OSR "Rules & Regulations": An Essay on the OSR

[MichaelSomething]

Just wanted to say that mini's have been central to D&D play from the very beginning. The forerunner of D&D was a miniatures wargame called Chainmail, made by the same author. 2nd edition represented the game reaching a level of development that understood the value of extensive role-playing and suspension of disbelief, however. 2nd edition is manifestly superior to every other edition for this reason, save that 4th edition proved that a far more balanced game was actually possible. The sense of wonder many people keep looking for is the feel when something in print is awesome for its newness and the descriptions it has, independent of its "discussed" uses on the battle grid. The sense of wonder "awed" almost to a point where there wouldn't be any discussion. It is the consumption of 3rd edition, by so many, that has led to these issues today. I don't mean to bash any edition, just that 3rd edition introduced a new level of discussion between players about what their characters would be doing, both on the battle grid AND in character creation and building, with different feats and so on. And yes, having magic items "in every city", for sale, didn't help because (newly discovered) magic items were one of the things that gave the game a sense of wonder literally. It was the fact that the game itself became something "to be discussed so much in its components and procedures for play", that it opened up the entire gaming community to what has been like a practical (as opposed to a sense of wonder), almost scientific discussion.

At the end of the day, what is taking place is we are all "learning more", but "also arguing more, and seeing that we don't know as much as we used to to feel ready to play" at any given time or level of play. You "have to learn it," and regardless of why or how cool it was to someone, you didn't have to do all this discussing before and the game "felt" quite different and was more ready to be used and for story-telling.

So ignorance is bliss and if people want to get the sense of awe back they should quit D&D and play an RPG they never heard of before?

 

[SirAntoine]

So ignorance is bliss and if people want to get the sense of awe back they should quit D&D and play an RPG they never heard of before?

That's a hard way to take what I said.

 

[MichaelSomething]

That's a hard way to take what I said.

I know I may be necroing but I got to know, how am I suppose to take it? Now let me tell you a story.

There once was a man who played a video game he just discovered. In many ways it was like classic D&D. There were hundreds of unique items, dozens of strange and deadly monsters to fight, and much random generation. Every day he would play the game and post a video of his game on the internet. However, he wasn't very good at the game, never getting very far. However, the more he played, the more he learned. He would learn how a new item works or how it interacted with other items. The enemies he saw again and again would be more predictable each time he meet them. Less things would surprise him. As he played and played, he got farther and farther and got better and better, until one day, armed with all of his accumulated knowledge and experience, he defeated that game! Hurray for him!

There was once another man who would watch all the videos of the first man playing the game. One day he purchased the same game and beat it on his very first try, because he knew what to do by watching the first man. Should we mourn the second man because he never went through the same process of discovery?

 

[SirAntoine]

Well, I can't help but wonder if you agree with the Mormon bishop you've quoted, because the point of my comment was to help identify certain things in D&D, for those who have discussed the particular things. From reading countless posts, here and on other sites, I see a lot of discussion of "a sense of wonder" that isn't specified because it's a little too hard for people to put their finger on. Comments such as "the game doesn't feel quite right", or it doesn't have "that" sense of wonder as they put it, shouldn't be overlooked in my opinion, yet I've seen these types of comments criticized as not adding to the debate constructively. In your two examples, one shouldn't grieve for the second man, but it is still a matter of fact that his experience was different.

I don't think D&D should be abandoned because of what I see as increased discussions and learning, and all I described, but it begs the question why we argue so much about the rules as if we're building a better wheel. The game has certain qualities that aren't easy to relate to others without experience, and it will always be quite a different game (even for very experienced players) if they spend time discussing the rules and options instead of making use of that time with story-related action, maintaining suspense easier with keeping everyone asking "okay what happens next". Players used to do that a little more--and my thesis is that this little bit makes a significant change to the sense of wonder people talk about, and really the experience itself if you were to look at it objectively as a newcomer or bystander. Do you see players "at the edge of their seats role-playing, and following the story--or fighting in combat with more rapidness--or do you see players doing a lot of pointing at miniatures and discussing in the most "out of character" terms possible what the rules are and what their options and abilities do?

I believe the game should aim for a big reduction in such discussion, and a re-focus on the role-playing and "suspension of disbelief" to be had in the story-telling. D&D is certainly a viable outlet for story-telling, and creative and cooperative thinking, all going far towards making it certainly not a waste of time. You shouldn't ignore your responsibilities in some way, but so long as this recreation doesn't compel you to act irresponsibly, it should be given as much respect as any other game even by religious people in my opinion.

 

[Dethklok]

I know I may be necroing but I got to know, how am I suppose to take it? Now let me tell you a story.

I don't think your story addresses SirAntoine's point.

I don't think D&D should be abandoned because of what I see as increased discussions and learning, and all I described, but it begs the question why we argue so much about the rules as if we're building a better wheel. The game has certain qualities that aren't easy to relate to others without experience, and it will always be quite a different game (even for very experienced players) if they spend time discussing the rules and options instead of making use of that time with story-related action, maintaining suspense easier with keeping everyone asking "okay what happens next". Players used to do that a little more--and my thesis is that this little bit makes a significant change to the sense of wonder people talk about, and really the experience itself if you were to look at it objectively as a newcomer or bystander. Do you see players "at the edge of their seats role-playing, and following the story--or fighting in combat with more rapidness--or do you see players doing a lot of pointing at miniatures and discussing in the most "out of character" terms possible what the rules are and what their options and abilities do?

I don't think D&D (vis-a-vis other games) was ever really very good at inspiring this sense of wonder in adults. Do do that, a game needs to be sparing on the fantasy elements and shroud them in mystery. For instance, consider this:

I do have a good reason for recommending that you don’t start neatly indexing elves and dwarves and what-have-you into suitable player-character templates. That’s because it will ruin your game.

Mike Polling (the author of “The Key of Tirandor”, an excellent scenario in White Dwarf #49-50 that is to be reprinted in In From the Cold) describes a problem in fantasy fiction and gaming that he calls taxonomic reduction. It begins with a demand for details about elves, for example - their social organization, clothing, breeding habits, and so on. So you get a supplement with all that stuff… hit points for Grey Elves, magic for High Elves, eye colour and what they eat. Now you can play an elf. But actually all you are playing is another kind of human being.

Okay, so now your players start to sense that something has gone. Elves used to be mysterious. Now they know more about them than they do about Yanomami Indians. So you have to bring in something new. You scour legends until you find Trows, say, or Sith. Just words. Now they take the place of the elves who have been filed and categorized into meaninglessness. Yet pretty soon a player says, “How can I get to play a trow character?” and the whole reductive process begins again.

D&D is a fun, light game. Really it's something of a kid's game, where everyone has a magic sword and fireball spells, and the point is to kill monsters to get more treasure and experience in order to get more skillful and buy better equipment kill even bigger monsters. From my perspective, at least, the silliness of D&D is part of the fun; where else could you cast magic missile at a gelatinous cube in order to win a chest full of electrum pieces? This has continued all the way through fourth edition, where you can use stinging shout on the rust monster.

If you want that sense of wonder, I think you're looking for another game. D&D was always better with beer.