OSR Is there room in modern gaming for the OSR to bring in new gamers?

[Clint_L]

I wasn't around for the original thread. I would think using OSR for new gamers depends on context.

For your home game, absolutely. Introduce them to the game you love to play, and if they get into it, they'll learn about the different versions of the game soon enough.

For beginners, if your goal is to teach them D&D so they can start their own campaigns, then OSR is not a good idea, IMO. I use 5e for D&D Club because the idea is to run a short campaign so that they get the gist of the game and then can run their own games while I move onto a new crop of beginners. If I taught them Basic or 1e or any of the actual OSR games, they'd have a devil of a time finding players for their new campaign, or joining with an existing group.

And if I just want to teach the basic concept of a TTRPG to total newbies, I don't use D&D at all. I use Dread, because the premise is the same in terms of GM/player dynamic, but the only rule they have to learn is "pull a Jenga block to see if you succeed."

 

[bloodtide]

Is there room for OSR, or even just Old School Gaming today? Yes.

Just from my experience : I have always run the "Old School" way, even in 5E. Cursed items, Unfairness, Unbalanced, and so on. And the bulk of the 5E community is happy playing the "fun adventure game" of 5E D&D.

5e D&D is made to be simple, straightforward and fun for everyone...that wants that type of fun. It's very much made for the "get together and have a fun adventure" for a couple weeks...then buy the next one from WotC.

And I see a lot of gamers have fun with this. They get together for their game each week: they relax, goof around, tell stories, watch you tube videos and in between play a little 5E D&D. One by one they knock out the offical modules, and maybe move on to third party stuff. You see a lot of random sandbox game play and that play style where the DM has the players make up things.

But......it does get boring for many players and DMs. 5E is made to be the same adventure over and over and over again. Like a modern adventure video game, TV show or series of movies. So in this adventure it's a fire giant, not a frost giant....but it's still an easy foe with no chance of loss, negativity or character death. Just like every other combat encounter. Adventure #16 has a locked chest: well just use that skill DC 10 and pop it open just like adventures #1-#15.

For my one group, the straw for them was 5E Spelljammer. They loved the D&D in space concept, but 5E Spelljammer really let them down. They liked it, but the rules were just "ok". And WotC sure was not putting out a bunch of Space Adventure Paths. There DM did try an original adventure for a bit, but the game did not work out.

So....the whole group went looking for a DM. Someone to fill their need for some wild space adventure. And they came to me. And I don't just use the "gritty" 5E rules....I have lots of Old School home rules.

But they want to play Spelljammer...and I'm the DM to do that.....so we started a game. There was a bit of a learning curve, but they quickly learned to love the Old School style of play.

And they were not the only ones.....

 

[Lanefan]

I think they'd be foolish to publish two (or more) separate versions of the game and split their base, but I think the underlying idea is great and they could dedicate a section of the new DMG to a set optional rules for creating a more old-school vibe, or even publish it as a supplement; same for your heroic fantasy idea.

Problem is, presenting it as optional rather than core guarantees it'll be ignored by 75% of the DM/player base.

Two equal separate compatible complete games, both core within themeselves and each an optional add-on to the other, is the only way this'll work.

Though they are probably content to leave that to 3PP.

Thus upping the ignore rate to 90%.

However, if they did it themselves it would be compatible with DDB, making it much more accessible.

True.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

5e D&D is made to be simple, straightforward and fun for everyone

Citation needed.

As someone who is in the group pointedly ignored, rejected, and even openly mocked by the designers of 5e, it was NOT made to be fun for everyone. It was made to be fun for a specific range of people, and anyone outside it frequently gets told to stuff it or, even better, gets (fully sincerely!) told to be happy they got any tiny scraps of support at all.

 

[Ondath]

For beginners, if your goal is to teach them D&D so they can start their own campaigns, then OSR is not a good idea, IMO. I use 5e for D&D Club because the idea is to run a short campaign so that they get the gist of the game and then can run their own games while I move onto a new crop of beginners. If I taught them Basic or 1e or any of the actual OSR games, they'd have a devil of a time finding players for their new campaign, or joining with an existing group.

I actually think the opposite is true: 5E is terrible for learning how to start your own campaigns. The 5E DMG tells you little to nothing about how to populate your world if you want to go simulationist. It tells you practically nothing about how to improvise a plot structure if you want to be a narrativist (unlike PbtA teaching you about hard framing and so on), and even in terms of designing a good series of encounters or how to run dungeon crawling or exploration if you're a gamist, it's sparse. Since 5E was designed as an evergreen edition aimed to appease the older fanbase (and grew to a new following completely by surprise), it just assumes you'll know how to DM from earlier editions. The 3E/3.5 DMG, by contrast, gives you very useful points about how to populate a world that I still refer to. The 4E DMG's sections on skill challenges and monster design still give me ideas for 5E. But 5E's DMG? Honestly I just refer to some of the optional rules every now and then.

Sure, dungeon crawling/hexcrawling and similar OSR-like game procedures are not that popular, but I think knowing them is essential, if only to know why some things in 5E are designed the way they are. You can then abandon them and go with a more "cinematic" experience if you wish, but I honestly think a lot of my own DMing owes it to starting in 3.5 and reading a plethora of editions (and other games) to improve myself.

And I'm saying this as someone who is 90% happy with 5E and intends to keep it (well, Level Up, but that's still a 5E clone) as my evergreen edition for future fantasy games.

 

[Scribe]

Citation needed.

As someone who is in the group pointedly ignored, rejected, and even openly mocked by the designers of 5e, it was NOT made to be fun for everyone. It was made to be fun for a specific range of people, and anyone outside it frequently gets told to stuff it or, even better, gets (fully sincerely!) told to be happy they got any tiny scraps of support at all.

While amusingly we both want different things, we both feel like 5e is not for us at all, and are told here by various folks, that we should be happy for what we get.

Funny, in a sad way.

The 'big tent' strikes again.

 

[ECMO3]

Citation needed.

As someone who is in the group pointedly ignored, rejected, and even openly mocked by the designers of 5e, it was NOT made to be fun for everyone. It was made to be fun for a specific range of people, and anyone outside it frequently gets told to stuff it or, even better, gets (fully sincerely!) told to be happy they got any tiny scraps of support at all.

Can you elaborate on this? I don't know what you are speaking of and am genuinely interested.

I have not noticed the designers of 5E openly mocking people. Perhaps it happened and I missed it. There have been many allegations of racism and things at WOTC, and printed material that would tend to support this idea, but these have not been "open" and either fall more into "he said - she said" or a mistake which was apologized for and fixed.

 

[Zardnaar]

While amusingly we both want different things, we both feel like 5e is not for us at all, and are told here by various folks, that we should be happy for what we get.

Funny, in a sad way.

The 'big tent' strikes again.

How many editions do you like? D&D usnt going to appeal to everyone.

If you only like 1 edition though i don't think the problem is D&D but your tastes are very specific.

 

[Scribe]

How many editions do you like? D&D usnt going to appeal to everyone.

If you only like 1 edition though i don't think the problem is D&D but your tastes are very specific.

2-3.5/PF1 is my preferred range.

The point being however, that while 5e is many things, it certainly is not all things to all people, it cant be.

 

[Zardnaar]

2-3.5/PF1 is my preferred range.

The point being however, that while 5e is many things, it certainly is not all things to all people, it cant be.

Yup no RPG is at best big tent. Big tents aren't infinite. That applies to pretty much everything.

Not everyone likes chocolate!!!!