What's the least OSR game you can imagine?

RPGPundit · October 07, 2014, 08:18:00 PM

Just that. What comes to your head as the RPG that is LEAST like what you think of when you think "OSR"?

Doom · October 07, 2014, 08:29:21 PM

Man, it's a close call between DnD4e and Pathfinder.

I'm going to go with 4e, because players basically start at 3rd or 4th level in Pathfinder terms, or around 6th level in OSR terms. By this I mean the players never have a "we don't have much in the way of resources" phase, or a "wow, one hit from a monster can kill me, I'd better be careful" phase, and they basically start out with all the non-magical equipment they could possibly want. PF at least sort-of has such phases, though the rules still are so heavy that it's pretty far from OSR (even though 4e has somewhat simpler rules overall, with often poor execution).

cranebump · October 07, 2014, 08:45:33 PM

FATE

Brad · October 07, 2014, 08:46:33 PM

Of the games I own and have played, Star Wars: Edge of the Empire. Mostly because the game was so tied up in dice rolls to do anything that I thought I was playing a board game, not an rpg.

To piggy-back, does a game like Amber actually define OSR because it's entirely based on "rulings, not rules"?

Silverlion · October 07, 2014, 08:51:57 PM

Hearts & Souls! High Valor!

Well, I love OSR, but I haven't written one..yet anyway.

Emperor Norton · October 07, 2014, 08:58:41 PM

Quote from: Brad;790777Of the games I own and have played, Star Wars: Edge of the Empire. Mostly because the game was so tied up in dice rolls to do anything that I thought I was playing a board game, not an rpg.

Eh, that just sounds like who was running it. the FFG Star Wars game runs best when you only roll dice if it matters, otherwise things like despair can get really slapstick.

Also, I'm not sure how it could feel board gamey when everything about how advantage/threat is used outside of combat is just freeform winging it.

(I agree though that it is really far from OSR)

cranebump · October 07, 2014, 09:04:34 PM

Oooh...I didn't think of "rulings, not rules." I was just thinking "essence" with FATE. 4E didn't feel very old school to me. Full blown 3.5 with all the skills and feats and bullshit seemed antithetical to that idea. How about FATAL? (oh, wait, you mean real role-playing games, right?).

Nah, it's still FATE. You have to roll to determine how well something succeeds. (though I'd honestly like to play it with a good group of creative narrativists).

Akrasia · October 07, 2014, 09:10:01 PM

Any White Wolf game?

David Johansen · October 08, 2014, 12:33:11 AM

Quote from: Brad;790777Of the games I own and have played, Star Wars: Edge of the Empire. Mostly because the game was so tied up in dice rolls to do anything that I thought I was playing a board game, not an rpg.

To piggy-back, does a game like Amber actually define OSR because it's entirely based on "rulings, not rules"?

This right here.

S'mon · October 08, 2014, 01:57:26 AM

Eh, probably the Greg Stafford Heroquest RPG. It doesn't have any combat rules!

Dirk Remmecke · October 08, 2014, 02:03:17 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;790774Just that. What comes to your head as the RPG that is LEAST like what you think of when you think "OSR"?

Least but still OSR, or least as in "diametrically opposite"?

Spinachcat · October 08, 2014, 02:42:19 AM

5e?

It wants to pretend its OSR, but its clearly built in the 3e/4e mindset with some 2e-ish trappings.

Of course, what is being meant by OSR? So much of OSR is just AD&D Revivalism. Both Tunnels & Trolls and Top Secret are Old School games, but certainly are worlds apart in a many key ways.

JeremyR · October 08, 2014, 06:22:32 AM

I would go with 5e.

3e was incredibly complex, but in many ways was remarkably close to previous version in terms of spells, monster stats (up to about 9th-10th level), and yes, even skills. The skill list was basically lifted from BECMI/2e.

Saladman · October 08, 2014, 09:21:38 AM

Of the games I know, its got to be 4E. And it occurs to me its probably not a coincidence the 4E era helped kickstart the osr, but that wasn't why I thought of it.

5E... I'm probably not the average consumer, so I may have a biased view. I sat out the playtest, didn't preorder the books, and just read the Basic pdf to start. I ended up getting a PHB, but haven't read it through yet. All that said, I don't understand how it comes to mind as the least osr game. So far, it supports an old school play style just fine, in a way 4E didn't. (Whether a majority of customers will use it that way is a separate question.)

Akrasia · October 08, 2014, 09:34:46 AM

Quote from: JeremyR;790831I would go with 5e.

3e was incredibly complex, but in many ways was remarkably close to previous version in terms of spells, monster stats (up to about 9th-10th level), and yes, even skills. The skill list was basically lifted from BECMI/2e.

Bwuh? :huhsign:

I certainly can understand not liking 5e. But by no reasonable measure is 3e 'closer' to earlier editions overall. Feats alone make all the difference.