Tap into the OSR with the Questing Beast newsletter: bit.ly/Glatisant Join the Questing Knights on Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon Download my RPGs and adventures: bit.ly/ItchStore My favorite OSR books: bit.ly/TopOSRBooks
You have an excellent description of OSR, especially about not having ready-made Intelligence rolls to figure out puzzles or strategize combat. You have to think your way out yourself, it's all on you, not on rolls.
The lethality of early d&d really added to the dramatic tension one experienced when playing. Foolish play was severely punished. This fostered creative and thoughtful role-play to avoid combat when possible, and encouraged sound tactical thinking when forced into combat. Old school Dungeons and Dragons was a thinking man's game.
@@CampKillCommentary no even, you just have to do 2 simple things: 1-Ignore CR and just place whatever makes sense to be there 2-don't run a WotC module. done
@@CampKillCommentary Smartphones/apps didn't exist when 3rd Edition D&D came out, in fact even MMOs were still a brand new, niche phenomenon that most people didn't even know about (the early days of Everquest). So your causation doesn't work. I would say that 3rd Edition D&D was very heavily influenced by Wizard's experience working on Magic: The Gathering, and this is what led D&D on the path toward being more about the numbers-crunching / rules-lawyering style of gameplay than the problem-solving kind that it once was. But I'll agree that the rise of CRPGs, then MMOs, then the ubiquity of gaming apps further cemented this desire for crunchy D&D.
Mr Gygax was once asked if a 1st Level party should encounter a Vampire. His response was "Encounter one? Absolutely. Defeat one? Almost never." The world's a dangerous place, that's why the PCs have to band together in the first instance. Mutual survival. 5th ed is great to get the players in, it doesn't take long for the interested players to find a version that suits them. I always use the term 'like minded players ' when I talk about any RPG, but D&D, AD&D, OD&D, whateverD&D this is particularly true. Sometimes a wine becomes better with age and sometimes it's vinegar.
I prefer 2e and treat it as Old School dnd. There are a ton of optional rules that really help with character uniqueness but your chances of death are the same as 1e, you start as a regular person, not as a superhero at level 1 like 5e.
I've been striving to obtain a total completion of the 2e line over the last two and half years. I've played every edition and honestly 2e is the only one I had a truly good time playing.
I also love 2e, I recently got all my old stuff out of storage and I've got way more 2e stuff than I remembered. So many source books and campaign settings.
@@bedeodempsey5007 I started the hobby in AD&D 2E in 1999 and unfortunately we migrated to the "new" edition of the game and since that point the hobby never had the same feel for me. I've tried every edition and honestly I ignore the existence of the game called Dungeons and Dragons if it isn't TSR related.
@@PaulGuy I sold off my 3.5 books a few years ago when I got fed up with pathfinder and dnd society play. I came to the realization that it was the D20 system that destroyed the game and have since been collecting the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 2E line since. Went back to where it all began for me and haven't regretted it at all!
Thank you for your review and recommendations :) I'm new to TTRPG world, so your description about playing intelligently, diplomacy importance and high risk of death if battling thoughtless,- these points, I think, describe the style of role playing games I would really prefer. I also started exploring your Knave 1 & 2 rules (learned about it from MausRitter),- it might be very helpful for new DMs out there. Really like your channel :)
Dude!! YOU MADE KNAVE??? I LOVE THAT THING!!! It's definitely one of my FAVORITE systems. I did some minor alterations to character creation and I'm having a blast!!! Good job with the video too!!
2e has the challenge and feel of the implied setting I want, 3.5 has the options I want and 5e has the core mechanics I want ( except the 3 death saving throws ). Will someone just make my perfect game already! In the meantime, I'll play them all + GURPS.
Great video. Another essential trait of the OSR spirit is a ruleset that allows the story to keep moving forward, no matter what. You keep advancing the story, keep having the players making decisions and talking in character, you keep telling them what happens next. No endless rolls and tables, no slow, arduous games. You maintain the flow, maintain the theater of the session. You can't do that if the GM keeps checking tables or if the players need an accountant to explain to them what their character is doing. For that to happen you need simple, elegant rules.
I started in 1989 (I was 5), and my uncle (the DM) still played 1st edition AD&D. My first character was a cleric, and I had a blast protecting and healing my party while cracking skulls with my mace. Spell slots were scarce, so playing intelligently was something I learned early on. I preferred 2nd edition when we had a chance to try that because it cleaned up much of the table wargaming stuff that made no sense to me (spell segments and weapon damage variables). I've been thinking about finding time to play that again. I love 5th edition, but it feels like less of a challenge.
I'm one of those 'played since AD&D 1st edition' people. I agree with your analysis, modern D&D is usually played very differently from how we used to play it. Which was, in a word, more 'hardcore'. However I do think you can play with an old school feel using new rules fairly easily. The specific rules are less important than one might think. For example, The Slumbering Tsar saga manages to create a very Old Skool feel using Pathfinder 1st edition rules. Or just break out Tomb of Horrors, which has been converted to all the systems iirc. It's not the same as playing with original rules, but you can get reasonably close imho. Although 5e is very light, so that is probably more challenging than other systems to play that way. But it can be done with a few houserules imho. You can even mix it up and mix the modern NPC-role play heavy style (aka 'critical role') with the old school hardcore 'verisimilitude' style of exploration and combat. Currently i'm trying to fuse a narrative-rpg-inspired style (eg FATE) of NPC and role play gaming, with Pathfinder-rules for combat and exploration, as one way of making the combination work. You don't have to be all one or the other, is the point i'm trying to make :)
I'm coming to realize more and more (as a 30+ year veteran of the game) that it isn't the game system or rules so much as it is the players. Modern 5e era players are just . . . not good at playing real RPGs.
Explain then how in OSR you'd make a Gnome Luchador-Priest who can DDT a giant such as a troll or hill giant, I'm talking ProWrestling, not dosing with so much pesticide they die from sheer toxicity, all without getting enlarged? That's just one of my 4E characters, and he could do it as early as Level 3.
@@HenshinFanatic Creativity and a genuine back and forth during gameplay. lol you can roleplay all of that and still give gentle bonuses during game play. Since in OSR it's about the shared imagination and adventure. Not a bad attempt at mimicking video games on paper 🤷 but that's only my thoughts. You would just roleplay it 🤣
As an RPG enthusiast and seeing another part of the hobby the OSR. I see it as a new way to experience different ideas and an intresting way of playing the Old-School way. At first I was excited by D&D 5e to play something away from video games, but It started to feel like a video game. Its not to say I hate the game but we have our own preferences. I like dungeon crawls and it intrest me to see that drawing maps while exploring and getting treasure. It made me approach the OSR and look for a system that will suit my taste.
What I liked about the old system was the Class Roles. Fighters had HP, Armor, and multi attacks. Thieves Snuck, Found Traps, and Picked Locks. The Everyone Can Do Everything idea has eliminated those roles. Thieves don't backstab anymore, they just try to make sure an ally is nearby. Dex does as much damage as strength. Wizards just pump out spells, but are hampered by Concentration. In the old game, you could have an Invisible, Hasted Fighter, you just had to be careful not to run out of spells.
Concentration killed all the fun for wizards. But hey, I have a great Dex, so my 11th-level elven wizard is a battlefield juggernaut with her dagger +2 and her 102hp now. Why on Earth did I accept to convert her into a 5E character? Sigh...
@@SimonAshworthWood Concentration was associated with the casting action. You would lose your spell if hit by a Magic Missile/arrow while casting it. But said Magic Missile/arrow would not dispel your Fly spell if already cast. Earlier than 1st edition? Huh ? 😋 By the way, we switched back to ADD2 with the aforementioned character and simultaneously play a 5E campaign.
I started playing D&D again about 3 years ago and love OSR stuff. I had the good fortune to run into a DM who was very much OSR. I think you did a good job of capturing what it's all about because it's partially real stuff and partially an overall feel.
I don't remember how I stumbled on your channel but coming from an old 3.5e player who likes the complicated mechanics and number crunching of epic and homebrew, I do enjoy all your product vids. I've only recently started working on my own setting but I've gotten a ton of ideas and inspiration from books you've covered like Godbound, Metamorphica and Veins of the Earth. Keep up the good job!
Thank you so much for making Knave. It's so simple my 5 year old can play it! I'm using Kevin Crawford's solo rules on top of it and using S&W bestiary with it. Love the OSR.
I like a mix of both. An entirely "story-focused" campaign tends to run into the problem of nearly no player agency and the increasing diminishing of stakes when PCs literally cannot be killed. A campaign with no story only focused on looting and amassing wealth then makes for a very poor roleplaying experience since you're pretty much forced to have one-dimensional stereotype characters as character death is so rampant. Mixing a very basic story outline with somewhat dangerous encounters with the very deadly fight sprinkled in is the best approach in my opinion. The players get to have their characters and develop them beyond simple archetypes while also keeping the tension of them not being invincible.
If I may ask, Is it possible to have a narrative, story-oriented game with OSR? :/ or is 5e better suited for that? I like the idea of complete creative freedom in creating my own world and narrative in 5e. Can I also do that in an OSR-setting, or is that really more suited to crypt-looting-dungeon-delving with no or almost no story as they used to do it back then?
@@Labroidas It is, but with OSR there's a constant risk of your characters dying off, which makes it pretty hard to have a story that focuses around them/has them deeply engaged in it.
In the early to mid 80s, it was all “homebrew”*. We didn’t even use that word. Almost every group had its own house rules because there weren’t rules covering every last damn thing. The DMs set up campaigns with loose plots, but the worlds were more like sandboxes. Some DMs’ games were very basic: go to the dungeon, come back to town, rinse and repeat. Other DMs were skilled at responding to unexpected character actions, and some of those were great at improvised PC-NPC interactions. (The best DM I ever played with was an acting major, and I remember one game where we didn’t roll the dice even once.) Bottom line was everything tended to be more free form. There is the commonly held opinion that early D&D was deadly. This was true for magic users at low levels and it could be true for foolhardy adventurers. One player I knew was constantly getting his characters killed, almost every session or two. But for the most part, we players learned to not get killed rather quickly. Or rather to not let our characters get killed too quickly. 😅 *TSR sold modules, but I never played one straight. One campaign I was in started with a highly modified Keep on the Borderlands, but it moved on from there pretty quickly.
I still play 1st and 2nd edition AD&D. Still running games, and have been since the mid 1980s. I can't remember ever having trouble learning old school AD&D. It was all pretty straight forward if you read the books. Things were a little scattered and unorganized in the 1st edition DMG for sure, but it wasn't rocket science, folks. OSR stuff sounds like fun, and if it helps people to learn to have fun gaming, I'm all for that.
Great video as usual, Ben. Thank you. Out of the points you made, what is really frustrating to me in 5e is what you mentioned regarding immersion: of you played Rules Cyclopedia and 2e, it's unbelievable that nowadays - instead of the player having to do the thinking - is the PC who "Does the thinking." I mean,"Give me a perception roll" is an absurd! Back in the day (1992), my DM TPK'ed us because we did not explicitly say "We look up right after we open the door." The BBEG, a Wizard, was levitating, we did not see him, he casted Sleep, we all failed, and he slit it our throats. If it was today, one of us (5 PCs) would very likely have succeeded at the perception roll and thus we would have survived - with NO merit!
@@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself So how does that work? I remember playing these "full sandbox" type games when I was younger. They always started with us finding ourselves in a tavern or somewhere else and then.... nothing. How are the players just suppose to start doing shit?
@@Top1-p2x I agree. Even in Lost Mines of Phandelver, every party I've had gets analysis paralysis and has to be pushed or approached by an NPC to actually do something, if you try to let them have unbridled freedom. Otherwise they're like "duhhh....let's go shopping now then I guess?" Before eventually deciding on a quest purely because it's something to do. These are players who beforehand claim that they LOVE roleplaying and getting into character. Sometimes they go "exploring," and then they can't handle a simple non-hostile interaction without going uhhhhhh every three seconds, and it's when you find out that not all socially awkward people are actually creative.
Really cool video! Agree with all points and I fell in love with OSR as soon as I realized it existed. Big fan of KNAVE too, it really inspired my adventure system. One suggestion, it might be cool to have a graphical list of the points you make as you go through the discussion.
cool vid, u gained a sub. I never heard of OSR and never played old but been homebrewing campaigns in this style for a few years now. homebrew classes, races, world, monsters, potions, spells, rules, etc, and more of a focus on a realistic and tough dungeons
Great vid. I've been a fiend for the osr and retroclones lately. I've been a roller since the original AD&D. But this new crop of homebrew stuff is amazing. :)
Loved this. I can tell you as someone who’s delved into writing a 5E product, there’s a LOT of amazing and imaginative content in OSR products, as well as a much higher level of quality in book binding, cover materials and other production. I work in the printing industry and I find the WoTC standard for these poor. OSR producers seem to care more. It’s gaming products and ideas BY gamers FOR gamers. Well met, Ben
I had no knowledge of this Old School Renaissance. I've been playing D&D for about thirty years and we would always "modify" rules that we did not like or agree with. We have started doing that with some of the rules for 5e. I personally do not like the attunment of magical items and being able to only have three items attuned at one time.
I think attunement is a cool idea but was used on too many things, I think it would be much better as a very rare mechanic used for the strongest of magic items, not like 70% of the list.
Besides D&D I would also add some other Old School Ames to your definition of OSR. Traveller and Runequest, there have been retro clones of both those games using SRD's and OGL.
I do still really enjoy pathfinder and a number of other newer systems but I think OSRs are definitely a fascinating set of systems that I am really interested in learning more about, im glad your channel exists so I’ll be able to do so far more efficiently that individually looking for systems are reading through entire rulebook just to get a sense of them
I like the board game feel I get from your osr videos. It reminds me of the first time I saw dnd was a board game when we had cards for our items. I was really little and only ever got to play that once but it made me always want to try playing that again.
Great video! I started playing D&D, mostly as a DM, right after it was first published (edition zero). All the excellent points you have made (which is why I loved the game) are spot on. I quit playing when D&D had just changed too much in directions I didn’t enjoy (around edition 3.5). I tried to pick up tabletop RPGs again with Pathfinder...and I tried... I really tried, but I just could not get into it. I actually started to loathe all RPG’s. I thought my tabletop RPG days were over and that it had just been a romanticized and idealized phase of my youth, and an interest long gone. Then I found the OSR. For me, this may be a bit about nostalgia, but, frankly, I think the OSR is far better than the original materials that we had back in the 70’s! As you correctly pointed out, some of the early written materials are not so easy to learn from. I myself learned from someone who learned from someone who learned from Gygax. Then we all taught others how to play. I and others didn’t even have the booklets yet. We bought those later. The new Indy designers and their products are fabulous! I LOVE their stuff! I look forward to watching more of your videos.
As someone who plays alot of video games, and had a little interest peaked in D&D, upon comparing older and newer versions, I noticed monsters kept getting nerfed, and players kept getting buffed. If I were to homebrew, I'd have 5E characters, but older versions of certain monsters. For example, fairy dragons should be OP like they used to be (I.E. near MAGIC IMMUNITY), but also more adorable. I think things like that would discourage murder hoboism, since you'd be questioning what can and cannot kill you when you get wrecked by a few dragons the size of a housecat when you tried to harm them.
Three things that made 1st edition DnD awesome. Potion miscibility roll, Psionics, and a true bard was probably the most powerful bastard in the game. Bonus was the conversion between swords and sorcery vs sci fi vs six guns! You could literally play a guy clad in power armor with a sheriff with a 45 and a shot gun! Along side of a wizard with a wand of wonder! Sometimes old school is best school! Although Thac0 still requires a college degree! Lol!
I plan to create a world where the PCs have to catch and cook to survive in the wild between towns. There will need to be a recipe book for making rations based on specific ingredients, and BBQ recipes. The stores will not stock rations to force PCs to craft their own. The PCs could cook a party meal during a short or long rest, then make rations from leftovers to eat on the road. To make it work, a time tracker will need to be used. I could also make it so that the only way to regain HP during a short or long rest will be to eat something, and the amount of HP gained will depend on the dish eaten.
I absolutely love the OSR. The products are great quality in both writing and printing, and no matter what edition of D&D you prefer you can find _something amazing_ to add to your game. If you're of a mind to do so, conversion is extremely simple, even with a more complex rule system like 3.5 or Pathfinder.
What I find fascinating about it is the feel of exploring a real dangerous world, because your character could die easily, and the encounters are not balanced. You can encounter monsters much stronger than you at any moment, and you better hide, run, or think about some clever way to overcome it. Also the simplicity of the system, not relaying on hundreds of rules and subrules. You feel much more immersed in that fantasy world.
This also exist for Star Wars. The first system (now refred to as "D6") was the best. And is now even better with fans having polished a few rule details.
Another feature of OSR games is that you can easily port a character from one OSR product into another, with minimal tweaking. This can even be done across genres in some cases. One example of this is the several games produced by Eric Bloat. You can easily take characters from Survive This Zombies, into Dungeons and Demogorgons, then into Vigilante City essentially combining Horror, Kids on Bikes Fantasy, and Super Heroes into one campaign with the same group of characters. At least one notable creator of OSR products has claimed that this portability is the hallmark of an OSR game. That is largely the result of the common mechanics of having six attributes; hit points or health points; armor class or defense score; and some kind of skill system based on class archetypes, or professional skill sets. Excellent video, as always.
ADnD 2nd and DnD 3.5 were my introductions into tabletop roleplaying - rolling on skills and profiencies to define what a character is able to and what (s)he isn't. What changed my approach to roleplaying was Matthew Finch's Quick Primer for Old School Gaming - even when I am still not using all his "zen moments" the old but fresh ideas into that read worthy essay were a great inspiration to me as a player and a dungeonmaster. It is good to see that OSR is still a big inspiration to the whole community :)
I play 5e, I’m a returning Ad&d player. I learned today that I’m an OSR player. I make my own worlds, don’t balance anything and don’t care what wotc says( I’m happy they’re there, but it’s MY .. no my group’s game). Thanks for the video. It helped me put words on how I play differently than others, no better, just different.
I learned 1st edition AD&D back in 1982 and than transitioned to 2nd edition in 1989. Have always prefer those two to all other's(after all 1st/2nd edition of ad&d are forward/backwards compatible
You just laid out half of the reasons why I can't get into newer editions LOL. I used to play a 2nd edition that borrowed heavily from 1st edition and it was awesome. About a year ago I bought the newer editions and I can't get inspired to play them. I'd love to find an osr group.
Jason Voorhees That’s exactly what me and my old gaming crew did. It was an amalgam of 1e and 2e. We did that forever till everyone married, moved, or just vanished. 3e was ok. 4 was absolute trash. 5 is ok but too geared to making some kind of video game character come to life.
@@NotAlrightSpider And thats another big problem I have. You used the right words for it, too. It feels like they're trying to translate a video game toon to pencil and paper. I understand how it makes the game more appealing to a newer crowd, but it isn't doing anything for me.
Point #4, definitely. The core mechanics got you started and, beyond that, you made your world your own. Gygax even encouraged DMs to modify rules to fit their setting. Homebrew and house rules were the norm and not the exception. Unless you were playing tournament at GenCon, I don't know anyone in the 80s who were playing straight by the book.
Hi Ben! Great video, as usual! On this topic, I just read "Through Dungeons Deeper: A Survival Guide For Dungeoneers As Written By A Survivor". It's a fun and useful read for new (and not-so-new) old-school players and GMs. I'd love to see you do a review!
Having played since 1975, I can say the 2nd Edition was the best. It filled many of the holes from the first edition, and provided a lot of information to further the experience. But, the rules were not as scattershot as 5th, and not as stringent as 3rd.
Once again, thank you, Ben. I've seen a lot of the OSR crowd try to define 'why?' before, but it comes out like an anachronistic grognard or a relentless hipster too many times (or plagued by low production standards). I am one of those 'been playing it this way since..." guys - so I have a bit of rose colored nostalgia sometimes - but the honest reasons I love the OSR isn't always understood in my Pathfinder/5e dominated landscape (and it's sparse in Vermont, as is). You nailed the core of it. There was something lost, a long time ago. I do personally believe that Hackmaster 4e (which is actually 1e of HM) really spurred the OSR - the difference is that Kenzer had a license to reproduce AD&D. But, almost against the later grain, it chose to be very, very crunchy - but it felt right, and the writing was reverent of the old style. I realize that the High Gygaxian prose turns a lot of newer gamers off, but it never ceases to make me smile... I swear I learned English from Lovecraft and Gygax sometimes.
Your channel and these videos were recently recommended to me. I have been printing and binding pdf files of original D&D books to read and enjoy. I began playing in 4th edition, and despite it's flaws, I liked a house rule modified version of that game. I like 5e as well. However, there is an appeal to the older versions of the game, especially if some things were cleaned up. I am very interested.
I never left the Old School, I admit I tried with 3.5 and I've looked at 4e and 5e but everything seems so watered down and/or videogamey... I learned OD&D on my own from reading the books as well as 1st edition and 2nd edition. No the rules dont cover everything, but they were never supposed to; you don't see a rule for a situation, make it up, but remember your ruling for consistency. One of my favorite parts of 2nd edition was the expansion of weapon and non-weapon proficiencies. I really did try to give WoTC and Hasbro the benefit of the doubt with their newer editions but they've been consistently underwhelming with their rule sets, their story paths and modules are a different story though, thank the powers that be that conversion to older rule sets is fairly easy to do. Sorry for the book length comment.
last played about 1982. my friend an old dm and i came up with our own character generator plus combat charts, you may hit everytime, but his plate absorbs so much damage.
This is a brilliant and insightful video! This past few days, I have been trying to hone in on how to define "OSR" as a noun rather than an adjective. I already know you and I do not agree 100%. But that is okay! I have been in this discussion with people that would disagree with both of us and each other. Yet we will all agree on some universal points. I propose this as a definition of OSR: "RPGs from the late 1900s and the modern interpretations thereof". That would cover both old games and retoclones. It would also include a lot of nonD&D games, which is another debate entirely. I think it is worthy of consideration, but we can set that aside for the nonce. However, my definition excludes OSR-is games, 5e patches like Mork Borg, DCC, or FTD. I love those games, don't get me wrong! I just think that the should be categorized as "in the style of", as to differentiate them from retroclones and originals in philosophical discussions. And philosophical discussions boost your algorithm! :-D
2 additional thoughts that help explain the difference between OSR-ish school of thought and the Official streams: 1: much of the rules build-up was based on tournament play. Everyone needed to have the same ruleset to be able to better determine "who won." House ruling didn't cut it. If it's not in "the rules" you couldn't do it. The bottom line is the bottom line: tournaments paid for a lot of things that simply could not be done (financially speaking, in particular) prior to the interwebs, or even desktop computers. 2: OSR philosophy is much more like open source software (Wizards didn't invent the idea of "open source", although applying it as OGL was a neat trick). By allowing others to scrutinize your "source code", game mechanics got a lot of testing and improvements. Yes, the 0DD, B/X, 1e were all...let's just say they definitely benefited from rewrites with a UX perspective they did *not* have. (I still have bits of my original 0DD *photocopies :') ) Lovingly, Grognard
Jeff Stormer the UX improvements that the OSR movement has brought forward really can’t be overstated. B/X Essentials (now Old School Essentials) and the preceding parade of retroclones may not have made any revolutionary rules changes, but they definitely improved the layout and design for use at the table of both reference books and adventure material. 1e’s DMG is a delight to read on your own time, but if you’re trying to reference it at play you’re likely in dire straits unless you have the location of each rule memorized (and if that’s the case, you likely just have the rule itself memorized haha). The layout and usability improvements that newer retroclones have is amazing and contemporary source book writers should be taking notes...
Colin you're spot on. Reading those earlier versions was a lot like wandering through a flea market, nothing organized, totally randomized, and you never knew where the next delight or treasure would be found. Not what you needed when referencing and refereeing on the fly. Of course nowadays on a digital device, any decent search engine would solve that challenge handily. I had my old dmg totally worked over: diy tabs (eg scraps of paper & staples), crayon colored dog ears, paper clips, bookmarks that were taped or stapled in place, a bazillion more bookmarks that were not. I eventually began my own index but gave up after a while because it needed to.be rewritten too often. And my handwriting really didnt help. Kids (eg under 40) these days (who just will.NOT stay off.my lawn!) Dont know how good they have it! Grognard
Part of the issue with jumping right into the AD&D rules (1e) and why people find it confusing from the original books is that it assumes a certain familiarity with the rules from basic D&D (i.e the basic through companion (and even master) box sets (compiled in the 90's into the Rules Cyclopedia)). Fan of the old school, find that in the modern incarnations that characters are more over powered.
It was basically the same issue that OD&D had, which was pretty inscrutable unless you were familiar with wargaming norms at the time. Or unless someone showed you how to play.
I started at age 10 in 1980 with the original 1974 books I found in a NJ mall hobby shop that were dirt cheap so my mother bought them for me.. I then moved on to basic and quickly after that 1st edition.. I've been living the OSR my whole life.. Old School Essentials, Lamantation of the Flame Princess, Swords and Wizardry and others are really Crushing it with beautifully produced books and cleaner rule sets. It's a great time to be alive if you like such games particularly if you are turned off by the WotC shit show, they never handled the IP properly imop since day one and I never bought in heavily on anything they made
Could you do a video comparing OSR games geared towards "which OSR game is for you" I'm very interested in running an OSR campaign but idk which one I want to invest my time and money on.
Well, having started in Basic (the red set) in early 80's I say that it's more rules light than any other RPG I've played. We had fun while playing it. If it had one disadvantage it was the lack of skills, but it was sort of remedied in - I think - the green set (the third set). But....as a GM (me) one should be careful in awarding coins because they were xp! A lot of spells had been removed from D&D when 3.0 came out. Nearly a third of wizard spells! Really good ones too. I don't know about cleric spells but I guess those were thrown out as well. That's too bad, but I worked together with one of my friends to reconstruct many of the lost wizard spells to 3.5. ^^ Finally, there is some advice on the second page in the Basic set from Gary Gygax : "These rules are supposed to be a guide. They are not final. If you like insert your own rules." I didn't quote because I haven't the book right here - I'm on holiday - but you get the gist. 😁
I sort of have my own kind of OSR. Having been increasingly dissatisfied with 5e, I was looking through the 3.5e books, saw bits and bobs I liked, and began making 5e conversions of them, paying more heed to the old way instead of the 5e way. That is to say, ignoring 5e's more silly limits like no epic levels or CR 30 max. I started cobbling together my own hybrid system. It's built on 5e, but then incorporates spells, concepts, etc from 3.5e and 2e and 1e that I find and like. My players have grown fond of it over time.
I played AD&D back in the late 80's right before 2nd edition came out. You did have to be smart, and the game didn't coddle you. If you played stupidly or carelessly, you'd be rolling up a new character before long. I don't miss the backwards armor system though.
I cut my teeth on ad&d then home brewed for a while. I like ad&d because it forces me to do math in a way that’s not traumatic unlike my abusive schooling were my teachers refused to believe in math learning disorders. I use it with my own kid.
It's weird hearing about the 'lethality' of the old rules - when our group played 2nd Edition, we ended up limiting PCs to max 3 hit dice (as in, you never got more Hit Points after 3rd Level), because we weren't buying the idea of our characters shrugging off 10th level Fireballs in the face. A drastic and probably wrong-headed approach, but we were young!
I know this is an older post but it still needs to be said, one of the reasons I am having a difficult time as an adult getting back into the hobby is because of the new push for dungeon master plot-driven Grand Story arcs. While they can be fun there is something to be had in player led Adventures that eventually end up with greatness or a tragedy depending on the dice.
This. I just had a an official module campaign implode because I let the players screw up and get themselves and their NPC companion killed because they hung around in a combat that went bad. They were really angry when I refused to save them.
Problem with all these later editions is power creep the player characters progressively become more and more powerful a first level 5th edition character is as powerful as a split-level first edition character
When wizards took over AD&D they threw out a set of rules that lasted for about 23 years yet wizards d&d versions only seem to last between 6 to 8 years before they change the rules again and in 2 years there's going to be a new d&d rules set . Wizards problem was they wanted to port their magic the gathering ccg into a tabletop rpg and once they figured out how to do it after they bought TSR out they switched rules set to emulate magic the gathering intabletop form . It's evident by wizards stripping away everything that set AD&D apart from other fantasy rpg's because there were no longer any restrictions on what race could be what class to match it's ccg magic the gathering . Even more evidence of that fact is the inclusion of races directly ported from magic the gathering such as the Loxodon from Ravnica which was also made into a d&d setting . Wizards doesn't even understand that an adventure doesn't have to be tied into one giant huge adventure with lots , sub plot and ending with a good fight ( I hate MMO terms used in tabletop games ) and they call that a campaign when the original definition for rpg's was the setting of the game which is why you see on the original setting of the Forgoten Realms said " campaign setting " and just about every adventure was around 30 to 40 pages long execpt a few that tied together and not every adventure had to have a major fight at the end . Wizards also thinks the DM has to tell his story to the players which they then go through when in reality it was never about the Dm's story but about the players creating the stories of their characters . And open sandbox hexcrawling was a major part of the game because before they created the first campaign setting ( the world of Greyhawk ) we had no setting but the ones we made yet today's Dm's don't know how to run sandbox games because everything is handed to them to just read from a book causing a lack of imagination on everyone's part . So you end up with every single game running exactly the sane way which again steals DM creativity from them ....
I don't know a lot about old school d&d, but I am pretty familiar with a system called Dungeon Crawl Classics. I enjoy that system a lot, I just wish my 5e group could appreciate it too(they go for more of a "Critical Roll-esque" narrative, which is by all means quite fun and cool). How similar is DCC to OSR stuff, or classic d&d?
D&D and The Colored Box Sets are technically different settings. The Box Sets Mystra or Hollow Earth. I learned on Mystra then 2ndEd AD&D came out and I moved over.
I love 5e, it’s the first version of D&D I’ve played. I love the role playing and the dice add a fun aspect. I played Edge of the Empire before that and had tried Pathfinder. I’ve played some AD&D, looked into OSR stuff. I really want to play Castles & Crusades, and hopefully I’ll get the chance. S&W seems interesting too but I don’t want to overwhelm my group.
You need to find the original paperback books of Arduin by David Hargrave, everything you say you were looking for is covered in Arduin. It is its own game system, but its in over 6 paperback books, we never used it, we just cherry picked spells, items, monsters, crit and fumble charts and many more things to make our campaigns more alive and dangerous. Chris
I am one of the players from the 70's. I never as a DM ran appropriately leveled encounters for my players. I always ran on open sandbox game. Players drove the story, always. I did have modules and dungeons in the game, but you had to find them and the hooks to find them. Yes at first level you could encounter an overwhelming encounter. Running, diplomacy, hiding, fighting and yes surrendering is an option in every encounter. Yes you can be captured and turned into a slave or indentured servant with a contract and a release clause. So yeah, old school is lots of fun and depends on the DM and the group of players. My goal as a DM is always make each player feel they are part of their own story, that their choices matter. Then I always try to make the party feel like they are going to DIE, then watch them sweat, moan and complain and then do the miraculous and either triumph, survive or get away. I know I did my job well when at the start of the next session, they are all talking about the last session and they cannot believe how they survived. Yeah style of DM and players matters.
In my day "rules" were known as "guidelines." "Knowing when to ignore the dice" was a part of the DM's philosophy. The goal was to create a cohesive story that the players are allowed to flesh out along with the DM. Players' choices effected actions in the game, even if it was a module adventure, which was typically pretty linear in format. The idea was simple. Use the rules when they were necessary, don't worry so much about them when they weren't needed, and modify them when it seemed called for. DMing was (and still should be) an art form. Today many RPGers seem to be obsessed with RULES and official setting information. I'm guessing that attitude comes from years of playing "RPG" video games on computers instead of table top games. Most video games aren't exactly role playing games, even if they proclaim otherwise. There's generally no way for you to have true interaction and input other than some sort of linear response. I frequently find that modern gamers don't seem to be able to tap into their own, individual imaginations as easily as gamers once did. Having a great imagination was a big part of the success of role playing games back in the '70s and '80s. Games like D&D and ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS hung their hats on that. Mostly it was theatre of the mind gaming. Few ever really used miniatures because we had healthy imaginations for visualizing combat and situations, and skilled DMs who could weave a visual story. Painting pictures with words was essential. A good DM helped immerse the players into a fleshed out setting, and the players used their acting skills and personality to do the same for their characters in the game. It wasn't so much about rolling dice every 5 minutes. You rolled dice only when it was truly necessary to do so. The story remained the thing of true importance. While there were a lot more rules in the ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, it is hardly the "mess" that modern gamers often claim it was. It wasn't particularly well organized because the game did expand, and updates were part of that expansion. The more updates that came out, the more books that you needed to play the game, right? No. Not really. That's just how TSR made their buck. You could play AD&D with only three books: The Players Guide, the DMG, and the Monster Manual. Not that tough really. Sure, they made more Monster Manuals and all sort of other books, but those were supplemental volumes. 2nd Edition did a lot to streamline and organize things, and that did help. Getting back to the RPG rules business. The game with the best and most streamline rules ever doesn't matter doodly squat if your DM isn't very good. The story is the thing, not the rules. You're all telling a story together. Players serve as heroes (and sometimes villains) in the tale. The goal is to have fun. Rules can't really help you with that. They are just gaming mechanics. If you're not having fun folks, it might not be the gaming mechanics and system that is truly at issue. That might factor a little, but having fun gaming depends on having a good DM to run the game, and good players that contribute to the excitement. Nothing kills games more than rules, so that's why many of the early forms of D&D referred to the rules as "guidelines." All that said, I do like what's going on with the OSR games being produced. Taking the game back to the fundamentals and concentrating on home brewed campaigns and adventures is a good thing I think. Most of these games seem to capture that original D&D spirit, and I think that's wonderful! I just think that too many RPG gamers get caught up in rules and game mechanics sometimes. It's not the tools, it's the fools. A good imagination and some skill at roleplaying goes a long, long way towards having successful, fun gaming sessions.
Is it fair to say that aside from the differences in rules, that there is also usually some difference in play styles with OSR with regard to the degree of role playing? It seems like a lot of the 5e game sessions you see on RUclips are so heavily focused on the role playing aspect that there's very little "G" in their RPG. I suspect that's a CR influence. When I started playing in the early 80s, I knew only a small number of people who played Dungeons and Dragons. I don't recall any of us referring to it as a role playing game, or as an RPG. It was always simply referred to as Dungeons and Dragons or just D&D. No one I knew played in character. Most everyone I knew who played were drawn to the game for one or more of the following: (1) were fans of Lord of the Rings, Conan, or other fantasy literature and enjoyed the emersion into a fantasy setting, (2) were avid readers, especially of fantasy and/or sci fi, and simply enjoyed reading the game books, (3) were mathematically minded, and were intrigued by the role (roll) of probability in the rules, (4) liked the challenge of creatively solving situations, puzzles, etc. No one I knew who played D&D used dialects, accents, or in character voices. It never occurred to me that this might be part of the game for some. I stepped away from the game for many years, and only recently became interested again. I was really surprised to see that so many people now seem to approach the game more as improvisational acting, with the game itself as almost an afterthought (likely also a CR influence). That aspect, along with the imagery of the game materials/artwork become more and more Disney-esque and much less dark as the original is what draws me more to the OSR. Is that a fairly common experience, or am I in a minority of those who never really accentuated the dramatics/role playing aspect?
I'm an old school player too, first char was Al 'Azareth my Ranger, and currently have all the AD&D core books from 1st through to 5th. I agree with you about CR, I don't really enjoy their show as I find it too mannered. They are professionals and it lacks that feel of a great gaming session to me. Don't get me wrong I'm not belittling CRs many talents but to me there is something lacking, I recently started watching Dungeon Dudes and their games feel more fun, more chill and most importantly more like the games me and my friends used to play.
Tap into the OSR with the Questing Beast newsletter: bit.ly/Glatisant
Join the Questing Knights on Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon
Download my RPGs and adventures: bit.ly/ItchStore
My favorite OSR books: bit.ly/TopOSRBooks
You have an excellent description of OSR, especially about not having ready-made Intelligence rolls to figure out puzzles or strategize combat. You have to think your way out yourself, it's all on you, not on rolls.
The lethality of early d&d really added to the dramatic tension one experienced when playing. Foolish play was severely punished. This fostered creative and thoughtful role-play to avoid combat when possible, and encouraged sound tactical thinking when forced into combat. Old school Dungeons and Dragons was a thinking man's game.
exactly. That's why kids today find it boring. Because it was actually a real game, not just some arcade-like smash-o-thon for app addicted normies.
you still can make 5e very lethal and punishing
patricio torre ya, if you change it to be real D&D and ignore 90% of the horrible wizards of the coast garbage.
@@CampKillCommentary no even, you just have to do 2 simple things:
1-Ignore CR and just place whatever makes sense to be there
2-don't run a WotC module.
done
@@CampKillCommentary Smartphones/apps didn't exist when 3rd Edition D&D came out, in fact even MMOs were still a brand new, niche phenomenon that most people didn't even know about (the early days of Everquest). So your causation doesn't work. I would say that 3rd Edition D&D was very heavily influenced by Wizard's experience working on Magic: The Gathering, and this is what led D&D on the path toward being more about the numbers-crunching / rules-lawyering style of gameplay than the problem-solving kind that it once was. But I'll agree that the rise of CRPGs, then MMOs, then the ubiquity of gaming apps further cemented this desire for crunchy D&D.
Ben you are a credit to the hobby, your presentation style and even, soothing voice are pitch-perfect. This video is great!
So that's why my students keep falling asleep...
@@QuestingBeast haha nah they're just overwhelmed by the inhuman thresher of modernity coming down on them
Mr Gygax was once asked if a 1st Level party should encounter a Vampire. His response was "Encounter one? Absolutely. Defeat one? Almost never."
The world's a dangerous place, that's why the PCs have to band together in the first instance. Mutual survival.
5th ed is great to get the players in, it doesn't take long for the interested players to find a version that suits them.
I always use the term 'like minded players ' when I talk about any RPG, but D&D, AD&D, OD&D, whateverD&D this is particularly true.
Sometimes a wine becomes better with age and sometimes it's vinegar.
I prefer 2e and treat it as Old School dnd.
There are a ton of optional rules that really help with character uniqueness but your chances of death are the same as 1e, you start as a regular person, not as a superhero at level 1 like 5e.
I've been striving to obtain a total completion of the 2e line over the last two and half years. I've played every edition and honestly 2e is the only one I had a truly good time playing.
2e was the last system of AD&D I played in the mid-90s. I will be retiring next year and will start gaming again 40 years after I started.
I also love 2e, I recently got all my old stuff out of storage and I've got way more 2e stuff than I remembered. So many source books and campaign settings.
@@bedeodempsey5007 I started the hobby in AD&D 2E in 1999 and unfortunately we migrated to the "new" edition of the game and since that point the hobby never had the same feel for me. I've tried every edition and honestly I ignore the existence of the game called Dungeons and Dragons if it isn't TSR related.
@@PaulGuy I sold off my 3.5 books a few years ago when I got fed up with pathfinder and dnd society play. I came to the realization that it was the D20 system that destroyed the game and have since been collecting the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 2E line since. Went back to where it all began for me and haven't regretted it at all!
Thank you for your review and recommendations :)
I'm new to TTRPG world, so your description about playing intelligently, diplomacy importance and high risk of death if battling thoughtless,- these points, I think, describe the style of role playing games I would really prefer.
I also started exploring your Knave 1 & 2 rules (learned about it from MausRitter),- it might be very helpful for new DMs out there.
Really like your channel :)
Dude!! YOU MADE KNAVE???
I LOVE THAT THING!!! It's definitely one of my FAVORITE systems. I did some minor alterations to character creation and I'm having a blast!!!
Good job with the video too!!
Spot on. OSR is relatively new to my world, but the quality of the products continues to surprise me.
2e has the challenge and feel of the implied setting I want, 3.5 has the options I want and 5e has the core mechanics I want ( except the 3 death saving throws ). Will someone just make my perfect game already! In the meantime, I'll play them all + GURPS.
Index Card RPG... or even Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (but not 3rd edition)
Why not make it yourself? You can easily add, remove and change rules in any D&D edition.
Working on it TBH, from focused classes and extra action and attack options, to a better death mechanic to my fix of the mystics and more classes
Shadow of a Demon Lord is your jam. 👍
Late to the party, but you might like WWN. Plenty of customization, some similarities to 5e, but still very much OSR and lethal
Great video. Another essential trait of the OSR spirit is a ruleset that allows the story to keep moving forward, no matter what. You keep advancing the story, keep having the players making decisions and talking in character, you keep telling them what happens next. No endless rolls and tables, no slow, arduous games. You maintain the flow, maintain the theater of the session. You can't do that if the GM keeps checking tables or if the players need an accountant to explain to them what their character is doing. For that to happen you need simple, elegant rules.
I started in 1989 (I was 5), and my uncle (the DM) still played 1st edition AD&D. My first character was a cleric, and I had a blast protecting and healing my party while cracking skulls with my mace. Spell slots were scarce, so playing intelligently was something I learned early on. I preferred 2nd edition when we had a chance to try that because it cleaned up much of the table wargaming stuff that made no sense to me (spell segments and weapon damage variables). I've been thinking about finding time to play that again. I love 5th edition, but it feels like less of a challenge.
I'm one of those 'played since AD&D 1st edition' people. I agree with your analysis, modern D&D is usually played very differently from how we used to play it. Which was, in a word, more 'hardcore'. However I do think you can play with an old school feel using new rules fairly easily. The specific rules are less important than one might think. For example, The Slumbering Tsar saga manages to create a very Old Skool feel using Pathfinder 1st edition rules. Or just break out Tomb of Horrors, which has been converted to all the systems iirc. It's not the same as playing with original rules, but you can get reasonably close imho. Although 5e is very light, so that is probably more challenging than other systems to play that way. But it can be done with a few houserules imho.
You can even mix it up and mix the modern NPC-role play heavy style (aka 'critical role') with the old school hardcore 'verisimilitude' style of exploration and combat. Currently i'm trying to fuse a narrative-rpg-inspired style (eg FATE) of NPC and role play gaming, with Pathfinder-rules for combat and exploration, as one way of making the combination work. You don't have to be all one or the other, is the point i'm trying to make :)
I'm coming to realize more and more (as a 30+ year veteran of the game) that it isn't the game system or rules so much as it is the players. Modern 5e era players are just . . . not good at playing real RPGs.
I really enjoy OSR, I see all the abilities and character builds in other systems like 5e/Pathfinder as restrictions at this point not choices.
Exactly. Creativity thrives under constraints. Give the players less and they will find ways to give themselves more.
I ran escape from zanzers dungeon under 5e... It was no less lethal. One player ended up becming green slime.
Yeah 5E easy
Explain then how in OSR you'd make a Gnome Luchador-Priest who can DDT a giant such as a troll or hill giant, I'm talking ProWrestling, not dosing with so much pesticide they die from sheer toxicity, all without getting enlarged? That's just one of my 4E characters, and he could do it as early as Level 3.
@@HenshinFanatic Creativity and a genuine back and forth during gameplay.
lol you can roleplay all of that and still give gentle bonuses during game play.
Since in OSR it's about the shared imagination and adventure.
Not a bad attempt at mimicking video games on paper 🤷 but that's only my thoughts.
You would just roleplay it 🤣
As an RPG enthusiast and seeing another part of the hobby the OSR. I see it as a new way to experience different ideas and an intresting way of playing the Old-School way. At first I was excited by D&D 5e to play something away from video games, but It started to feel like a video game. Its not to say I hate the game but we have our own preferences. I like dungeon crawls and it intrest me to see that drawing maps while exploring and getting treasure. It made me approach the OSR and look for a system that will suit my taste.
Nicely done. It's the DIY aspect coupled with the touchstone of legacy D&D systems that drew me in like a moth to a flame.
OSR is full of independents this inspires me
far more than supporting corporations .
The coolest thing ever to come out from W.o.t.C is the O.G.L
What I liked about the old system was the Class Roles. Fighters had HP, Armor, and multi attacks. Thieves Snuck, Found Traps, and Picked Locks. The Everyone Can Do Everything idea has eliminated those roles. Thieves don't backstab anymore, they just try to make sure an ally is nearby. Dex does as much damage as strength. Wizards just pump out spells, but are hampered by Concentration. In the old game, you could have an Invisible, Hasted Fighter, you just had to be careful not to run out of spells.
Concentration killed all the fun for wizards.
But hey, I have a great Dex, so my 11th-level elven wizard is a battlefield juggernaut with her dagger +2 and her 102hp now. Why on Earth did I accept to convert her into a 5E character?
Sigh...
@@SimonAshworthWood Concentration was associated with the casting action.
You would lose your spell if hit by a Magic Missile/arrow while casting it.
But said Magic Missile/arrow would not dispel your Fly spell if already cast.
Earlier than 1st edition? Huh ? 😋
By the way, we switched back to ADD2 with the aforementioned character and simultaneously play a 5E campaign.
I started playing D&D again about 3 years ago and love OSR stuff. I had the good fortune to run into a DM who was very much OSR. I think you did a good job of capturing what it's all about because it's partially real stuff and partially an overall feel.
Good gravy, just discovered your channel after backing a 5e/OSR Kickstarter. So happy to have discovered this.
This is a wonderful video, thanks for posting Ben!
You seriously deserve waaay more subscribers. What great videos
Mork Borg was also a blast, and met the criteria for OSR very well....a post apocalyptic adventure with a horror feel. Really like this channel!
Literally last night I was searching this channel for an explanation video on OSR. Thanks for the instant gratification!
I don't remember how I stumbled on your channel but coming from an old 3.5e player who likes the complicated mechanics and number crunching of epic and homebrew, I do enjoy all your product vids.
I've only recently started working on my own setting but I've gotten a ton of ideas and inspiration from books you've covered like Godbound, Metamorphica and Veins of the Earth.
Keep up the good job!
Thank you so much for making Knave. It's so simple my 5 year old can play it! I'm using Kevin Crawford's solo rules on top of it and using S&W bestiary with it. Love the OSR.
5E player: "Are we ready to tell an amazing story?"
AD&D Player: "Nope we are ready to loot a crypt and build a fortress."
Yes. And both are fine. The rampant elitism of many fans of the OSR is really getting on my nerves, as a fan of both new and old style of play.
I like a mix of both.
An entirely "story-focused" campaign tends to run into the problem of nearly no player agency and the increasing diminishing of stakes when PCs literally cannot be killed.
A campaign with no story only focused on looting and amassing wealth then makes for a very poor roleplaying experience since you're pretty much forced to have one-dimensional stereotype characters as character death is so rampant.
Mixing a very basic story outline with somewhat dangerous encounters with the very deadly fight sprinkled in is the best approach in my opinion. The players get to have their characters and develop them beyond simple archetypes while also keeping the tension of them not being invincible.
@@boianko Yes, I agree. On that aspect, games that mix modern and old-school styles of play get to shine. Forbidden Lands is truly a gem in its genre.
If I may ask, Is it possible to have a narrative, story-oriented game with OSR? :/ or is 5e better suited for that? I like the idea of complete creative freedom in creating my own world and narrative in 5e. Can I also do that in an OSR-setting, or is that really more suited to crypt-looting-dungeon-delving with no or almost no story as they used to do it back then?
@@Labroidas It is, but with OSR there's a constant risk of your characters dying off, which makes it pretty hard to have a story that focuses around them/has them deeply engaged in it.
In the early to mid 80s, it was all “homebrew”*. We didn’t even use that word. Almost every group had its own house rules because there weren’t rules covering every last damn thing. The DMs set up campaigns with loose plots, but the worlds were more like sandboxes. Some DMs’ games were very basic: go to the dungeon, come back to town, rinse and repeat. Other DMs were skilled at responding to unexpected character actions, and some of those were great at improvised PC-NPC interactions. (The best DM I ever played with was an acting major, and I remember one game where we didn’t roll the dice even once.)
Bottom line was everything tended to be more free form.
There is the commonly held opinion that early D&D was deadly. This was true for magic users at low levels and it could be true for foolhardy adventurers. One player I knew was constantly getting his characters killed, almost every session or two. But for the most part, we players learned to not get killed rather quickly. Or rather to not let our characters get killed too quickly. 😅
*TSR sold modules, but I never played one straight. One campaign I was in started with a highly modified Keep on the Borderlands, but it moved on from there pretty quickly.
I still play 1st and 2nd edition AD&D. Still running games, and have been since the mid 1980s. I can't remember ever having trouble learning old school AD&D. It was all pretty straight forward if you read the books. Things were a little scattered and unorganized in the 1st edition DMG for sure, but it wasn't rocket science, folks. OSR stuff sounds like fun, and if it helps people to learn to have fun gaming, I'm all for that.
I recently got into Dungeon Crawl Classics. Wondered what the hell “osr” was in recommended RUclips videos. Thanks!
Great video as usual, Ben. Thank you.
Out of the points you made, what is really frustrating to me in 5e is what you mentioned regarding immersion: of you played Rules Cyclopedia and 2e, it's unbelievable that nowadays - instead of the player having to do the thinking - is the PC who "Does the thinking."
I mean,"Give me a perception roll" is an absurd!
Back in the day (1992), my DM TPK'ed us because we did not explicitly say "We look up right after we open the door." The BBEG, a Wizard, was levitating, we did not see him, he casted Sleep, we all failed, and he slit it our throats.
If it was today, one of us (5 PCs) would very likely have succeeded at the perception roll and thus we would have survived - with NO merit!
“Player led” so essential. I’m really glad I was pointed in your direction.
I so wish newer players would actually participate in progressing the game instead of just sitting there like the GM is putting on a one-man show.
@@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself So how does that work? I remember playing these "full sandbox" type games when I was younger. They always started with us finding ourselves in a tavern or somewhere else and then.... nothing. How are the players just suppose to start doing shit?
@@Top1-p2x I agree. Even in Lost Mines of Phandelver, every party I've had gets analysis paralysis and has to be pushed or approached by an NPC to actually do something, if you try to let them have unbridled freedom. Otherwise they're like "duhhh....let's go shopping now then I guess?" Before eventually deciding on a quest purely because it's something to do. These are players who beforehand claim that they LOVE roleplaying and getting into character.
Sometimes they go "exploring," and then they can't handle a simple non-hostile interaction without going uhhhhhh every three seconds, and it's when you find out that not all socially awkward people are actually creative.
Really cool video! Agree with all points and I fell in love with OSR as soon as I realized it existed. Big fan of KNAVE too, it really inspired my adventure system.
One suggestion, it might be cool to have a graphical list of the points you make as you go through the discussion.
cool vid, u gained a sub. I never heard of OSR and never played old but been homebrewing campaigns in this style for a few years now. homebrew classes, races, world, monsters, potions, spells, rules, etc, and more of a focus on a realistic and tough dungeons
I love the OSR! Warms the cockles.
^ Loves warm cockles
The OSR movement will take over the industry.
Great vid. I've been a fiend for the osr and retroclones lately. I've been a roller since the original AD&D. But this new crop of homebrew stuff is amazing. :)
Loved this. I can tell you as someone who’s delved into writing a 5E product, there’s a LOT of amazing and imaginative content in OSR products, as well as a much higher level of quality in book binding, cover materials and other production.
I work in the printing industry and I find the WoTC standard for these poor. OSR producers seem to care more. It’s gaming products and ideas BY gamers FOR gamers.
Well met, Ben
Yes
I had no knowledge of this Old School Renaissance. I've been playing D&D for about thirty years and we would always "modify" rules that we did not like or agree with. We have started doing that with some of the rules for 5e. I personally do not like the attunment of magical items and being able to only have three items attuned at one time.
I think attunement is a cool idea but was used on too many things, I think it would be much better as a very rare mechanic used for the strongest of magic items, not like 70% of the list.
Besides D&D I would also add some other Old School Ames to your definition of OSR. Traveller and Runequest, there have been retro clones of both those games using SRD's and OGL.
You kind of distilled my memories of early 80s
That would me as well bruddah. I was into playing with judges guild folks, still have some of the Judges Guild Modules ....classic
I do still really enjoy pathfinder and a number of other newer systems but I think OSRs are definitely a fascinating set of systems that I am really interested in learning more about, im glad your channel exists so I’ll be able to do so far more efficiently that individually looking for systems are reading through entire rulebook just to get a sense of them
I like the board game feel I get from your osr videos. It reminds me of the first time I saw dnd was a board game when we had cards for our items. I was really little and only ever got to play that once but it made me always want to try playing that again.
Great video! I started playing D&D, mostly as a DM, right after it was first published (edition zero). All the excellent points you have made (which is why I loved the game) are spot on. I quit playing when D&D had just changed too much in directions I didn’t enjoy (around edition 3.5). I tried to pick up tabletop RPGs again with Pathfinder...and I tried... I really tried, but I just could not get into it. I actually started to loathe all RPG’s. I thought my tabletop RPG days were over and that it had just been a romanticized and idealized phase of my youth, and an interest long gone. Then I found the OSR. For me, this may be a bit about nostalgia, but, frankly, I think the OSR is far better than the original materials that we had back in the 70’s! As you correctly pointed out, some of the early written materials are not so easy to learn from. I myself learned from someone who learned from someone who learned from Gygax. Then we all taught others how to play. I and others didn’t even have the booklets yet. We bought those later. The new Indy designers and their products are fabulous! I LOVE their stuff! I look forward to watching more of your videos.
As someone who plays alot of video games, and had a little interest peaked in D&D, upon comparing older and newer versions, I noticed monsters kept getting nerfed, and players kept getting buffed. If I were to homebrew, I'd have 5E characters, but older versions of certain monsters. For example, fairy dragons should be OP like they used to be (I.E. near MAGIC IMMUNITY), but also more adorable. I think things like that would discourage murder hoboism, since you'd be questioning what can and cannot kill you when you get wrecked by a few dragons the size of a housecat when you tried to harm them.
Three things that made 1st edition DnD awesome. Potion miscibility roll, Psionics, and a true bard was probably the most powerful bastard in the game. Bonus was the conversion between swords and sorcery vs sci fi vs six guns! You could literally play a guy clad in power armor with a sheriff with a 45 and a shot gun! Along side of a wizard with a wand of wonder! Sometimes old school is best school! Although Thac0 still requires a college degree! Lol!
I plan to create a world where the PCs have to catch and cook to survive in the wild between towns. There will need to be a recipe book for making rations based on specific ingredients, and BBQ recipes. The stores will not stock rations to force PCs to craft their own. The PCs could cook a party meal during a short or long rest, then make rations from leftovers to eat on the road.
To make it work, a time tracker will need to be used. I could also make it so that the only way to regain HP during a short or long rest will be to eat something, and the amount of HP gained will depend on the dish eaten.
I haven’t played D&D since 1981 but I still have a few of the 0 & 1st edition books with a few in mint condition.
I absolutely love the OSR. The products are great quality in both writing and printing, and no matter what edition of D&D you prefer you can find _something amazing_ to add to your game. If you're of a mind to do so, conversion is extremely simple, even with a more complex rule system like 3.5 or Pathfinder.
What I find fascinating about it is the feel of exploring a real dangerous world, because your character could die easily, and the encounters are not balanced. You can encounter monsters much stronger than you at any moment, and you better hide, run, or think about some clever way to overcome it.
Also the simplicity of the system, not relaying on hundreds of rules and subrules.
You feel much more immersed in that fantasy world.
This also exist for Star Wars. The first system (now refred to as "D6") was the best. And is now even better with fans having polished a few rule details.
Truth!
yayyy I hope lots of the newcomers to d&d get into playing and making OSR stuff
Another feature of OSR games is that you can easily port a character from one OSR product into another, with minimal tweaking. This can even be done across genres in some cases. One example of this is the several games produced by Eric Bloat. You can easily take characters from Survive This Zombies, into Dungeons and Demogorgons, then into Vigilante City essentially combining Horror, Kids on Bikes Fantasy, and Super Heroes into one campaign with the same group of characters.
At least one notable creator of OSR products has claimed that this portability is the hallmark of an OSR game. That is largely the result of the common mechanics of having six attributes; hit points or health points; armor class or defense score; and some kind of skill system based on class archetypes, or professional skill sets.
Excellent video, as always.
Yeah, that's a great point.
Thanks for that video. It may be the little push I needed to finally give OSR a try. Now, I'm off to try and convince my friends to Play with me!
ADnD 2nd and DnD 3.5 were my introductions into tabletop roleplaying - rolling on skills and profiencies to define what a character is able to and what (s)he isn't.
What changed my approach to roleplaying was Matthew Finch's Quick Primer for Old School Gaming - even when I am still not using all his "zen moments" the old but fresh ideas into that read worthy essay were a great inspiration to me as a player and a dungeonmaster.
It is good to see that OSR is still a big inspiration to the whole community :)
Love the channel. I've been DMing since AD&D. I have hacked rule sets for decades. Thanks for all the work you've put into this channel.
Excellent, educational and informative. Thank you.
Great video and you 'hit the nail on the head' of what OSR actually is.
I play 5e, I’m a returning Ad&d player. I learned today that I’m an OSR player. I make my own worlds, don’t balance anything and don’t care what wotc says( I’m happy they’re there, but it’s MY .. no my group’s game).
Thanks for the video. It helped me put words on how I play differently than others, no better, just different.
I learned 1st edition AD&D back in 1982 and than transitioned to 2nd edition in 1989. Have always prefer those two to all other's(after all 1st/2nd edition of ad&d are forward/backwards compatible
This is really good. Gonna have to cross post it to our social media for Secrets of Blackmoor.
You just laid out half of the reasons why I can't get into newer editions LOL. I used to play a 2nd edition that borrowed heavily from 1st edition and it was awesome. About a year ago I bought the newer editions and I can't get inspired to play them. I'd love to find an osr group.
Jason Voorhees That’s exactly what me and my old gaming crew did. It was an amalgam of 1e and 2e. We did that forever till everyone married, moved, or just vanished. 3e was ok. 4 was absolute trash. 5 is ok but too geared to making some kind of video game character come to life.
@@NotAlrightSpider And thats another big problem I have. You used the right words for it, too. It feels like they're trying to translate a video game toon to pencil and paper. I understand how it makes the game more appealing to a newer crowd, but it isn't doing anything for me.
@@danielgoldberg5357 What, you mean you don't want arching pauldrons that are bigger than your great helm? 😆
@@danielgoldberg5357 "one campaign" ...for like 3 years? Thats not fast leveling.
Point #4, definitely. The core mechanics got you started and, beyond that, you made your world your own. Gygax even encouraged DMs to modify rules to fit their setting. Homebrew and house rules were the norm and not the exception. Unless you were playing tournament at GenCon, I don't know anyone in the 80s who were playing straight by the book.
Agreed.
Hi Ben! Great video, as usual!
On this topic, I just read "Through Dungeons Deeper: A Survival Guide For Dungeoneers As Written By A Survivor". It's a fun and useful read for new (and not-so-new) old-school players and GMs. I'd love to see you do a review!
This is great and inspiring. Thank you!
Having played since 1975, I can say the 2nd Edition was the best. It filled many of the holes from the first edition, and provided a lot of information to further the experience. But, the rules were not as scattershot as 5th, and not as stringent as 3rd.
Hey that was interesting. I might check out that Old School Essentials you mentioned. Thanks!
Once again, thank you, Ben.
I've seen a lot of the OSR crowd try to define 'why?' before, but it comes out like an anachronistic grognard or a relentless hipster too many times (or plagued by low production standards). I am one of those 'been playing it this way since..." guys - so I have a bit of rose colored nostalgia sometimes - but the honest reasons I love the OSR isn't always understood in my Pathfinder/5e dominated landscape (and it's sparse in Vermont, as is). You nailed the core of it. There was something lost, a long time ago.
I do personally believe that Hackmaster 4e (which is actually 1e of HM) really spurred the OSR - the difference is that Kenzer had a license to reproduce AD&D. But, almost against the later grain, it chose to be very, very crunchy - but it felt right, and the writing was reverent of the old style. I realize that the High Gygaxian prose turns a lot of newer gamers off, but it never ceases to make me smile... I swear I learned English from Lovecraft and Gygax sometimes.
I feel exactly the same: OSR movement is refreshing, refreshing indeed!
Your channel and these videos were recently recommended to me.
I have been printing and binding pdf files of original D&D books to read and enjoy.
I began playing in 4th edition, and despite it's flaws, I liked a house rule modified version of that game. I like 5e as well. However, there is an appeal to the older versions of the game, especially if some things were cleaned up. I am very interested.
I never left the Old School, I admit I tried with 3.5 and I've looked at 4e and 5e but everything seems so watered down and/or videogamey... I learned OD&D on my own from reading the books as well as 1st edition and 2nd edition. No the rules dont cover everything, but they were never supposed to; you don't see a rule for a situation, make it up, but remember your ruling for consistency. One of my favorite parts of 2nd edition was the expansion of weapon and non-weapon proficiencies. I really did try to give WoTC and Hasbro the benefit of the doubt with their newer editions but they've been consistently underwhelming with their rule sets, their story paths and modules are a different story though, thank the powers that be that conversion to older rule sets is fairly easy to do. Sorry for the book length comment.
last played about 1982. my friend an old dm and i came up with our own character generator plus combat charts, you may hit everytime, but his plate absorbs so much damage.
This is a brilliant and insightful video! This past few days, I have been trying to hone in on how to define "OSR" as a noun rather than an adjective. I already know you and I do not agree 100%. But that is okay! I have been in this discussion with people that would disagree with both of us and each other. Yet we will all agree on some universal points.
I propose this as a definition of OSR:
"RPGs from the late 1900s and the modern interpretations thereof".
That would cover both old games and retoclones. It would also include a lot of nonD&D games, which is another debate entirely. I think it is worthy of consideration, but we can set that aside for the nonce. However, my definition excludes OSR-is games, 5e patches like Mork Borg, DCC, or FTD. I love those games, don't get me wrong! I just think that the should be categorized as "in the style of", as to differentiate them from retroclones and originals in philosophical discussions.
And philosophical discussions boost your algorithm!
:-D
2 additional thoughts that help explain the difference between OSR-ish school of thought and the Official streams:
1: much of the rules build-up was based on tournament play. Everyone needed to have the same ruleset to be able to better determine "who won." House ruling didn't cut it. If it's not in "the rules" you couldn't do it. The bottom line is the bottom line: tournaments paid for a lot of things that simply could not be done (financially speaking, in particular) prior to the interwebs, or even desktop computers.
2: OSR philosophy is much more like open source software (Wizards didn't invent the idea of "open source", although applying it as OGL was a neat trick). By allowing others to scrutinize your "source code", game mechanics got a lot of testing and improvements.
Yes, the 0DD, B/X, 1e were all...let's just say they definitely benefited from rewrites with a UX perspective they did *not* have. (I still have bits of my original 0DD *photocopies :') )
Lovingly,
Grognard
Jeff Stormer the UX improvements that the OSR movement has brought forward really can’t be overstated. B/X Essentials (now Old School Essentials) and the preceding parade of retroclones may not have made any revolutionary rules changes, but they definitely improved the layout and design for use at the table of both reference books and adventure material. 1e’s DMG is a delight to read on your own time, but if you’re trying to reference it at play you’re likely in dire straits unless you have the location of each rule memorized (and if that’s the case, you likely just have the rule itself memorized haha). The layout and usability improvements that newer retroclones have is amazing and contemporary source book writers should be taking notes...
Colin you're spot on. Reading those earlier versions was a lot like wandering through a flea market, nothing organized, totally randomized, and you never knew where the next delight or treasure would be found.
Not what you needed when referencing and refereeing on the fly. Of course nowadays on a digital device, any decent search engine would solve that challenge handily.
I had my old dmg totally worked over: diy tabs (eg scraps of paper & staples), crayon colored dog ears, paper clips, bookmarks that were taped or stapled in place, a bazillion more bookmarks that were not. I eventually began my own index but gave up after a while because it needed to.be rewritten too often. And my handwriting really didnt help.
Kids (eg under 40) these days (who just will.NOT stay off.my lawn!) Dont know how good they have it!
Grognard
This is fascinating!
Part of the issue with jumping right into the AD&D rules (1e) and why people find it confusing from the original books is that it assumes a certain familiarity with the rules from basic D&D (i.e the basic through companion (and even master) box sets (compiled in the 90's into the Rules Cyclopedia)).
Fan of the old school, find that in the modern incarnations that characters are more over powered.
It was basically the same issue that OD&D had, which was pretty inscrutable unless you were familiar with wargaming norms at the time. Or unless someone showed you how to play.
Great video and a nice primer for those OSR curious people out there.
I started at age 10 in 1980 with the original 1974 books I found in a NJ mall hobby shop that were dirt cheap so my mother bought them for me.. I then moved on to basic and quickly after that 1st edition.. I've been living the OSR my whole life.. Old School Essentials, Lamantation of the Flame Princess, Swords and Wizardry and others are really Crushing it with beautifully produced books and cleaner rule sets. It's a great time to be alive if you like such games particularly if you are turned off by the WotC shit show, they never handled the IP properly imop since day one and I never bought in heavily on anything they made
Could you do a video comparing OSR games geared towards "which OSR game is for you" I'm very interested in running an OSR campaign but idk which one I want to invest my time and money on.
Well, having started in Basic (the red set) in early 80's I say that it's more rules light than any other RPG I've played. We had fun while playing it. If it had one disadvantage it was the lack of skills, but it was sort of remedied in - I think - the green set (the third set). But....as a GM (me) one should be careful in awarding coins because they were xp!
A lot of spells had been removed from D&D when 3.0 came out. Nearly a third of wizard spells! Really good ones too. I don't know about cleric spells but I guess those were thrown out as well. That's too bad, but I worked together with one of my friends to reconstruct many of the lost wizard spells to 3.5. ^^
Finally, there is some advice on the second page in the Basic set from Gary Gygax : "These rules are supposed to be a guide. They are not final. If you like insert your own rules." I didn't quote because I haven't the book right here - I'm on holiday - but you get the gist. 😁
I sort of have my own kind of OSR. Having been increasingly dissatisfied with 5e, I was looking through the 3.5e books, saw bits and bobs I liked, and began making 5e conversions of them, paying more heed to the old way instead of the 5e way. That is to say, ignoring 5e's more silly limits like no epic levels or CR 30 max. I started cobbling together my own hybrid system. It's built on 5e, but then incorporates spells, concepts, etc from 3.5e and 2e and 1e that I find and like. My players have grown fond of it over time.
I played AD&D back in the late 80's right before 2nd edition came out. You did have to be smart, and the game didn't coddle you. If you played stupidly or carelessly, you'd be rolling up a new character before long. I don't miss the backwards armor system though.
Yeah, most people who play old-school systems today have switched to ascending Armor Class. The math is the same, it's just easier to teach.
Old school was more about setting and character development. Newer games are more about Building characters.
Jennings Cunningham what’s the difference?
I cut my teeth on ad&d then home brewed for a while. I like ad&d because it forces me to do math in a way that’s not traumatic unlike my abusive schooling were my teachers refused to believe in math learning disorders. I use it with my own kid.
Well put my friend
It's weird hearing about the 'lethality' of the old rules - when our group played 2nd Edition, we ended up limiting PCs to max 3 hit dice (as in, you never got more Hit Points after 3rd Level), because we weren't buying the idea of our characters shrugging off 10th level Fireballs in the face. A drastic and probably wrong-headed approach, but we were young!
As a long-time D&D player, I really appreciate your take.
I know this is an older post but it still needs to be said, one of the reasons I am having a difficult time as an adult getting back into the hobby is because of the new push for dungeon master plot-driven Grand Story arcs. While they can be fun there is something to be had in player led Adventures that eventually end up with greatness or a tragedy depending on the dice.
This. I just had a an official module campaign implode because I let the players screw up and get themselves and their NPC companion killed because they hung around in a combat that went bad. They were really angry when I refused to save them.
Problem with all these later editions is power creep the player characters progressively become more and more powerful a first level 5th edition character is as powerful as a split-level first edition character
What about Basic Fantasy RPG? Could you do a review of the system and point out the pros and cons?
AD&D (1ed) was the BEST D&D.
Buying the OSR books in 3,2,1
Very clarifiyng. Thanks!
When wizards took over AD&D they threw out a set of rules that lasted for about 23 years yet wizards d&d versions only seem to last between 6 to 8 years before they change the rules again and in 2 years there's going to be a new d&d rules set .
Wizards problem was they wanted to port their magic the gathering ccg into a tabletop rpg and once they figured out how to do it after they bought TSR out they switched rules set to emulate magic the gathering intabletop form .
It's evident by wizards stripping away everything that set AD&D apart from other fantasy rpg's because there were no longer any restrictions on what race could be what class to match it's ccg magic the gathering .
Even more evidence of that fact is the inclusion of races directly ported from magic the gathering such as the Loxodon from Ravnica which was also made into a d&d setting .
Wizards doesn't even understand that an adventure doesn't have to be tied into one giant huge adventure with lots , sub plot and ending with a good fight ( I hate MMO terms used in tabletop games ) and they call that a campaign when the original definition for rpg's was the setting of the game which is why you see on the original setting of the Forgoten Realms said " campaign setting " and just about every adventure was around 30 to 40 pages long execpt a few that tied together and not every adventure had to have a major fight at the end .
Wizards also thinks the DM has to tell his story to the players which they then go through when in reality it was never about the Dm's story but about the players creating the stories of their characters .
And open sandbox hexcrawling was a major part of the game because before they created the first campaign setting ( the world of Greyhawk ) we had no setting but the ones we made yet today's Dm's don't know how to run sandbox games because everything is handed to them to just read from a book causing a lack of imagination on everyone's part .
So you end up with every single game running exactly the sane way which again steals DM creativity from them ....
It took five months. :D
I don't know a lot about old school d&d, but I am pretty familiar with a system called Dungeon Crawl Classics. I enjoy that system a lot, I just wish my 5e group could appreciate it too(they go for more of a "Critical Roll-esque" narrative, which is by all means quite fun and cool). How similar is DCC to OSR stuff, or classic d&d?
D&D and The Colored Box Sets are technically different settings. The Box Sets Mystra or Hollow Earth. I learned on Mystra then 2ndEd AD&D came out and I moved over.
I love 5e, it’s the first version of D&D I’ve played. I love the role playing and the dice add a fun aspect. I played Edge of the Empire before that and had tried Pathfinder. I’ve played some AD&D, looked into OSR stuff. I really want to play Castles & Crusades, and hopefully I’ll get the chance. S&W seems interesting too but I don’t want to overwhelm my group.
I'd recommend Castles & Crusades for any OSR-curious 5e groups, since the core mechanics are nearly identical.
You need to find the original paperback books of Arduin by David Hargrave, everything you say you were looking for is covered in Arduin. It is its own game system, but its in over 6 paperback books, we never used it, we just cherry picked spells, items, monsters, crit and fumble charts and many more things to make our campaigns more alive and dangerous. Chris
I am one of the players from the 70's. I never as a DM ran appropriately leveled encounters for my players. I always ran on open sandbox game. Players drove the story, always. I did have modules and dungeons in the game, but you had to find them and the hooks to find them. Yes at first level you could encounter an overwhelming encounter. Running, diplomacy, hiding, fighting and yes surrendering is an option in every encounter. Yes you can be captured and turned into a slave or indentured servant with a contract and a release clause. So yeah, old school is lots of fun and depends on the DM and the group of players. My goal as a DM is always make each player feel they are part of their own story, that their choices matter. Then I always try to make the party feel like they are going to DIE, then watch them sweat, moan and complain and then do the miraculous and either triumph, survive or get away. I know I did my job well when at the start of the next session, they are all talking about the last session and they cannot believe how they survived. Yeah style of DM and players matters.
In my day "rules" were known as "guidelines." "Knowing when to ignore the dice" was a part of the DM's philosophy. The goal was to create a cohesive story that the players are allowed to flesh out along with the DM. Players' choices effected actions in the game, even if it was a module adventure, which was typically pretty linear in format. The idea was simple. Use the rules when they were necessary, don't worry so much about them when they weren't needed, and modify them when it seemed called for. DMing was (and still should be) an art form. Today many RPGers seem to be obsessed with RULES and official setting information. I'm guessing that attitude comes from years of playing "RPG" video games on computers instead of table top games. Most video games aren't exactly role playing games, even if they proclaim otherwise. There's generally no way for you to have true interaction and input other than some sort of linear response.
I frequently find that modern gamers don't seem to be able to tap into their own, individual imaginations as easily as gamers once did. Having a great imagination was a big part of the success of role playing games back in the '70s and '80s. Games like D&D and ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS hung their hats on that. Mostly it was theatre of the mind gaming. Few ever really used miniatures because we had healthy imaginations for visualizing combat and situations, and skilled DMs who could weave a visual story. Painting pictures with words was essential. A good DM helped immerse the players into a fleshed out setting, and the players used their acting skills and personality to do the same for their characters in the game. It wasn't so much about rolling dice every 5 minutes. You rolled dice only when it was truly necessary to do so. The story remained the thing of true importance.
While there were a lot more rules in the ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, it is hardly the "mess" that modern gamers often claim it was. It wasn't particularly well organized because the game did expand, and updates were part of that expansion. The more updates that came out, the more books that you needed to play the game, right? No. Not really. That's just how TSR made their buck. You could play AD&D with only three books: The Players Guide, the DMG, and the Monster Manual. Not that tough really. Sure, they made more Monster Manuals and all sort of other books, but those were supplemental volumes. 2nd Edition did a lot to streamline and organize things, and that did help.
Getting back to the RPG rules business. The game with the best and most streamline rules ever doesn't matter doodly squat if your DM isn't very good. The story is the thing, not the rules. You're all telling a story together. Players serve as heroes (and sometimes villains) in the tale. The goal is to have fun. Rules can't really help you with that. They are just gaming mechanics. If you're not having fun folks, it might not be the gaming mechanics and system that is truly at issue. That might factor a little, but having fun gaming depends on having a good DM to run the game, and good players that contribute to the excitement. Nothing kills games more than rules, so that's why many of the early forms of D&D referred to the rules as "guidelines."
All that said, I do like what's going on with the OSR games being produced. Taking the game back to the fundamentals and concentrating on home brewed campaigns and adventures is a good thing I think. Most of these games seem to capture that original D&D spirit, and I think that's wonderful! I just think that too many RPG gamers get caught up in rules and game mechanics sometimes. It's not the tools, it's the fools. A good imagination and some skill at roleplaying goes a long, long way towards having successful, fun gaming sessions.
Is it fair to say that aside from the differences in rules, that there is also usually some difference in play styles with OSR with regard to the degree of role playing? It seems like a lot of the 5e game sessions you see on RUclips are so heavily focused on the role playing aspect that there's very little "G" in their RPG. I suspect that's a CR influence.
When I started playing in the early 80s, I knew only a small number of people who played Dungeons and Dragons. I don't recall any of us referring to it as a role playing game, or as an RPG. It was always simply referred to as Dungeons and Dragons or just D&D. No one I knew played in character. Most everyone I knew who played were drawn to the game for one or more of the following: (1) were fans of Lord of the Rings, Conan, or other fantasy literature and enjoyed the emersion into a fantasy setting, (2) were avid readers, especially of fantasy and/or sci fi, and simply enjoyed reading the game books, (3) were mathematically minded, and were intrigued by the role (roll) of probability in the rules, (4) liked the challenge of creatively solving situations, puzzles, etc. No one I knew who played D&D used dialects, accents, or in character voices. It never occurred to me that this might be part of the game for some.
I stepped away from the game for many years, and only recently became interested again. I was really surprised to see that so many people now seem to approach the game more as improvisational acting, with the game itself as almost an afterthought (likely also a CR influence). That aspect, along with the imagery of the game materials/artwork become more and more Disney-esque and much less dark as the original is what draws me more to the OSR. Is that a fairly common experience, or am I in a minority of those who never really accentuated the dramatics/role playing aspect?
Immersion into a fantasy setting, such as the classic literature, with the combination of war gaming rules is what drew me in.
I'm an old school player too, first char was Al 'Azareth my Ranger, and currently have all the AD&D core books from 1st through to 5th. I agree with you about CR, I don't really enjoy their show as I find it too mannered. They are professionals and it lacks that feel of a great gaming session to me.
Don't get me wrong I'm not belittling CRs many talents but to me there is something lacking, I recently started watching Dungeon Dudes and their games feel more fun, more chill and most importantly more like the games me and my friends used to play.
No edition has changed our gaming since 2edition...mostly I like the additions of books - to read and laugh.