As a person who significantly contributed to popularizing the term "Old School Renaissance" - I think I came up with it for Fight On! riffing on a post from Jeff's Gameblog, but who knows for sure now - I can tell you what I thought it meant at the time, which was that there was a renaissance of people returning to the games and playstyles that were popular in the seventies and early eighties. A renaissance is not a centrally planned event, although it is one which can be encouraged and supported.  It's not a term that to my mind it makes much sense arguing about who's in and who's out. If you like seventies and early eighties style rpgs and still play them today then in some sense you've 'participated' in the OSR in the sense I wanted to use the term.

I suppose if there are groups that have been playing since the seventies and early eighties who have had no contact with the RPG world outside their group they would not be part of a renaissance, although we love to hear from them when they discover us, just as I'm sure the Renaissance humanists were delighted to occasionally make contact with the few surviving direct heirs to the classical tradition who escaped the fall of Constantinople.

Quote from: Calithena on March 30, 2022, 12:35:44 AM
As a person who may have invented the term "Old School Renaissance" - I think I came up with it for Fight On! riffing on a post from Jeff's Gameblog, but who knows for sure now - I can tell you what I thought it meant at the time, which was that there was a renaissance of people returning to the games and playstyles that were popular in the seventies and early eighties. A renaissance is not a centrally planned event, although it is one which can be encouraged and supported.  It's not a term that to my mind it makes much sense arguing about who's in and who's out. If you like seventies and early eighties style rpgs and still play them today then in some sense you've 'participated' in the OSR in the sense I wanted to use the term.

It first use was in a anonymous post on Dragonsfoot. However when I trace it usage there was a considerable uptick in it's usage as a result of your work with Fight On! And for the brief time the OSR storefront on Luke also helped to cement the term in folks minds. It really started to snowball in 2008.

Note Dan Proctor's (Dan of Earth) comment on the post below.

https://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2009/08/where-hell-old-school-renaissance-come.html

I agree with what Dan Proctor wrote there 100%. I wouldn't be surprised if someone had said those words in a coffee shop sometime in the late 1990's under the weight of all those late 2e splatbooks, for that matter - it's not a deeply complicated set of words to put together.

Quote from: Calithena on March 30, 2022, 12:35:44 AM
... Fight On! ...

I think Fight On! embodies the spirit of the OSR more than anything else I can think of.

Quote from: Pat on March 30, 2022, 07:21:13 AM

Quote from: Calithena on March 30, 2022, 12:35:44 AM
... Fight On! ...

I think Fight On! embodies the spirit of the OSR more than anything else I can think of.

I really wish Fight On! was continued to be published and pushed all back issues on PDF as it was fantastic to read.

I've been wondering about the definition of old school.

People usually refer to Finch's Primer but that would maybe exclude AD&D ("rulings not rules", "hero not super hero", etc.)

I really like the Primer but some of the examples seem to even contradict thief skills (find traps, secret doors, etc.)

Of course, Finch uses 0e as an example, which is fair enough.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 30, 2022, 12:36:01 PM
I've been wondering about the definition of old school.

In the context of the OSR old school means whatever you want to mean. The fact that Old School is part of Old School Renaissance/Revival/etc. is mainly because OSR is a fun reflection of TSR. But people started complaining and talking shit about it from day one.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 30, 2022, 12:36:01 PM
People usually refer to Finch's Primer but that would maybe exclude AD&D ("rulings not rules", "hero not super hero", etc.)

Matt Finch's Primer is not meant to be used as a way of defining stuff like the OSR. Nor it is a reflection of how things were handled back in the day. It is rather a practical how-to on how to use the bare-bone mechanics of classic D&D for a tabletop roleplaying campaign. Like much of the OSR it is a mashup of several things floating around at the time. Some are rooted in how things were originally handled, and more than a few on thing that were learned along the way.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 30, 2022, 12:36:01 PM
I really like the Primer but some of the examples seem to even contradict thief skills (find traps, secret doors, etc.)

The original thief class was a hack adopted and reworked by Gygax. Like with much of OD&D he didn't bother explaining many of his assumptions. Since most people consider the rules of a game to be sacrosanct or you are cheating, most hobbyists of the time took the write-up literally. That only thieves can use those skills and yes they suck at most of them at low levels.
 
Once I learned of the origins of thief class, I jettisoned it in favor of my Burglar class and made my skill mechanic (abilities) reflect how OD&D worked prior to the thief. Outside of spellcasting and combat, players were free to attempt anything as their characters. My ability system allows players to be better at things outside of combat and spellcasting.  And any character can use any ability (Mages can stealth, cleric can pick lock, etc.) and still have a decent chance of success (around 30%, 1d20 + attribute bonus >= 15).

Other OSR author has their own solution to the issue. Some embrace it 'as is'. There is no real right answer beyond explaining things well and why it works the way the author thinks it ought to work. Solutions that still keep the overall system compatible tend to be used widely in the OSR.  But there are dozens floating around each with their own merits, including mine.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 30, 2022, 12:36:01 PM
I've been wondering about the definition of old school.

People usually refer to Finch's Primer but that would maybe exclude AD&D ("rulings not rules", "hero not super hero", etc.)

I really like the Primer but some of the examples seem to even contradict thief skills (find traps, secret doors, etc.)

Of course, Finch uses 0e as an example, which is fair enough.

The Primer is from the era of the OSR where they were trying to rediscover and promote the original playstyle of the game. Not the way it was played by the kids in the 1980s, not the way it was played by all the wargamers in the 1970s, bu how it was played in the Greyhawk and to a lesser degree the Blackmoor campaigns. it's that specific, and that's also why it's heavily focused on 0e. There are a lot of assumptions about how the game should be played that were never explained in the text of any of the versions of old school D&D, and which went against how later generations tried to play. To give one example, a lot of the kids in the 1980s grew up on heroic fiction, and expected to play heroes with continuity and plot immunity. But the game is too random and deadly to really support that kind of play, leading to all kinds of houserules, frustration, and stalking away to so-called "better" games that really just fit the players' pre-existing expectations better. Games played in the way promoted by the Primer work a lot better with the rules as written, and can be really fun, but require unlearning a lot of basic assumptions.

The thief as a class is basically broken. If you look at a lot of the advice on how to handle thieves, almost all of it involves ignoring the rules and basically treating thief skills as a narrative back and forth between the player and DM. Which is fine, and works, (and is a bit storygame), but there's an inherent contradiction when they say the class is fine and then avoid the class entirely in practice.

Quote from: Pat on March 30, 2022, 04:44:54 PM
The thief as a class is basically broken. If you look at a lot of the advice on how to handle thieves, almost all of it involves ignoring the rules and basically treating thief skills as a narrative back and forth between the player and DM. Which is fine, and works, (and is a bit storygame), but there's an inherent contradiction when they say the class is fine and then avoid the class entirely in practice.

I'm not famililar with 0e. Do you have any details on why the Thief class was considered broken?

Quote from: THE_Leopold on March 30, 2022, 11:11:16 AM

Quote from: Pat on March 30, 2022, 07:21:13 AM

Quote from: Calithena on March 30, 2022, 12:35:44 AM
... Fight On! ...

I think Fight On! embodies the spirit of the OSR more than anything else I can think of.

I really wish Fight On! was continued to be published and pushed all back issues on PDF as it was fantastic to read.

Your wish is granted! We are working on issue 15 now, and all back issues are currently available in print and PDF!

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 30, 2022, 05:15:38 PM

Quote from: Pat on March 30, 2022, 04:44:54 PM
The thief as a class is basically broken. If you look at a lot of the advice on how to handle thieves, almost all of it involves ignoring the rules and basically treating thief skills as a narrative back and forth between the player and DM. Which is fine, and works, (and is a bit storygame), but there's an inherent contradiction when they say the class is fine and then avoid the class entirely in practice.

I'm not famililar with 0e. Do you have any details on why the Thief class was considered broken?

All the other class abilities tend to be things the character can do in relative safety alone, or that allow them to contribute in some way to a group activity, often combat. The thief skills on the other hand tend to be solitary but high risk -- potentially leading to setting off a trap, getting caught picking a pocket, getting caught alone while scouting (never separate the party), falling from a height, etc. That effectively turns the thief into a class that has to make a series of save or dies that nobody else has to do.

The solution is to never roll.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 30, 2022, 05:15:38 PM
I'm not famililar with 0e. Do you have any details on why the Thief class was considered broken?

From Greyhawk Supplement I

Thieves
Apprentice     0 Sharper          20,000
Footpad    1,200 Pilferer         40,000
Robber     2,400 Master Pilferer  60,000
Burglar    4,800 Thief            90,000
Cutpurse   9,600 Master Thief    125,000
(+ 125,000 additional points for each level above Master Thief)


Thief Type of Hit Dice: 4-sided Maximum Number: 10 Additional Points per Level Thereafter: +½

Thieves
Apprentice                  1     Man           NIL
Footpad                     2     Man + 1       NIL
Robber                      3     2 Men         NIL
Burglar                     4     2 Men + 1     NIL
Cutpurse                    5     3 Men         NIL
Sharper                     6     3 Men + 1     NIL
Pilferer                    7     Hero – 1      NIL
Master Pilferer             8     Hero          NIL
Thief                       9     Hero + 1      NIL
Master Thief               10     Superhero – 1 NIL
Master Thief, 11th Level   10     Superhero – 1 NIL
Master Thief, 12th Level   10 + 1 Superhero – 1 NIL
Master Thief, 13th Level   10 + 1 Superhero     NIL
Master Thief, 14th Level   10 + 2 Superhero     NIL

Thief
                          Pickpocket* or
                          Open Locks*/  Move Silently*/
                          Remove Traps* Hide in Shadows* Hear Noise
Apprentice                15%/10%       20%/10%          1–2
Footpad                   20%/15%       25%/15%          1–2
Robber**                  25%/20%       30%/20%          1–3
Burglar                   35%/30%       35%/25%          1–3
Cutpurse                  40%/35%       45%/35%          1–3
Sharper                   45%/40%       55%/45%          1–3
Pilferer                  55%/50%       60%/50%          1–4
Master Pilferer           65%/60%       65%/55%          1–4
Thief***                  75%/70%       75%/65%          1–4
Master Thief              85%/80%       85%/75%          1–4
Master Thief, 11th Level  95%/90%       95%/85%          1–5
Master Thief, 12th Level 100%/95%      100%/90%          1–5
Master Thief, 13th Level 100%/100%     100%/95%          1–6
Master Thief, 14th Level 100%/100%     100%/100%         1–6


Bonuses to Dwarves, Elves, and Halflings as Thieves:

       Open  Remove Pick-  Move     Hide in Hear
       Locks  Traps Pocket Silently Shadows Noise
Dwarf     5%    15%     -         5%     5%     -
Elf       -      -      5%       10%    15%     -
Halfling 10%     5%     5%       10%    10%    +1

*A score above the indicated percentage means failure, and no further attempts may be made. Also, there is a chance that the one who is being pickpocketed may detect the thief. To determine this, for each level above 5th, the victim has a + 5% chance of detecting the "lift," so a 10th level, for example, would reduce the possibility of a successful attempt by 25%, i.e. if a base 100% it reduces to 75%.
** Level at which languages can be read by the thief.
***Level at which magical spells can be read from scrolls by the thief.

There is no further explanation of the thief in Greyhawk. The names of the various abilities were considered enough by Gygax for people to figure out what thieves can do.  There was also no explanation of how to integrate these new abilities with how things were handled with the 3 LBBS. And this is on top of the fact that the 3 LBBs didn't explain this stuff well either.

Also, the odds of success were extremely low compared to what the other classes (Cleric, Fighter, Magic-User) can do.  Along with the punative notes saying you get one roll per attempt and that is it.

Quote from: estar on March 30, 2022, 12:55:36 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 30, 2022, 12:36:01 PM
I've been wondering about the definition of old school.

In the context of the OSR old school means whatever you want to mean. The fact that Old School is part of Old School Renaissance/Revival/etc. is mainly because OSR is a fun reflection of TSR. But people started complaining and talking shit about it from day one.

Fair enough, and I agree with most of your points.

However, "old school means whatever you want to mean" is not a great definition... We old school enthusiasts should e able to come up with a definition most of us would agree, and maybe aswer simples questions such as "does this include AD&D? traveller?" etc.

but maybe OS and OSR are separate things indeed.

EDIT: I do agree about the thief. OTOH the lower XP requirements make him a decent fighter. Probably a discussion for other thread...

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 31, 2022, 10:40:51 AM
Fair enough, and I agree with most of your points.

However, "old school means whatever you want to mean" is not a great definition... We old school enthusiasts should e able to come up with a definition most of us would agree, with and maybe answer simples questions such as "does this include AD&D? traveller?" etc.

My opinion it has been long settled. There is a Old School Renaissance focused on the classic editions of dungeons and dragons, that is part of a larger old school renaissance focusing on all older RPGs. Both are fueled by the availability of inexpensive PDFs of older products and in some cases (D&D, Traveller, Runequest) the availability of open content to allow a full range of activities (publishing, playing, promoting) to occur to support these older products 'as is'.

It has gone long enough that there are now distinct communities of hobbyist that support these older games.

Runequest has three groups (Chaosium hobbyists, Mythras Hobbyist, and a smaller group leveraging the Legends RPG like Openquest).
Traveller has Cepheus
Classic D&D has the OSR and its wealth of retro-clones.

It is rare for anybody involved to be a one-note wonder. Often there is something else involved that they will also support as well whether it sharing, promoting, playing, or publishing.

Definition are of little use. You can't make reliable generalizations about the entire group of hobbyists involved in any of these groups beyond a focus on a family of related RPGs. However, there are subgroups that you can make generalizations about. Although in recent years this has degraded as well as individual hobbyists have matured and diversified what they share or talk about. Along with new ones entering the scene.

So I am pretty skeptical of anybody trying to generalize what going on with any segment of the hobby. This includes other communities like Savage Worlds, Fate and other newer RPGs.  You are best off pointing out specific individuals doing specific things.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 31, 2022, 10:40:51 AM
but maybe OS and OSR are separate things indeed.

They are. The OSR can be thought of classic D&D along with anything else that interests the participants but which "other thing" varies on the idividual. For example, I talk a lot about GURPS and Harn, Dan Proctor did some work with Call of Cthulu, and so on.

EDIT: I do agree about the thief. OTOH the lower XP requirements make him a decent fighter. Probably a discussion for other thread...
[/quote]