This thread isn't to argue over what is and isn't OSR. I am using the broad term definition of the term.Let's leave that shit elsewhere.Now, what I am wondering is what type you like? Are you into simple like B/X clones? Do you like more advanced rules such as 1e/2e? Do you like ultra light like something like knave?Do you want something that mechanically is more or less a pure clone of a published game? Do you like something that merges some more modern ideas such as a acending AC?Or do you like stuff like the black hack, tales of argosa or even shadowdark that took the concept of OSR styles but are not built on those mechanics?This isn't a trolling thread, I am curious on what folks preferences are. What have they read or played they found fun or interesting.For myself, I need a level of church or fiddly. It makes my brain happy so I don't enjoy something too light. B/X and OSE don't really scratch my itch. I need something at lest AD&D level of fiddly. I thought it might be fun to see where other people landed.
D&D 5e
ACKS is peak OSR. No game will nail down Gygaxian D&D the way it does.
>>97900582When I wanna play D&D I just play D&D. OSR is for dweebs.
>>97900869Well there are a lot of versions of D&D. At lest 9
>>97900865It wasn't for me, but what do you enjoy about it?
>>97900865This, ACKS is the only game to come out in the OSR sphere that actually takes things like Gold for XP and Domain Play seriously. While still having a functional dungeon crawler for early levels.Next best is BECMI / RC D&D.
>>97900865>ACKS is peak OSR.I appreciate a lot of the concepts of ACKS, and I am also a fan of domain play - but ACKS is also full of weird quirks, and build-like options that are not very OSR.
>>97900582I just like the black and white drawings I saw on boomer's B/X. If Dungeons and Dragons 6th edition will use the black and white drawings, I will buy it then.
>>97901459That is fair. Some of the old art is simply fantastic. I got into D&D with 2e and the art sold it for me.
>>97900582I found B/X a bit simple (and quirky in some areas) and AD&D bit overdone (and lacking in some other areas), so I did what everyone did and made their own game. That's my favourite part of the OSR: people just making their own stuff to do exactly what they want, and most of it being cross-compatible / ripe for stealing from.I prefer the classic, rather limited OSR--a tight focus on dungeon-crawling, gold for XP--rather than the modern "it's all OSR if you really think about it" style. I find it pretty funny that D&D started out as this fairly specific thing and eventually became generic fantasy toolkit game, and then the OSR community appeared to get back to that fairly specific thing, and then new arrivals showed up as it got popular and turned it into generic fantasy toolkit game, and now you've got OSR for OSR (i.e. CAG). But I don't begrudge people doing their own thing, even if I have no idea why anyone would ever want to play Knave or whatever.
>>97901518>I found B/X a bit simple (and quirky in some areas) and AD&D bit overdone (and lacking in some other areas), so I did what everyone did and made their own game.Yeah. To be honest OSE does something like that, optionally, but still not as much as I want.I would say my ideal game is 50% BX, 30% AD&D, 10% stuff stolen from BECMI and 2e, 10% stuff stolen from OSR games
>>97900865>No game will nail down Gygaxian D&D the way it does.By having convoluted systems that don't produce the results they promises and that even the creators wouldn't use themselves? Then it really nails Gygaxian D&D.The stuff I read doesn't share Gary's tone of writing though.
>>97900844lol literally came to say this, so FPBP
