There seem to be something of a rebirth of "Old School" D&D-like games: Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, Basic Fantasy, Swords & Wizardry, etc. Noble Knight Games has a dedicated section for OSR (Old School Renaissance) publications. Whether this has to do with disappointment of D&D 4e, disappointment with the hard-cover fluff in general, nostalgy, the community is nevertheless actively creating material and putting out adventures that lend themselves to the style of the early editions of D&D.

I started with D&D Basic Set in 1986, and after moving to other games grew very anti-D&D -- probably to highlight "progress". In recent months, I've been skimming through these retro-clones as well as old D&D and AD&D. In the early days, it was possible to have a more or less complete system in 50-60 pages, and although the rules were seldom usable as written, things were pretty simple and people had good time. I am strangely fascinated by the idea of good-ole dungeon crawling. I don't know if it's nostalgy or a wish for a lighter setting/system.

Has this ever happened to you?

_________________
Running: AD&D / When a star falls
Running: MERP / Woses of the black wood

I have to admit I have no desire to return to dungeon crawling

There are times when I do think HarnMaster is too complex in play(*) - combat being the obvious example. But, I can't really say I want to return to the 'Roll a d20, oh dear you are dead' style of gaming either. Things like variable hit locations, and skill vs skill checks are important. More important to me still is that I don't like class based systems. I like mixes of skills based on character history and choice. I like the uniqueness of character you get when each skill develops at its own pace.

So, I guess I am saying, no, I have never felt the desire to return to a D&D like system.

(*) I like 'behind the scenes complexity - like character generation or HarnManor - but not stuff that slows down actual play.

_________________
··<SableFox>··
AKA Jonathan M Davidson

There are things I like about the "Old School". The first and foremost is simple - anyone can try anything. In the days before skill systems, you didn't look at your character sheet to decide whether you were going to swing from the chandelier or try to swindle the dragon. If it seemed like it was a good idea, you tried it. It was a more freewheeling game. And it meant that characters were measured by their actions, not their stats.

A lot of anti-DnD partisans gloat that the DnD class system reduces characters to simplistic tropes. But I aver that a skill-based system can be just as deadening to good role-playing. If "swindling the dragon" simply translates into "make an Intrigue roll", well, what's the fun in that? If the only player allowed to talk is the one with the high Rhetoric roll, how much fun are the other players having during the audience with the King? Skill systems can be handcuffs that keep the players (and GM) from exercising their full creativity.

Old School is mostly about keeping the action going, and not letting the rules slow down the play. It is associated with "dungeon crawls", but the Old School dungeon crawl is the kind with lots of clever traps, tricks, and even jokes. It is about as far from Harn as you can get, but that doesn't mean we can't learn a few things from it. In fact, I think it might be a fine exercise to imagine how HarnMaster might be revamped according to the Old School mentality. How could you streamline HM to get the highest fun/rule ratio? How could you interpret the Harn setting to maximize the action/time ratio?

Well said.



Remove all non combat skills,these succeed on a 3d6 vs target attribute.

_________________
A moment is the most you can ever expect from perfection.

I agree. Old School fantasy settings are also loose and easy to adapt. They are not bound by ideal medieval society, ecology or even common sense. For the entrance level gamers, the bar is set very low. For older players, the long interval between sessions does not erase crucial information (PME, Player Memory Erosion), because there is none.

_________________
Running: AD&D / When a star falls
Running: MERP / Woses of the black wood

Meh. I think this is more in how you run a game than anything else. I let characters try anything. Whether or not they succeed is entirely another matter. Though to be fair, I'm using a rules-system that allows characters to default to other skills/attributes if they don't have the perfect skill to govern the situation. It's all about being flexible and letting players come up with ways to use their abilities in new and interesting fashions.

Awesome thread,,,my 2d

_________________
"Pride and defiant hate, spite and harsh oblivion. Let the great jeweled knot of the Cosmos unravel in the dust."-The Pentadict of Lorgar

Old school D&D, not that I have played it for over 25 years, was never just Dungeon Crawls for my roleplaying groups. It was epic quests and associated strangeness.

A lot of interesting observations in this thread

But, the question that keeps sticking in my mind is this: Is this really a 'renaissance'? I mean-- did 'old-school' gaming ever really die and go away-- or at least suffer a major decline in popularity such that it makes sense to speak of a 'rebirth'?

I guess I've always assumed that the 'old school' gaming approach of "killing monsters and taking their stuff" never really went away. In fact, even with the plethora of diverse games out there-- and the advent of all those indie games and story games-- I guess my assumption, even now, is that "old-school" dungeon crawling had just always continued to be the dominant form of RPGing out there, even to this day.

Then again, I'll be the first to admit that I'm not particularly knowledgeable when it comes to what the majority of gamers out there are doing. Also I'm not 100% sure I really understand what 'old-school' means in the first place... I think I do, but maybe not?

_________________
-- Jim Chokey

"Argent, chief embattled tenne. A coney of the field and crossed carrots proper"

Ditto!

The dungeon crawl was but one part of the whole picture

Great thread. Like most discussions about the term "Old School RPG", it seems most define it in two ways:

1) dungeon crawl hack and slash AND/OR
2) simple, quick game system

The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but sometimes a debate/discussion about "Old School RPG" can get confusing when one party means the former and another the latter.

The games linked in the OP all seem to define themselves more in the second way--in how easy and fast their OGL d20 fantasy systems are.

However, the problem for me with these particular games (and thus, IMO, D&D of any edition--original through 4th) is still the strange abstraction of the class- and level-based system. But this problem isn't strickly "Old School", because even way back then games like RuneQuest and (a little later) HarnMaster offered non-class and -level mechanics.

In some ways, HarnMaster's reputation is a bit bizarre: it's for the most part unknown among the legions of 4E D&Ders--and so is "new"to them when/if discovered--yet it has been around for about 20 (HM) or 25 (HW) years! Perhaps this is 5 years shy of the first true wave Old School (D&D, RuneQuest, Chivalry & Sorcery)--but would you consider HM "Old School" nonetheless? Or does its hallmark realism keep it out of the Old School?

EDIT: After re-reading my post, it struck me that Chivalry & Sorcery is another first wave game that does not fit the "Old School" tag as invoked by the OP games. It's level and (essentially) class based, yet is not a simple/quick system. However, its first edition rules were looking for a publisher in the very middle of the Old School (~1975).

Very good points-- particularly about the potential confusion.

In fact, I wouldn't really have imagined 2) to be a feature of "old school RPG". (In hearing the term "old school RPG" what I think of first and foremost is AD&D, which had three books (Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide) as part of the *basic* rules with a few other books issues thereafter (Fiend Folio, Dieties & Demigods, etc.),and just oodles of charts and tables throughout the Player's Handbook and DMG. Then again, maybe I'm wrong in considering AD&D "old school"? Does one have to go back to the original "Greyhawk", "Blackmoor", "Eldritch Wizardry" Supplements to be "old school"?



I saw that in the copy for a few of them.

I also saw that the cover art for Swords & Wizardry depics a group of adventurers in a subterranean setting (obviously a "dungeon" or "ruin" of some sort) clambering over skeletons to get at some treasure. OSRIC shows other adventures-- again, in some grand Great-Hall-of-Moria like dungeon setting fighting a dragon. Labyrnth Lord shows a pair of adventureres-- again in a dungeon-- fighting some pig-faced orcs while a menacing spider loomsoverhead. While one should perhaps not judge books by their cover, I would say that the images on these are definitely screaming "dungeon crawl".

[minor edits to remove typos, extraneous phrases]

_________________
-- Jim Chokey

"Argent, chief embattled tenne. A coney of the field and crossed carrots proper"

Just a quick follow-up on my last post.

Even though I questioned whether "old-school" RPGing (at least as I understand it) really involved simple, easy-to-play systems, I do think your point about the games mentioned in the first post pitching themselves as being simple, quick, easy-to-play, etc., is worth noting.

I find it particularly intriguing becuase that those virtues also seem to be the sought-for ideal ideal in many of the newer indie games out there. (Oh sure, there are indie games like Burning Wheel which is detailed, crunchy, system that fills four rulebooks--- but that's not what I'm talking about here). From reading recent discussions on story-games and having attended GoPlayNW last month, I was struck by how many of the games played there- and being developed-- really are intended to be small, approachable games, with simple character creation methods, very easy conflict resolution, relatively few charts, and a pretty focused setting/genre/theme/concept. They're not what I would call "old-school" by a long shot-- quite the opposite in many ways-- but they do have rules that definitely are fairly simple, approachable, and easy to play (or at least that's the goal... or my perception).

I'm wondering if the 'old school' games alluded to above and the indie games I experienced recently might both be participating in a more general shift in gaming attitudes and preference (at least among some RPGers)-- a retreat away from big game "systems" that one has to master, and towards small, simple, focused RPGs that one can pick up and be playing in minutes?

_________________
-- Jim Chokey

"Argent, chief embattled tenne. A coney of the field and crossed carrots proper"

I'm in the camp that Old School Gaming is alive and well, and never really "went away".

Bare with me for a moment, because this is a half baked notion, but I think that a game, regardless of complexity, is Old School if its primary design goal is to facilitate interaction between the GM and the Players. Where the three interactive elements are the GM, the Players, and the World; however contrived or limited that world might seem; be it a dungeon sprawl or one of nations, armies, and gods.

Many modern games concern themselves with the interaction between GM and the Characters. Take D&D 3X. The rules are highly concerned with character balance, so much so that the rules presume that the characters have X amount of gold worth of equipment depending on their level.

So now you have a situation where regardless the circumstance of the adventure, characters gain levels and suddenly have the right to more magic items even if the story (or the risk involved) did not present those items within the context of the actual adventure. [queue Power Up Music and bling! shiny new stuff falls out of the sky].

This is not to say that a GM couldn't prepare for the event ahead of time, by providing a logical explanation for the character's increase in personal hoard. In practise, I found this very difficult and intrusive, as if the rules themselves were a cosmic auditor standing over my game, ready to balance the books between me and the players.

When I run 'Old School', that never happened. Rewards were placed in relationship to their risk, and many a hoard were left untouched because the characters either failed to locate them, or chose to fight another day. Characters might stumble across extraordinary objects because I placed them specifically for a future event, not just because they were on the cusp of gaining another level.

While my example is mostly drawn from my D&D experience, I do not think it is a dissimilar one from any game system that intends to 'get out of the way' when in use. Rules might need to be referenced frequently, or have complex skill mechanics. In my mind, they are Old School if they do not interfere with crafting an adventure.

I blame myself for the evolution of gaming. For decades my friends and I would ask each other, "Do you want to play D&D?", when we were really asking, "Do you want to game?" If we knew that refering to the past time by a name brand would give designers the idea that the game rules were equally or more important than the imagination and camaraderie shared between hobbyists, we would have chosen our words more carefully.

_________________
A moment is the most you can ever expect from perfection.

Hmmm,

"Old School" can have a lot of meanings. D&D is of course old school, and so is C&S. And so is Harn, really.

A lot of people assume old school to mean "Gygaxian", in that is a GM versus players... failing a saving throw means death, not massive damage or penalties. Quirky, rough around the edges rulesets without a unifying mechanic. Even ones with a unified mechanic can be old school... Rolemaster being a prime example.

Some people use the term old school if the game focuses on "gamist" priorities, or if the setting is generic European medieval fantasy. But wouldn't Hero system be old school too, by viture of its age?

Or is it that being "old school" means that most of the game's players are grognards?

-Mark

_________________
Putting the "Ho" in Hodiri since 1998.
The Forge: Western Martial Arts

Désolé mais grognards don't go to school, specially la vieille école. Get your semantics right, for the love of the Lost Guide.

_________________
«Fair is what we see, Fairer what we have perceived, Fairest what is still in veil.»
—Nicolaus Stenonius

Ah, but the oldest school of all is the "school of hard knocks" - and the grognards definitely attended that establishment!

Actually, contrary to what Spartan says, I associate 'Old School' with a simulationist perspective untrammelled by considerations of realism, balance, drama or 'story' (which seems, these days, to be used to cover a multitude of sins...). The focus is on the fantasy, the wonder and the situation and experiences of the characters, as experienced vicariously by the players - not on balanced challenges, historical minutiae or some preconceived, bloated "story arc". Characters are not designed with some driving purpose or existential "issue" in mind - in fact, they are often created randomly. It has (had?) a naivete and 'lightness' to it that was great while it lasted, but as soon as someone decides to 'push the boundaries' it suddenly becomes apparent that there aren't any to push - at least, not ones that push back in an interesting way.

_________________
Balesir
___________________
- Eschew Obfuscation!

That's a great point, Harshax. Now, I'm not sure whether I would describe a "non-cosmic auditor" rpg as "Old School" (C&S 1st edition magick rules--Old school yet quite the cosmic auditor!)--but the debate over terms might be beside the point.

This past year I've saved a group of bleary-eyed D&D 3Xers by introducing them to the non-class, non-level, skill-based system of HM (and RuneQuest), and it's just this very feeling of getting out from under D&D's "auditor's weight" (ast Harshax points out) that has been so liberating for them. They simply feel that the HM system--while robust--doesn't get in the way, doesn't get between them and the story/action, as much as 3X does.

Playing no, publishing yes. Basically a conjunction of factors have combined to allow small publishers to form and support the older editions of D&D. The two most important are the fact all the terms you need to for a older edition D&D products are now available under the OGL and the affordability of Print on Demand particularly Lulu.

Yes there is a lot of focus on the dungeon crawl but some of us Old School Authors are trying different things. There is the controversial Carcosa, James Raggi of the Lamentation of the Flame Princess has products with a unique feel and my own Points of Light. Despite the name they are series of mini-settings, mapped with numbered hexes, designed to be used with older editions of D&D. I have two products out now with Goodman Games.

As more people get in I think we will find the diversity of products increase as people are finding that the original rules are easily built on. I am currently working on a supplement based on my fantasy campaign which owes more than a little to Harn's way of dealing with the fantasy genre.

I have mixed feelings about the whole "old school" thing. I think its a lot of fun to read through old gaming products, talk about "the way things used to be" and things like that. I've had fun lurking on "old school" discussions in various places. On the other hand, I suspect the reality would be a big letdown for me.

When I think of old school, I think of my own experience playing under an "old school" DM back in college. This would have been around 1990 or so and this guy had been running his "dungeon" since the mid 70s. This thing would be called a megadungeon nowdays. It was so huge he multiple binders full of notes about the thing. He used 1e AD&D, but with a big binder of houserules in grand old tradition. Every weekend, he'd run people through this thing in a room in the student center and proceed to slaughter PCs in grand old "school of hard knocks" tradition. I vividly remember my first session when my brand new ranger was slaughtered by four monks all doing quivering palm on him simultaneously in one round. It wasn't much fun for me, but he packed 'em in. He regularly had 10+ people around his table and they came back weekend after weekend. He even had kids from the local high school coming up to play D&D under him. I sometimes wonder if that guy is still out there running his "dungeon" 30+ years after he started...

A few months ago, one of my current groups was waxing nostalgic for the days of 1e AD&D and everyone had some great memories to share. However, we spontaneously ran a session of "Keep on the Borderlands" today and it wasn't that much fun. (Honestly, that's why I'm here now. It motivated me to try and get a Harn game ready so we can do that instead.)

It occurs to me that it wasn't the rules or the products of that era that made old school great for us (my two gaming groups). Even back then, we were griping about how stupid the rules were and houseruling all the stuff we hated. We thought the published modules were awful and wrote our own adventures instead. It seems to me that we don't really need to go seeking a nostalgic experience via old products or new ones designed to emulate them since we didn't really like them all that much back then anyway. Our old school experience was really more about the spirit of those games.

A similar tangential discussion occured with my Traveller group this week....

Traveller can certainly be categorized as "old School", but is totally unlike ad&d....
The new Mongoose rules improve upon the classic rules, (And are better than the Mega and NEw Era crap...) but are not set up as a tactical combat engine like modern day 3.x + or GURPS. It really just a conflict resolution system deisgned to spur good roleplaying. The lure of bigger goodies fades quickly....because there are diminishing rewards....(found that to be the case in WHFRP as well..)

And I think THAT is what old school refers to....monty haul quests to get tons of silly loot.

Anyway, Our discussion concerned the dungeon mentality of "kill the moster, loot the treasure" and how that that style didnt fit into the Traveller universe. (or any realistic believeable setting with rules laws and any non-static environment)

I went on to discuss how in Traveller, and even in DnD 3.x that rewards dont HAVE to be looted treasure, but makes more sense as remuneration for work and adventure.

Also, obtaining signature items like a paladins holy sword or a Gazelle class Gunboat, became the quest....and ultimately made the acquiring of those items that much more satisfying, rather than taken off the body of a dead githyanki.

I too have had a longing for old school nostalgic gaming, but when I have sat down to play DnD 1e I find I am left very unsatisfied. Actually, I get much more enjoyment going off the deep end and playing Hackmaster with a MST3k mentality than serious gaming. (Which I keep locked up in my Harn and Traveller games)

I have a bunch of old D&D and AD&D 1E modules sitting in a closet. A while back, we busted them out to take a look at them and get a nostalgic chuckle. Most of them were pretty cheesy, but a few of them were surprisingly well done. And a few of them could easily be adapted to Harn and make for an interesting game. I'm actually thinking of writing up an adaptation of "The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh" and its sequels some time, because I think that there are some great conceptual tidbits there.

I ran Saltmarsh in Harn...and it worked rather well.....(I placed it in an unsettled area in Kanday) that one and the Bone Hill/Assassins knot were good too.
There was another one, where the group had to follow the steps of a dead kings heir on his pilgrimage that was good too, but cant remember the name...(king was killed by an arrow of slaying....heir was kidnapped and held in a castle with a griffon....ring any bells??)

Most of the 1e UK modules were pretty good...the Brits were more advanced than the US RPG'ers for sure.

I always like the A,G,D and Q series, and may adapt to Harn at some point....but I dont want to ruin the feel of my Harn game....(BUT I have a metagame idea brewing....)

For those of us who started roleplaying in the late 70s, this is a rather nostalgic (and somewhat scary) read ... http://www.elfishgene.com/

Cheers,
Brian

_________________
Brian McNeilly
Burnaby BC Canada
bmcneilly@shaw.ca
http://members.shaw.ca/harngm/