Ineffective Voulging
*eyeroll*
So, DP is the traveller, and the “broken” compass is everyone else telling them that their dictionarianist pedantry is not appropriate, and im the wise sage. Thanks.
The state of Post-OSR content
- Thread starter Yora
- Start date
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
Hear that "whooshing" sound? That's the point, soaring over your head. Once again.
Fix yourself.
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Lol. I feel called out. My 'didn't the earliest audiences faint?' comment was certainly anecdotal. I didn't around to responding to your reply (my WoW account(s) won't play themselves!), but I think you bring up good points. I never considered the fainting urban legend to be restricted by gender, but it probably was.
I was also going to say that this discussion lacks data. There must be a research paper somewhere that analyzed horror movies and the motivations to see them. Like everything else in the world, the reasons people watch horror movies is varied and it is good to not project your own feelings on the subject (ahem! that was my issue) on the populace at large.
As an aside, way back in the 80's in the Forum section of Dragon magazine some guy wrote a letter saying that we should up our game to be more descriptive with what we gave our players. He gave a paragraph long evocative description of a lair. I was besmitten by this idea and started to use it. I brought it up with a friend who was also a DM and he scoffed. "Psh, my players wouldn't have the patience to listen to me describe a room like that." I had to agree that he was right. The 'three sentence' rule was observed even back then.
I bring this up because the Ravenloft MC supplement tells you to do something like this in the introduction. Yeah, that's not going to work. Horror novels can work through their descriptions and their third person points of view. RPGs are not novels nor are they short stories. It just doesn't work.
Doh! My bad, I'll stop now. I found this to be an interesting, intellectual discussion. I believe my video game obsessions help me attain one of my principles. "If the conversation is turning into a flame war, ignore it and go somewhere else. Who has the time to argue with strangers on the internet about silly things. Your silence can say volumes."
The Heretic
Ineffective Voulging
*eyeroll*
Yes. I shouldn't mock. Sorry for your hurt.
Ineffective Voulging
*eyeroll*
I hope yous all are enjoying DP and I’s Performance Art portrayal of The State Of The OSR. I call it: “two bald cunts arguing over a comb”. Thank you and goodnight.
Last edited:
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
No, none of that was directed at you, I have yet to see you start WW3. Keep posting like you've been posting, post more if you like, you're one of the saner ones around here.
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Don't worry! I was commenting about that particular subject, not in general. My responses were filled with anecdote and projection too. Definitely not scientific.
I am curious about the reasons why you and your group watch and read the horror genre, so I wouldn't mind if that particular thread continued.
The Heretic
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
I'm not generally interested in horror. I actually prefer deconstructions of horror, like Cabin in the Woods or Scream, more than horror movies themselves. I'm also more likely to like horror that is also something else, like Alien or The Thing or Buffy or Teen Wolf (the series).
Off topic, but one of the things I really liked about Teen Wolf is that once the kids figured out what was going on and that they were all involved, they almost always told each other what was going on, instead of relying on everyone keeping secrets to drive the plot. They could be isolated during an episode, but when they got together (on screen or between episodes), the filled each other in. Including the stuff that usually gets buried, it would be like, okay this weird thing is happening with me and I don't know if I can control it so y'all need to keep an eye on me and take precautions. So refreshing, and it required a whole different approach to writing.
Maybe the reason I'm not really interested in horror is that I spend the whole movie trying to figure out how I could win, or how someone with better resources could win. Like, Aliens is exactly the sort of movie I would have made, if I made movies, after watching Alien. I sort of turn them into action/adventure movies in my head.
The Heretic
Should be playing D&D instead
Aha! I think this explains the difference in our answers. You're thinking more about horror movies, I am thinking more about horror literature (err, short stories, really). We're looking from different perspectives. This also explains your comment about jump scares.
For me, reading a horror short story allows me to live vicariously through someone else, in situations I'd never want to encounter in real life. This influenced my answer on why people enjoy horror.
I think horror doesn't work in RPGs from both points of view. From my point of view, D&D is a game more than a 'story', therefore the elements that make horror work in literature don't get applied in RPGs, and if you do try to apply them you end up with a mess. On the opposite end of the scale we have your comment on the inability of doing jump scares, and by extension the various other tropes used in horror movies.
The Heretic
grodog
Should be playing D&D instead
Some continuing discussion: https://princeofnothingblogs.wordpress.com/2025/09/02/on-the-osr/
Allan.
Allan.
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
In this singular blog post dripping of unwarranted smugness, Prince goes on an unhinged diatribe about how "far-left extremism" is responsible for adventures sucking, he manages to deploy both "gay" and "retarded" as an insulting pejorative (join us in the 21st century, please), and he deadnames Jennell Jaquays like the childish homophobe that he is. Oh, and he also takes credit for there being less "artpunk" stuff these days, claiming that his contest (an idea he stole from the contest I was running on this forum before he banned me from it) has won the war against it, so we can add "delusional" to his growing list of faults.
If anyone cared to see why I loathe him beyond the mere disagreements on this forum, that blog post is Exhibit A. "Prince of Nothing" is more than an apt moniker for the man.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
I found this article about how written English has changed over time. I think is it very relevant to the minimalist-evocative-bloat discussion, and the organization/comprehension discussion, in relation to keyed entries.
EDIT: Here's a new one from The Alexandrian talking about the definitions of "Trad". I have to say, I don't remember hearing anyone who is OSR or OSR-adjacent use the phrase "Trad RPG" to refer to old-school play. I'm pretty sure they used "old-school play" to refer to old-school play. If they had, "Trad School Renaissance" (TSR) was right there.
EDIT: Here's a new one from The Alexandrian talking about the definitions of "Trad". I have to say, I don't remember hearing anyone who is OSR or OSR-adjacent use the phrase "Trad RPG" to refer to old-school play. I'm pretty sure they used "old-school play" to refer to old-school play. If they had, "Trad School Renaissance" (TSR) was right there.
Last edited:
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
That's because the term "trad" is stupid, as the Alexandrian is pointing out. A post-paradigm-shifted D&D should not be referred to as "traditional" D&D, regardless of etymological gymnastics.
Even using the term "old school play" is a confusing, divisive and nebulous concept. Just state the edition, and leave it at that. We don't need more tribalism in our lives.
squeen
8, 8, I forget what is for
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
The style of play that you are referring to as "post-paradigm-shifted" was well entrenched before 1e and Basic came out. It is also useful to have words to describe things that are different from other things, and if you don't like those words, I think you need to suggest replacement words, since "that playstyle out of Berkley* in the mid 70s" isn't really going to resonate with anyone who doesn't know that bit of history, which is almost everyone.
Also, one of the reasons Alexander gives for it being stupid is that the OSR was using the word to describe old-school play, which I think your just agreed it was not doing, which ought to suck the wind out of Alexander's sails.
Let's also talk about the point of definitions. There are several identifiable playstyles for RPGs. It is useful to be able to label them for practical reasons and for the purposes of discussion. Labels are practical as a means of identifying your own game, to attract the players you want; or somebody else's game, so you know what you are getting yourself into. Using the "Six Cultures"** labels for the moment, it means something if I call my playstyle "OSR-informed Classic play". Labels are essential for the purposes of discussion because you can't compare things if you don't have a way to distinguish them in a conversation.
In fact, in the"What is a Trad RPG" article we are discussing, Alexander links to an article about the usefulness of labels. And in that article, he discusses Storytelling Games, which if you read the comments (comment 20), he considers to be synonomous with the games coming out of The Forge, which are what SC calls "Storygames". We will come back to this.
It does not really matter what the labels are. If you don't like "Classic", "Trad", "Story Games", etc., you could refer to them by letter or number ("Style A", "Style B", "Style C") or according to origin ("Geneva", "Berkley*", "Forge"). Another way is to name a playstyle using the name that the players of that playstyle use, which is what is done in SC for Trad, Nordic Larp, Storygames, the OSR and OC/Neo-trad. The only label he invents is the label for Classic, although as often as modules like T1 are referred to as "Classic D&D", it isn't exactly a reach.
So we have six identifiable playstyles, which may or may not have been described accurately. I agree that Six Cultures got some history wrong, but that's actually pretty irrelevant. The issue is whether Six Cultures gets the descriptions of the cultures/playstyles wrong, and I note that Alexander doesn't allege that he did. So until I see evidence to the contrary, I'm going to assume the descriptions are more or less accurate.
Those identifiable playstyles need labels in order to compare and contrast. SC coins one label for I think reasonable reasons, and uses fives others that are used by the adherents of their respoective cultures. I don't think this is an unreasonable decision.
Alexander criticises the use of the word "Trad" because:
(a) The OSR uses the word to describe Classic D&D. Or if you don't like labels, people in the RPG community that wanted to revive older styles of play use the word "trad" to describe the style of play used by Gary Gygax.*** Except it looks like the OSR didn't use that term.
(b) People who play Storygames use the word "Trad" to describe RPGs. Maybe they do, I have no information ot the contrary, so for the purposes of this discussion, I will take his word for it. Although I do that with a grain of salt because -
(c) Jk, actually some people in the OSR use "Trad" to mean "anything that is not the OSR. I have not seen this use, either, so I'm calling bullshit on this. I do see people in the OSR referring to "anything that is not Classic or the OSR" as "Storygames", though, and you don't see Alexander suggesting that invalidates the definition of Storygames, either in SC or in his own article.
(d) SC uses the term "Trad" to mean Hickman-style linear play, which is bad because SC gets some probably irrelevant history wrong which is very important but Alexander isn't going to tell you why lalala I can't hear you. Alexander
All of which leads me to the inescapable conclusion that sometimes Alexander can be kind of a dick, just because he's feeling dickish. Which anyone who reads a lot of him probably sees from time to time. Also, his argument is bullshit, he just got a bee in his bonnet about something or other, and was too invested to let himself see what bullshit it was.
Also, I'm going to keep using "Trad" the way SC uses the word "Trad" because I've been doing that for four years, most of you have probably read the SC article, and you all know what I fucking mean. If I encounter anyone in whatever now passes for the OSR who gets confused and thinks I mean Classic or anything-but-Classic-or-OSR, I will let you know.
As to your point that "Trad" is a bad label to apply to something invented ten minutes after the LLBs were published, (a) as I mentioned, it's older than you think, and (b) so what? I get annoyed at people who use "literally" to mean figuratively, and people who use "verbal communication" to mean oral communication. All language is verbal, including writing. Nobody is going to change that to please me, and I would be an idiot to pretend that I don't know what they are talking about. "Trad" is a label that the Classic/OSR players don't use for anything, Trad players use for themselves, and SC has pushed out into the universe for other people to use. It's the closest we have to a broadly understood label, so suck it up and use it to avoid confusion.
To your other point, that you can refer to edition instead, as someone who runs an "OSR-informed Classic game" using 4e, I don't feel that is particularly useful. In fact, a lot of grog's dip into 5e once in a while. Using edition as a proxy for playstyle would be singularly unhepful on this forum.
(I admit, I might have gone a little overboard with this rebuttal.)
_____________________________________________________
*I think it was Berkley, but I could be misremembering.
**Hereinafter "SC", because defined terms are useful and save typing. Also, I would "@" the author if I could remember his handle here, I thought is was something like "pseudoephedrine" but I've had no luck guessing the letters. LMK if anyone remembers it.
***Yes, the longer way is obviously better, there is clearly no point in using defined terms as shorthand /s.
Beoric
8, 8, I forget what is for
Also, did nobody read this and find it worthy of comment?
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
I just hate the term "trad" for anything (it sounds like a pejorative).
I think a better dichotomy could have been identified - "long-play" vs. "episodic", or "narrative" vs. "simulationist", or "character-driven" vs. "world-driven"... something like that. The word "traditional" implies things, most chiefly age and originality, which "trad" D&D ain't.
I also hate the entire 6 Cultures concept in general, but that's neither here nor there.
But to your end point about editions not working for this purpose because people can use different styles across editions, I'd argue that the way you explained your own games (OSR-informed Classic game using 4e) is far more effective as a descriptor than just saying "I run a trad game", so I believe my point still stands.
I think a better dichotomy could have been identified - "long-play" vs. "episodic", or "narrative" vs. "simulationist", or "character-driven" vs. "world-driven"... something like that. The word "traditional" implies things, most chiefly age and originality, which "trad" D&D ain't.
I also hate the entire 6 Cultures concept in general, but that's neither here nor there.
But to your end point about editions not working for this purpose because people can use different styles across editions, I'd argue that the way you explained your own games (OSR-informed Classic game using 4e) is far more effective as a descriptor than just saying "I run a trad game", so I believe my point still stands.
DangerousPuhson
My my my, we just loooove to hear ourselves don't we?
I read it. I get it. Language changes over the years. What was once flowery and complex is now direct and simple. Modern people just don't have the patience for "for t'was that it t'were and t'weren't" and all that. What's to discuss further?
Ineffective Voulging
*eyeroll*
“Trad” is a great label.
I can spit it out with contempt.
I can spit it out with contempt.