before WOTC came in and turned it into vanilla?  I appreciate your patience with me.

Forgive me if this is obvious but: Wizards of the Coast bought TSR and created a 3rd edition of D&D that played a bit different than the TSR games in a number of ways. They released a lot of their game content to a semi-public domain status under a legal document called the OGL. The content is all available in a Systems Reference Document (https://www.d20srd.org) to encourage folks to create more D&D content and expand the market. The SRD is content game creators can borrow and change to create their own products as long as they include the OGL page. Folks have used that information to create games that play similar to the old games mentioned previously.

Also a lot of this came after folks read the Quick Primer to Old-School Gaming by Matt Finch (https://friendorfoe.com/d/Old%20School%20Primer.pdf). Download that because the primer has become very hard to find online lately. At least I ran into a lot of 404s while searching.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on January 06, 2023, 11:55:13 AM
Forgive my ignorance.
I play exactly two RPGs, my own being one of them.  I follow along best I can, but I sometimes get lost in the jargon.  I see "Old School Rules" a lot.  Is old school rules an actual concrete game system, with a core rule book that you can purchase?  ...Or, is this a concept, a idea of games like D&D before WOTC came in and turned it into vanilla?  I appreciate your patience with me.

Originally, it was a wonderful concept.

Now it is just an advertising gimmick.

I think it's both

Part of it is rules that are based on the old D&D/AD&D engine, including things like Gamma World, original Tekumel, Metamorphosis Alpha,  and even the Buck Rogers RPG

OTOH, it's also a way of play. When 3rd edition came out, we played it like 1e. It worked. Only after a time did the major differences start to show (and after the rules lawyers showed up, but high level play and making monsters were tricky regardless of those)

But even so, I think a lot of the things in 3e that were so different were taken from Rolemaster, since Monte Cook was a designer for ICE. The painful skill system, the huge number of hit points, critical hits, etc

Quote from: GhostNinja on January 07, 2023, 12:21:11 PM

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 07, 2023, 01:20:24 AM
The most common rules used to make an OSR styled game is probably the Basic D&D games from the early 1980's.  I think the Moldvay one is the top dog there, but I don't know the differences between the 3 or so variants of Basic D&D boxed sets.  Nor is it that important anyway.

Is there an document with these rules for creating OSR games? Also, would this be effected by the crap Wizard is trying to pull?

A document? Not that I know of.
But all you really need is the six attribute lineup (3-18 scores) with some derived modifiers that apply to related rolls, a "saving throw" mechanic of some type, class-based progression, and a d20 v Target Number resolution. Everything else (feats, an exhaustive skill list, etc) is just additional options.

QuoteI find Basic Fantasy boring and lacking options.  I played in a game using Basic Fantasy and I was just bored.

That sounds like a GM problem more than a system problem. Any game can be boring if the person running it doesn't cater to it's strengths. Gaming is a proactive medium; it is what you make of it. It's not like a movie where you are a passive audience.

I found some of the mechanics of Basic Fantasy to be antiquated, but then I think that was a deliberate design decision rather than a flaw. Still, I have enough gaming experience under my belt that a few minor tweaks were no problem.

At the beginning there was a lot more 'give', with people arguing that any old school game had potential for the OSR. That quickly got narrowed down to D&D (like everything in this hobby). It took a while, but by now I think OSR has pretty much coalesced around clones and reinterpretations of B/X. OSRIC may have started it but everyone else has taken AD&D elements and converted them to B/X. Or starting from B/X and creating new mechanics. Usually combined with one particular masochistic style of old-school play cherry picked from a hobby where, at the time, every table did things its own way.

Quote from: Effete on January 08, 2023, 05:05:11 AM
A document? Not that I know of.
But all you really need is the six attribute lineup (3-18 scores) with some derived modifiers that apply to related rolls, a "saving throw" mechanic of some type, class-based progression, and a d20 v Target Number resolution. Everything else (feats, an exhaustive skill list, etc) is just additional options.

OSIRC has a license and a document to use and I really like the rules and will probably go with that.

Quote from: Effete on January 08, 2023, 05:05:11 AMThat sounds like a GM problem more than a system problem. Any game can be boring if the person running it doesn't cater to it's strengths. Gaming is a proactive medium; it is what you make of it. It's not like a movie where you are a passive audience.

I found some of the mechanics of Basic Fantasy to be antiquated, but then I think that was a deliberate design decision rather than a flaw. Still, I have enough gaming experience under my belt that a few minor tweaks were no problem.

It wasn't the GM.  The person running it had years of GM experience, even more than me.  It was the system, it just wasn't a fit.

If it works for you than great.  For me, I would never play it again.

Dude, if you ask 50 people in the OSR what the OSR actually is, you'll get 60 different answers. 

I have a hot sports opinion - I think the OSR is just another Purity Spiral.

Depends on which OSR you want to focus on...

The AD&D Revival OSR = they want to play TSR era stuff and maybe new stuff that is TSR era rules compatible. This is probably the largest player base for the OSR and the realm of OSR publishers who really just want to sell AD&D stuff.

The D&D-ish Homebrew OSR = they want new stuff that is 75% akin to one of the TSR era rulesets, usually B/X D&D. AKA, stuff like Labyrinth Lord or Stars without Number. This is probably the largest focus for OSR publishers.

The New Stuff OSR = they want new stuff that's focused on the spirit and sensibilities of the early RPGs, but may have 50% or less mechanics from those games. AKA, Mothership or Cha'alt.

The Non-TSR OSR = they want to play and revive RPGs that aren't D&D, aka all the D100 games, the Not-Traveller clones, etc.

i would define it by the gameplay loop and subsystems for that; the gold-xp-monster-treasure cycle, the established parameters for dungeon/wilderness exploration, the game on the dm side of the screen found in random generation of encounters and treasures. narrative or lack of not withstanding, if it has this sort of automated sandbox loop i counts it.

I would say that when it comes to rules, the OSR emulates game systems pre-3E D&D. Most of the OSR material does concentrate on pre-2e D&D though.

Idea or mindset? A similar thread was posted at Dragonsfoot.org. here's my response:

-rulings vs. rules: means in the OS way, if you didn't have a rule for it, you made a ruling at that time and stuck with it. Now? There seems to be a rule for EVERYTHING. Whichever one is better is a personal opinion.

- tables vs. lack thereof: LOTS of tables in OS games, which shows the wargaming connection. I think that's kinda cool. Modern tends to do away with tables mostly, at least when it comes to anything combat related. It's mostly apposing dice rolls or some target number thingy. Again, personal preference. I prefer the former and not the latter

-basic character classes and races vs. everything but the kitchen sink: PCs in the OS were mostly pretty basic as far as skills and abilities. The Core Four (Fighter, Cleric, MU, Thief) didn't have much to them. Even the sub-classes just had a few extra special abilities. It was up to you as the player to make them unique in the game. Give them personality, if you wanted to. Even the races to pick from didn't have too many special skills. Humans didn't have any! Modern has skills, abilities, and races that are greatly influenced by online RPGs. LOTs a skills and abilities, even for the basic classes. I prefer the former. If I want to play a video game, I'll play a video game thankyouverymuch.

which leads to...

-challenging the player vs. challenging the character: with the previously stated about PC classes and races, because of the minimum amount of those skills and abilities, much of the challenges met in OS were to challenge the player of that character: to be creative to get out of a situation, to figure out a riddle or puzzle, etc. Now in Modern, most of it is reduced down to a roll of the dice. Need to negotiate with a group of bandits? Somebody probably has a skill for that. need to figure out a riddle based in the lore of a long lost race? I'm sure a PC has a skill to help out. I think a balance can be made, but I'd rather not leave it down to a die roll every single time. Nor should you keep trying to break the brains of every player at the table. That can get exhausting. I prefer more challenges to me as a player than dice rolls for everything you throw at me. It's the satisfaction of ME overcoming the challenge, not some numbers on a piece of paper and dice rolling.

zeros vs. already heroes: This goes with my 4th point above. PCs in OS started off as "zeroes": nobodies. You had to earn you way up the ladder to be someone. Ability scores were fixed for the most part. In Modern, most PCs has a boat load of special skills and talents. You can even improve ability scores and start way above normal people. You already start as a hero. Now IMO that takes away entirely from the Hero's Journey. If you already have a bunch of cool skills, talents, etc. and already somewhat made a name for yourself, then what is the point? IMO, the intrinsic value of the PC earning the fame, fortune, and power along the way is much more interesting than a PC that already has some of that from the get go.

That's just my opinion. YMMV.

In France and Germany I have primarily heard people refer to OSR as a style of play, irrespective of the rules system used.