Over on Reddit, Kaliburnus asks What the point of the OSR is? He concludes his post with some questions.
So, honest question, what is the point of OSR? Why do they reject modern systems? (I’m talking specifically about the total OSR people and not the ones who play both sides of the coin). What is so special about this movement and their games that is attracting so many people? Any specific system you could recommend for me to try?
My answers
What is the point of the OSR?
To play, promote, or publish older editions of Dungeons & Dragons, along with anything else that appeals to those who enjoy those systems. This often includes older editions of other systems, like Traveller, or newer RPGs that build on similar themes to classic D&D.
What distinguishes the OSR is the "hack" developed by Stuart Marshall, Matt Finch, and Chris Gonnerman. They discovered that if you take the d20 SRD and omit the newer mechanics (like feats), the result is only a hop and a skip away from any classic edition of D&D. This insight removed most of the IP barriers that had previously prevented fans of older editions from fully supporting the editions they loved.
Even better, this "hack" was based on open content under an open license, meaning anyone with time and interest could freely build on it, including developing their own take on the various classic editions.
This coincided with advances in digital technology that lowered the barriers to creating, publishing, and sharing products. Better DTP software, PDFs, online storefronts, and print-on-demand combined to let individuals publish ambitious projects within the time and budget of a hobby.
So the "point" is simple: after 2006, people began doing what they had always wanted to do in the first place.
Because the OSR was an early pioneer in leveraging digital tools, and because its foundation rested on open content and open licenses, it naturally diversified into what we see today. Each new creator arrived with their own vision. Many now only loosely adapt D&D mechanics while keeping its themes, or use D&D-style systems for entirely different genres and settings.
Why do they reject modern systems?
Games are not technology. While their presentation can improve over time, a game plays as well today as it did decades ago.
The OSR is not about rejecting modern systems. It is about enjoying different RPGs than those produced by the market leaders. Moreover, because of how the OSR began (see above), its community is fueled by the creative and logistical freedom to make and share anything they want, in whatever form they choose, without being beholden to anyone else.
The OSR is not a rejection. It is a celebration.
What is so special about this movement and its games that attracts so many people?
No dominant brands or market leaders are dictating what appears. Anyone, including you, can look at the available content and decide, "They are doing it wrong; I can do it better." Then you can actually go out, use the available open content, and do it within the time and budget you have for a hobby.
As for why classic D&D and systems modeled after it remain appealing, it is because they work. They have proven themselves capable of running fun, emergent, and engaging campaigns for decades.
Crucially, the OSR, from 20 years ago to today, does not just say these games are fun; it shows it through actual play reports, adventures, and supplements.
Many industries see their founders get close to the right idea but fall short, only for a later entrant to perfect it. For example, automobiles and the Model T. That is not the case with D&D. OD&D plus the Greyhawk supplement created what we now call "classic D&D," and it has endured for decades.
The only reason it ever became debatable was IP control, when the owner of D&D stopped publishing classic versions. But thanks to the "hack" that sparked the OSR, hobbyists today can play classic D&D and, if they enjoy it, support it however they wish, even by publishing for it.
That does not make classic D&D the "best" RPG, no more than chess or checkers are the best board games. But like those classics, it is still played, loved, and expanded upon by people around the world.
What specific systems would you recommend trying?
First, I recommend starting with the excellent Swords & Wizardry Quick Start. It is free, teaches the rules, and includes an adventure that gives you a clear sense of what an OSR campaign feels like.
All of these I have used or played at one time or another
Some others worth mentioning
I have my own project available.
Also, my Blackmarsh setting is free and provides an excellent example of what an OSR supplement looks like:
8 comments:
I liked this.
Can I translate and publish this translation too, Rob? When it's published, I'll post the link here.
Thanks!
Excellent summary Rob, couldn't have put it any better.
Sure thing, and I answered your question about contacting me in my previous post.
That's probably the best description of the OSR I've read. Well done, sir.
Thanks.
There’s a feeling I got as a kid opening my first boxed set of Dungeons & Dragons: this is a new world, and I can enter it and interact with it quickly and easily. I rolled up character after character, and spent a year waiting for someone who would join me in playing. When I found someone, we immediately dove in and had loads of fun without ever fully understanding half of the game mechanics. It was like playing a board game, but way more versatile. Decades later, when I found someone folks to play with again, the entry point was a little steeper. Character creation was a much longer process. Although it offered me more choices to build my character, I soon realized that those choices were actually narrowing down what my character was and could do. When Fourth Edition came out, it seemed like this was taken to the extreme: I was offered ready-made character templates that left little to the imagination. My heart ached for my old game. And then OSR came about, and I felt I’d found my people again.
Yes, Rob. Thank you.
And I've already sent the email. Did it go to spam or did I send it to the wrong address? I sent it as gabner.alves to the address you provided. Didn't it reach you?
Thank you for including the links; I very much enjoy exploring the various OSR --rabbit holes-- perspectives.
Post a Comment