HypthtcllySpkng
*eyeroll*
Specifically, if a player asked you not to include things in your game without regard for their choices, even if they'd never know; would you still do it?
The state of Post-OSR content
- Thread starter Yora
- Start date
Specifically, if a player asked you not to include things in your game without regard for their choices, even if they'd never know; would you still do it?
The1True
8, 8, I forget what is for
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Here's an excerpt from the introduction to The New C Standard: An Economic and Cultural Commentary by Derek M. Jones
I feel as though this is a the heart of why there is so little willingness for edition-hopping: the cost vs. benefit. Jones was referring to resistance to changes in an established programing language, but there are similarity with D&D.
For example, I am convince most OD&Ders rail against the "stupid" complexity and disorganization of AD&D mainly due to an unwillingness to expended the effort to (re)learn it---i.e. the benefits are not immediately recognizable given the effort. However, that same crew happily grab the expanded spells, classes, monsters, and treasure listed in the AD&D book because all that is low hanging fruit that can easily be made to fit in their existing mental framework.
Similar arguments could be made about the 3e to 4e shift (the benefits were not clearly spelled out, and the complexity/changes price seemed too high). Also, 5e was a clear attempt to lower the complexity bar to get new players into the game (and older players to reunite)---and it worked.
In the context of changing the C programming language, Jones (who was involved with the language standard) seems to be waiving a cautionary flag against radical, frequent, or frivolous change---because of the human factor. Perhaps WotC should take heed as well, and find a way to generate revenue without another reboot.
Once you've found your "Jeep", you don't see the benefit of change...you just want to play D&D. There's probably a fairly small window in which a players or DM's mind is open to tinkering with rules. I feel as if mine is closing (closed?). When I talk about the OD&D/AD&D "vibe", perhaps I am just exemplifying what Aristotle said: "things that are said some other way do not seem the same to all but seem rather incomprehensible". I cannot connect what is being said in 5e to the type of game I like. It's not that it's not possible---it's just being said in a different language...one I do not speak, so it sounds like gibbering-badness to me.
There is a wonderful quote with regards to coding format which is (tongue firmly planted in cheek) called The One True Brace Style. (@The1True!)
The Commandment:
My favorite part: "...even if thou likest it not"
LOL!
There it is, in a nut shell. I offer up The First Commandment for a Newbie DM:
The other option is to, like the OP @Yora decided, convince yourself that for what you are trying to do, D&D just isn't a good fit---and then go play some other game. The Commandment is truly edition agnostic, but that last little bit of advice is not. Once you've truly learned the edition you are using, and discover it's just not doing it for you...then perhaps it's time for a new pasture.
Tired of all the "house ruling" that was happening with OD&D (due to ambiguity), I believe this was what Gygax & Co. were attempting with AD&D. Not a straight-jacket for creativity---just one for misplaced creativity. In the case of rule-mod'ing, Better is probably the enemy of Good Enough. They just wanted to get everyone speaking the same language (e.g. at tournament$). The Holmes Beginner rule-set was a similar (initial) attempt at unification. Ironically, AD&D ended up being too "advanced" for the average Joe and instead of uniting the tribes, was D&D's Tower of Babel. (The B/X rules...I would argue were attempting something else entirely, and I personally struggled at it's initial publication with the vibe/language shift.).
For me, moving from OD&D and learning AD&D (properly) has had a rewarding cost-benefit. I am glad that---through the efforts of the folks that produced the trailblazing retro-clone OSRIC---that option is still alive and kicking. I'm also thankful there are sites like K&KA and The Blue Bard to teach me how AD&D generally works better once I stop ignoring half of the rules!
After that, I'm not sold---i.e. the benefits are just not obvious. I love to learn new things, but "it's simpler/easier" is just not a sales-pitch that resonances with me. "There's more knobs" (for players to fiddle with) seems just like bad design practice (e.g. tits on a bull). Popularity has never been a big motivator in my decisions (unless I'm worried about support). Lastly, change for the sake of change also seems kinda pointless and dumb (unle$$ you are WotC).
When I came back to the hobby in 2012, it was overwhelming. So many rules! So many systems!
Do I pick one? Or is it a smorgasboard?
My thinking now is that's it the former, but had initially assumed it was the latter---after all OD&D was extremely DIY. I had even a some point mistakenly bought into the twin myths of "broken" and "progress"---but that was just salemens' FUD. Still, my sincerest thanks to all who genuinely helped me navigate the edition maze and find my way home.
I just wanted to close out this ancient thread at a personal level. My hardback copy of OSRIC arrived in the mail from Blade Blade Publishing yesterday. It's beautiful.
Jones said:
Jones said:
Jones said:
I feel as though this is a the heart of why there is so little willingness for edition-hopping: the cost vs. benefit. Jones was referring to resistance to changes in an established programing language, but there are similarity with D&D.
For example, I am convince most OD&Ders rail against the "stupid" complexity and disorganization of AD&D mainly due to an unwillingness to expended the effort to (re)learn it---i.e. the benefits are not immediately recognizable given the effort. However, that same crew happily grab the expanded spells, classes, monsters, and treasure listed in the AD&D book because all that is low hanging fruit that can easily be made to fit in their existing mental framework.
Similar arguments could be made about the 3e to 4e shift (the benefits were not clearly spelled out, and the complexity/changes price seemed too high). Also, 5e was a clear attempt to lower the complexity bar to get new players into the game (and older players to reunite)---and it worked.
In the context of changing the C programming language, Jones (who was involved with the language standard) seems to be waiving a cautionary flag against radical, frequent, or frivolous change---because of the human factor. Perhaps WotC should take heed as well, and find a way to generate revenue without another reboot.
Once you've found your "Jeep", you don't see the benefit of change...you just want to play D&D. There's probably a fairly small window in which a players or DM's mind is open to tinkering with rules. I feel as if mine is closing (closed?). When I talk about the OD&D/AD&D "vibe", perhaps I am just exemplifying what Aristotle said: "things that are said some other way do not seem the same to all but seem rather incomprehensible". I cannot connect what is being said in 5e to the type of game I like. It's not that it's not possible---it's just being said in a different language...one I do not speak, so it sounds like gibbering-badness to me.
There is a wonderful quote with regards to coding format which is (tongue firmly planted in cheek) called The One True Brace Style. (@The1True!)
The Commandment:
10 Commandments of C Programming said:
My favorite part: "...even if thou likest it not"
LOL!There it is, in a nut shell. I offer up The First Commandment for a Newbie DM:
"Thou shall learn the D&D rules completely (even if thou likest them not). Instead of modifying them, use your creativity to make wonderful game content for your players---otherwise all you will have done is created new impediments to human understanding."
The other option is to, like the OP @Yora decided, convince yourself that for what you are trying to do, D&D just isn't a good fit---and then go play some other game. The Commandment is truly edition agnostic, but that last little bit of advice is not. Once you've truly learned the edition you are using, and discover it's just not doing it for you...then perhaps it's time for a new pasture.
Tired of all the "house ruling" that was happening with OD&D (due to ambiguity), I believe this was what Gygax & Co. were attempting with AD&D. Not a straight-jacket for creativity---just one for misplaced creativity. In the case of rule-mod'ing, Better is probably the enemy of Good Enough. They just wanted to get everyone speaking the same language (e.g. at tournament$). The Holmes Beginner rule-set was a similar (initial) attempt at unification. Ironically, AD&D ended up being too "advanced" for the average Joe and instead of uniting the tribes, was D&D's Tower of Babel. (The B/X rules...I would argue were attempting something else entirely, and I personally struggled at it's initial publication with the vibe/language shift.).
For me, moving from OD&D and learning AD&D (properly) has had a rewarding cost-benefit. I am glad that---through the efforts of the folks that produced the trailblazing retro-clone OSRIC---that option is still alive and kicking. I'm also thankful there are sites like K&KA and The Blue Bard to teach me how AD&D generally works better once I stop ignoring half of the rules!
After that, I'm not sold---i.e. the benefits are just not obvious. I love to learn new things, but "it's simpler/easier" is just not a sales-pitch that resonances with me. "There's more knobs" (for players to fiddle with) seems just like bad design practice (e.g. tits on a bull). Popularity has never been a big motivator in my decisions (unless I'm worried about support). Lastly, change for the sake of change also seems kinda pointless and dumb (unle$$ you are WotC).
When I came back to the hobby in 2012, it was overwhelming. So many rules! So many systems!
Do I pick one? Or is it a smorgasboard?
My thinking now is that's it the former, but had initially assumed it was the latter---after all OD&D was extremely DIY. I had even a some point mistakenly bought into the twin myths of "broken" and "progress"---but that was just salemens' FUD. Still, my sincerest thanks to all who genuinely helped me navigate the edition maze and find my way home.
I just wanted to close out this ancient thread at a personal level. My hardback copy of OSRIC arrived in the mail from Blade Blade Publishing yesterday. It's beautiful.
Last edited:
Beek Gwenders
*eyeroll*
Great post Squeen.
I understand the appeal of rules-light, but after playing (and mastering to some degree) AD&D for decades now, the leaner versions of D&D always lack that ‘little extra’ that makes a good game for my group and I. It’s either AD&D, or it’s another game entirely, not another version of D&D. The only exception being introducing kids to the game, then and only then, would I look to actual run with a different version.
As for the state of post-OSR content, the last few years have been quite telling: there is a flood of ‘sort-of-like D&D adventure + setting + game system’ publications hitting the market with a focus on style over content (Electric Bastionland, Ultraviolet Grasslands are good examples) labelling themselves as OSR. The OSR has been a boon for all of those art and design student graduates. It’s something they can really thrive in; they have the know-how to put together top quality self-published books and the entry level into the RPG industry is much lower than other forms of publishing.
I think Prince’s quote from today’s review of Vornheim is quite on the mark:
”The Artpunk is rising. After Lotfp was dealt a grievous hit under the water-line and took on water, the adherents of this terrible creed emerged filth-spattered from all of its nooks and crannies and leapt into the ocean, to search for greener pastures to infest. In its wake follow Troika, and now Mörk Börg, and with each iteration we see an inexorable decline in gameability, depth, substance and thematic fealty in favor of gorgeous presentation, posturing and off-the-wall hair-brained ideas.”
I understand the appeal of rules-light, but after playing (and mastering to some degree) AD&D for decades now, the leaner versions of D&D always lack that ‘little extra’ that makes a good game for my group and I. It’s either AD&D, or it’s another game entirely, not another version of D&D. The only exception being introducing kids to the game, then and only then, would I look to actual run with a different version.
As for the state of post-OSR content, the last few years have been quite telling: there is a flood of ‘sort-of-like D&D adventure + setting + game system’ publications hitting the market with a focus on style over content (Electric Bastionland, Ultraviolet Grasslands are good examples) labelling themselves as OSR. The OSR has been a boon for all of those art and design student graduates. It’s something they can really thrive in; they have the know-how to put together top quality self-published books and the entry level into the RPG industry is much lower than other forms of publishing.
I think Prince’s quote from today’s review of Vornheim is quite on the mark:
”The Artpunk is rising. After Lotfp was dealt a grievous hit under the water-line and took on water, the adherents of this terrible creed emerged filth-spattered from all of its nooks and crannies and leapt into the ocean, to search for greener pastures to infest. In its wake follow Troika, and now Mörk Börg, and with each iteration we see an inexorable decline in gameability, depth, substance and thematic fealty in favor of gorgeous presentation, posturing and off-the-wall hair-brained ideas.”
Pseudoephedrine
Should be playing D&D instead
I think playing a lot of systems and having a couple of favourite systems are different joys. Not quite different hobbies, but very different practices within the hobby.
I am often convinced by friends to give new systems a try, and the fun is in experimenting with these systems, seeing how they work to shape our agency within the campaign, being fluid and flexible in adapting to the system such that one acquires greater facility with it over time, etc. The novelty and acquisition of facility with, but not necessarily mastery of,the system are key components of what makes doing this fun.
At the same time, there's maybe 5 or 6 systems which I know very well, which are extremely comfortable to use and where a particular combination of mastery and transparency due to familiarity are the primary delights of using them (I don't even like at least one of these systems - D&D 3.5 - in practice, but I can absolutely make it sing from long familiarity).
These have always seemed like very different kinds of gaming to me, albeit not irreconcilably so (often a group will have people who both are masters of the system and who are newly come to it and appreciate the novelty). I think the stuff you're talking about, Squeen, is very much concerned with the question of putting the effort to shift from having the first experience towards a particular game into having the second kind. And I agree, as a description of that process, that Jones' description is broadly accurate. But I do think a lot of the time one can simply kind of diddle around playing with a system without deep comprehension and still have fun - it's just a different kind of fun to when one starts acquiring true mastery.
I am often convinced by friends to give new systems a try, and the fun is in experimenting with these systems, seeing how they work to shape our agency within the campaign, being fluid and flexible in adapting to the system such that one acquires greater facility with it over time, etc. The novelty and acquisition of facility with, but not necessarily mastery of,the system are key components of what makes doing this fun.
At the same time, there's maybe 5 or 6 systems which I know very well, which are extremely comfortable to use and where a particular combination of mastery and transparency due to familiarity are the primary delights of using them (I don't even like at least one of these systems - D&D 3.5 - in practice, but I can absolutely make it sing from long familiarity).
These have always seemed like very different kinds of gaming to me, albeit not irreconcilably so (often a group will have people who both are masters of the system and who are newly come to it and appreciate the novelty). I think the stuff you're talking about, Squeen, is very much concerned with the question of putting the effort to shift from having the first experience towards a particular game into having the second kind. And I agree, as a description of that process, that Jones' description is broadly accurate. But I do think a lot of the time one can simply kind of diddle around playing with a system without deep comprehension and still have fun - it's just a different kind of fun to when one starts acquiring true mastery.
Melan
*eyeroll*
I had to look this up, because of various reasons. It certainly seemed credible. Well done.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Still waiting for that "Greater D&D" blog post Melan!
(Also, have you won Nox Archaist yet?)
Senpai noticed me 0_0
The other one I thought about posting was:
WARERATS ARE THE ONLY LYCANTHROPES THAT WILL CARRY A SWORD.
- Gary Gygax 1e DMG pg. 22
Adorable nonsense
Last edited:
Melan
*eyeroll*
I am making great strides in Papers & Paychecks, and I am not to be disturbed!
(Uh, yeah, about that... I will get back to the topic, I promise.)
Now, I am suddenly thinking about an all-caps GYGAXIAN PROCLAMATIONS GENERATOR.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
YOU MUST COMBINE IT WITH LINES RECITED BY BRIAN BLESSED!!!
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
THAT WOULD BE SO AWESOME!!!
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
I legit went over to Cameo to see if I could hire him - alas, he's not listed 
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
And now to ruin everyone's fun by bringing this thread back to being (sort of but not really) back on topic.
My group has been derailed by the pandemic. We've been playing an Uno knockoff online instead of getting back to D&D. Mostly this has been my fault (lack of inspiration, having a seven year old's attention span when it comes to a campaign, blah blah blah), so I've decided to do something new since one of the players is indefinitely out due to commuting issue.
So I've decided to run the rest of them through ASE1. Since I don't want to get out my old BECMI books I decided to download Labyrinth Lord, since ASE was written with those rules in mind.
Oy. It's like going from World of Warcraft back to Zork. I don't know if I can make it. I probably should've went with a 1e clone. Oh well.
I miss the options of modern games. Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, Thief. Ugh. Thief. WHY THE HELL WOULD ANYONE ROLL UP A THIEF, THEY ARE FUCKING USELESS.
Anyway, as I've been reading ASE for the game tomorrow I keep thinking "wow, this is going to be a slaughter". So should I break down and give them a little bit of good advice ("Roll an elf or a magic-user, and memorize the sleep spell if you want to survive") or should I let them figure it out on their own?
My group has been derailed by the pandemic. We've been playing an Uno knockoff online instead of getting back to D&D. Mostly this has been my fault (lack of inspiration, having a seven year old's attention span when it comes to a campaign, blah blah blah), so I've decided to do something new since one of the players is indefinitely out due to commuting issue.
So I've decided to run the rest of them through ASE1. Since I don't want to get out my old BECMI books I decided to download Labyrinth Lord, since ASE was written with those rules in mind.
Oy. It's like going from World of Warcraft back to Zork. I don't know if I can make it. I probably should've went with a 1e clone. Oh well.
I miss the options of modern games. Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, Thief. Ugh. Thief. WHY THE HELL WOULD ANYONE ROLL UP A THIEF, THEY ARE FUCKING USELESS.
Anyway, as I've been reading ASE for the game tomorrow I keep thinking "wow, this is going to be a slaughter". So should I break down and give them a little bit of good advice ("Roll an elf or a magic-user, and memorize the sleep spell if you want to survive") or should I let them figure it out on their own?
The1True
8, 8, I forget what is for
Or, y'know, just run it in the system they're used to and convert on the fly. Just stat out the boss monsters. I ran BECMI adventures for years in 1, 2 and 2.5e. It was never an issue. Race as class and demoralizing level caps were just uch. Also no spells for 1st lvl Clerics? No thankyou.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
My experience is that the thieves always live the longest and get to do a huge portion of the scouting/adventuring. I think older editions actually favor thieves!?!
Perhaps you are thinking frontal assault? Stealth is the name-of-the-game. Also...setting traps. (Two of the thief's strengths.)
I'm with @Beoric, some hand-holding may be in order at first. Also, there is no shame in running at 1st level (it's also exciting as hell trying to get out of the dungeon in a mad scramble once the inhabitants have figured out you are there).
Also...welcome back @The Heretic !
Perhaps you are thinking frontal assault? Stealth is the name-of-the-game. Also...setting traps. (Two of the thief's strengths.)
I'm with @Beoric, some hand-holding may be in order at first. Also, there is no shame in running at 1st level (it's also exciting as hell trying to get out of the dungeon in a mad scramble once the inhabitants have figured out you are there).
Also...welcome back @The Heretic !
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Eh, since I joined them for a 4th edition campaign and I've been running Pathfinder, That's not what I'm going for with this. But yeah I've been doing that sort of thing for years too. I even port older stuff into PFRPG.
LL at least lets 1st level Clerics have a spell. Yay!
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Um, what?
I remember getting to read the Moldvay version of the Basic set when I was visiting my cousins as a kid (I had BECMI Basic). The example of play had a thief go up to a chest, search for traps and find none, and then die from a poison needle trap while trying to pick the lock. Have you looked at the chance of success for their abilities? 17% find traps at 1st level? Save vs poison almost the worst in the game? Backstab is nice, yeah, if you can make your Move Silently and Hide in Shadows checks. What are they in LL? Like 20% or less at first level for each? When their attempts to be sneaky inevitably fail, their d4 hp aren't going to save them from the monster their trying to assassinate.
There's a reason why thieves need the lowest amount of XP to level, after all.
I intend to do that, yes. And I'm glad you remind me that running is an option. As I look at this intro adventure to ASE1 with all the moktars I think to myself "Damn, they're going to get slaughtered!". But actually, being cowardly will help them immensely.
(If you don't have ASE1, the moktars in question are poisoned by radioactivity and will slowly die as the adventure progresses. Running in, retreating, and coming back later would be a smart thing to do).
What I was talking about was the temptation to let them know one of the ace tricks of the early editions of D&D. Sleep is a godsend. No saving throw, but 2d8 or so HD of humanoids asleep. That's powerful stuff. I remember you commenting about this very thing, probably in a different thread. Sleep and Fireball were meant to even the odds for the PCs a bit.
Thanks! Besides the pandemic, I have been distracted by the latest expansion of my favorite MMORPG (ahem!), and now that that isn't stealing my focus away from things I'll probably post more.