OSR Why B/X?

[Reynard]

I recall OSRIC being a curiosity, mostly, except for a few early adopters, and then the bandwagon getting rolling with Swords & Wizardry and Labyrinth Lord, along with many less-popular games. Although if you mark the OSR from starting with Castles & Crusades, we're back to 1E being the dominant mode again (IMO -- obviously there are people who's call it a 2E game or its own thing entirely).

The design philosophy difference between say C&C and OSE is interesting to me. The former was all about building a new game that felt like the old game, slaughtering whatever was required to make that happen, while the latter is based upon trying to change as little as possible beyong clarity. Obviously there is a bunch of stuff in the OSR space that is innovative in its core game design, but OSE isn't that.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The design philosophy difference between say C&C and OSE is interesting to me. The former was all about building a new game that felt like the old game, slaughtering whatever was required to make that happen, while the latter is based upon trying to change as little as possible beyong clarity. Obviously there is a bunch of stuff in the OSR space that is innovative in its core game design, but OSE isn't that.

Yeah, philosophically, I prefer the C&C and Shadowdark approach, but I certainly understand why others prefer retroclones.

The nice thing is how well adventures and often even monsters and magic generally plays across those design fault lines.

 

[bulletmeat]

The design philosophy difference between say C&C and OSE is interesting to me. The former was all about building a new game that felt like the old game, slaughtering whatever was required to make that happen, while the latter is based upon trying to change as little as possible beyong clarity. Obviously there is a bunch of stuff in the OSR space that is innovative in its core game design, but OSE isn't that.

Early on the trolls commented that C&C was there to use all the old TSR stuff w/little conversion. That was my biggest pull to it back in the 00's.
I also think OSRIC was really popular but everyone at the time was afraid of lawsuits via TSR's history. It wasn't long after that, when no bombs dropped, that S&W & LL came out w/slight changes to rules.

 

[J.Quondam]

I said "current" because I remember when it first started with OSRIC and that dominated initially.

I suspect at least part of the appeal is due to OSE itself, because that game is so well laid out and easy to use for newer (and even older) gamers. It's has been modernized in presentation, making it clearer to new players the enjoyment of that classic mode of play.
The OSE approach is, imo, just a further evolution in retroclones, improving on lessons learned from others already released. And that's largely why it (and thus B/X) are so popular right now.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, philosophically, I prefer the C&C and Shadowdark approach, but I certainly understand why others prefer retroclones.

The nice thing is how well adventures and often even monsters and magic generally plays across those design fault lines.

I think that is the true strength of the whole OSR movement/subgenre. It can support a lot of creators and a lot of products because the language is common.

 

[bulletmeat]

I've never been clear why B/X is preferred over BECMI. My current working theory is that the "CMI" part, with its focus on domain-level play, the quest for Immortality, and then playing an Immortal, clashes with the low-fantasy aesthetic that the OSR prefers.

BECMI nerfed the thief skills to expand for more levels is the one I have heard about.

 

[Dyson Logos]

I've never been clear why B/X is preferred over BECMI. My current working theory is that the "CMI" part, with its focus on domain-level play, the quest for Immortality, and then playing an Immortal, clashes with the low-fantasy aesthetic that the OSR prefers.

Also, BECMI nerfs the thief class in a huge way. Reduces the skills across the board, and introduces a skill system so everyone else can out-thief the thief.

 

[bulletmeat]

Also, BECMI nerfs the thief class in a huge way. Reduces the skills across the board, and introduces a skill system so everyone else can out-thief the thief.

I was in a B/X game and brought my RC. Someone made a comment of, "I hate that book".
Yet it was used three times to look up odd ball things not in B/X during the game.

 

[Malmuria]

One of the hallmarks of the OSR is that it is generally pretty minimalist. Games come in one book instead of three and are often designed with ease of use in mind. Many of the 'NSR' games are less than 60 pages, and often less than 20 pages in length. Also, much of it is centered around low-level play, where things like resource management are most relevant; if anything 14 levels is too many. I started with the "Black Box," which goes from levels 1-5, which is sort of perfect for an OSR campaign in my opinion (maybe with some "high level" (5-8) shenanigans.

That being said, I have a lot of nostalgia for 2e and could see pulling out random things from those books to add to an OSE campaign.

When B/X was released in 1981, it was a HUGE breath of fresh air for me, and I haven't stopped playing it since.

That's surprising! I feel like most people started with Basic as the tween version of dnd and then moved to Advanced because it was "advanced."

I said "current" because I remember when it first started with OSRIC and that dominated initially.

OSRIC--and the OSR as a whole--was really not about game design but just about using the OGL to keep publishing AD&D material. As far as I know, it was only later that the OSR evolved to thing about why TSR editions of the game were preferable to WOTC versions, hence Matt Finch's primer.

 

[Dyson Logos]

That's surprising! I feel like most people started with Basic as the tween version of dnd and then moved to Advanced because it was "advanced."

That's my experience talking to others also. Because I started with OD&D instead of AD&D (I started before the AD&D DMG was released, so some tables included the classes & spells from AD&D, but not the combat system), the addition of all the AD&D rules was stifling to me. It seemed like we were adding complexity to the games for the sake of adding complexity to the games.