The state of Post-OSR content

[Two orcs]

I mean, unless your existing group is somehow being brainwashed to abandon its existing style, where's the problem exactly?

The problem is there is a great playstyle that is being overshadowed both by the "new school" (post DL?) style and corrupting impure heretical OSR-styles. The combined forces of commercialism and glib sirens draw people in but lead them astray. OSR is for me a new way of playing but since my entry was the early 2010's OSR blogs I found the light, had I happened upon this subgenré recently I would have found it as more of the same and probably not played at all.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

The problem is there is a great playstyle that is being overshadowed both by the "new school" (post DL?) style and corrupting impure heretical OSR-styles. The combined forces of commercialism and glib sirens draw people in but lead them astray.

Again though, this is an issue that only has impact when it affects your personal play group. People being corrupted, people being drawn away - those are OTHER people, they are presumably not YOUR group... and if they are your group, then you have a group problem (conflicting style preferences), not a paradigm-shift, all-gamers-are-collectively-losing-their-way problem.

Case-in-point:
I was very reluctant to get into 5e when it came out. My group had invested quite heavily in 3/3.5e, both in terms of time and money. I still had all my 3e stuff - my books, my modules, my play groups, my knowledge, everything. From a cost-benefit perspective, switching editions didn't seem like it would be worth it, so as a group we abstained from 5e for a couple years.

We eventually switched to 5e. Do you want to know why?

Well it wasn't because my whole group got brainwashed into believing it would be better. It wasn't because 5e was "overshadowing" 3e, or because my group was being drawn in by the siren-song of 5e commercialism.

It was because I sat down and read up on 5e, laid out the changes to my group, and then we collectively decided if we wanted to shell out more money for 5e books or stick with 3e. We choose the former, mainly because there were a lot of streamlining changes that we all collectively felt would make the game more fun. If anyone said "I don't want to play 5e", well, then they're free to go off and play 3e with some other group, or maybe make a convincing case to run both editions in tandem. In fact, I lost two of my regular players when I made the switch to 5e. But we decided to make the switch collectively, as a group, and are happier with the switch.

You people seem to think that by virtue of existing, other versions of the game are going to somehow pollute your own. But your group lives in a vacuum, specially-curated to contain only people who want to be in it, so what the hell is there to worry about?

 

[Two orcs]

Again though, this is an issue that only has impact when it affects your personal play group. People being corrupted, people being drawn away - those are OTHER people, they are presumably not YOUR group... and if they are your group, then you have a group problem (conflicting style preferences), not a paradigm-shift, all-gamers-are-collectively-losing-their-way problem.

I think we have a different social milieu. I have 20 or so friends and acquantainces that I start campaigns with, and a much wider network of people who they know and invite to campaigns. What is popular in this sphere does impact the type of games that can be run. Every one of the players in my game is someone I personally inducted, and they want to run similar games for people they know, but find it hard to go against the mainstream.

 

[Pseudoephedrine]

I remain open to there being a unified play culture around Gygax, TSR, and his supporting institutions (the Dragon, the RPGA, post-1977 Judges Guild, other suggestions welcome) that was actively cultivated from 1977-1982. I agree with Prince that textual production is an important historical indicator for tracking this stuff's development and progression.

If this culture exists/existed, I'd use the term "classic" to distinguish it from "old school" which has too many other prominent associations to do more than confuse. "Classic" would be the only culture of play that didn't have an autonym (tho' I think / hope the positive associations of "classic" would appeal to its adherents as a self-designation).

One important point of distinction between "classic" and the "OSR" would be that Gygax saw progressively escalating challenges balanced to progressively escalating PC agency as a core dynamic of play expressing a value of "fairness" or "balance" (he even uses the dreaded term "game balance" to defend specific game design decisions). OSR design tends to be more interested in variance in PC agency for its own sake. I tend to consider this distinction to support the existence of classic as a distinct culture.

For an end-date of 1982 for the active institutional spread of this culture:

1) The RPGA seems to support and advance "classic" play at conventions in 1981 and 1982, but not from 1983 onwards. I spent the weekend digging through Polyhedron and the RPGA modules from 1981-1983 at the suggestion of a friend that tournament modules from the RPGA would have been an important contemporary vector for spreading "classic" play styles. The RPGA modules in 1981 ("To the Aid of Falx", etc.) are written by Frank Mentzer and are definitely not trad. If one believes "classic" exists, then they are definitely expressive of its proposed values.

1982's RPGA modules are a mixed style tending to classic nonetheless, with "Investigation of Hydell" being fairly pure classic, but "Egg of the Phoenix" showing strong trad influences without fully expressing the style. The adventure opens up with a page of canned description that includes a narrated conversation a PC pre-gen has with the NPC quest-giver but then turns into a series of challenges with only a loose story. In 1983, Tracy Hickman (boo! hiss!) takes over writing the modules and they become expressive of his trad values. 1984 and 1985's module series have different writers, but are pretty clearly trad as well (To Find a King and all that).

2) 1982/1983 is also when Gary becomes mostly hands-off on the actual gaming side of TSR, loses a lot of control of the company to the Blumes, divorces his wife, and goes to Hollywood to try to drum up interest in D&D. This comes to a head in 1983, when the actual divorce and move happen, but from what I can tell, his collapsing marriage, drug use, and management fights with Brian Blume occupied most of 1982.

Gygax's only publications in 1982 are a republication of Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth (actually written five years beforehand), and Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun. FTT famously has art by Karen Nelson (a friend of Gygax's) because he was already being stymied in dealing with the design department at TSR by Blume.

1982 is a very good year for Mentzer, Moldvay, and Douglas Niles (obvious candidates for authors working with a "classic" set of play culture norms who were still publishing new texts through TSR) in terms of publications, but Moldvay would mostly stop publishing through TSR after 1982 (he shifts to Lords of Creation in 1983, which I think of as traddish in orientation). Douglas Niles became a trad guy from corresponding and co-creating Dragonlance with Hickman. Mentzer seems to have held out for Gygax's values for a while, but when you look at the republications of his "classic" modules (e.g. the I12 republication of Egg of the Phoenix) that he oversaw, they're definitely revised to better correspond with trad norms and values, and much of his later work (even with Gygax, e.g. Dangerous Journeys) seems trad-oriented.

3) The Judges Guild, which I agree settles down into a firm supporter of Gygax's style sometime in 1977, but has its license to release officially-branded material for AD&D in 1982. By 1985, the company is basically out of business (until revived later).

And so on and so forth.

The end of active institutional support for the culture doesn't mean it stopped existing (if, indeed, it ever existed), but it does explain how trad became hegemonic despite it being preceded by "classic" play.

For me, the next phase will be looking at publications outside of TSR's immediate influence (JG is 3rd party but working under a licensing deal) for people echoing Gygax's norms autonomously. I would consider texts that did so to be strong evidence in support of the existence of that culture. Recommendations are, of course, appreciated.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

What is popular in this sphere does impact the type of games that can be run.

You are the DM, are you not? You are the game's king! It runs as you will it to run, and will exclude what you choose to exclude. But the Dungeon Master is a Spaceman King - a crew fiefdom, isolated, in a vacuum; their reign does not extend into the realms of others.

Round these parts, there's an unwritten social contract that goes hand-in-hand with D&D: the DM runs his games like he runs them, and the players are either on board with that, or they're finding a different DM. This social contract is the great filter that ensures your game will be as you want it - not by the vague esotericisms of the primordial versions and the pathology of later editions, but rather by what the DM brings to his table in the here and now.

 

[EOTB]

I can't unpack this EOTB --- would you elaborate?

If two people agree they are not of the same group, and one person's group is called old school, then the other person's group is not old school.

Old school (applied to any "thing", not just RPGs) as a term refers back to the legitimacy/authority gained from the founding. People are always fascinated by how something was done first, when it was new. Because it's very easy to point where/how the current "thing" sucks, or is poseur-ish, or whatever. People know, instinctually, that with popularity also comes dross. Thus they always are willing to examine the first things to see if what they identify as dross was not present.

Look at how people object: "you weren't first!"; "What I like is just as old!"; "How can you claim that name and then exclude what I like from it?". It is because they know what I wrote above is true, even if they won't admit it. They don't want to be a 2nd generation (even if gen2 is very close in time to gen1). They don't want to be just "aged", they want to be "old school"; they want the implication of best and first. People don't ever say "oh wow - so what you like was next?"

Of course everyone will seek to disqualify some other sub-group in a "scene" they don't like. That's also instinctual. Because there is an element of zero-sum to all of this - the hobby requires money and time, and both are finite - people dislike the other competing sub-group and do not want to see it grow. To pretend otherwise is to not know one's self.

Every word said against something held dear stings, if someone takes any comfort in being part of something other people also like. It is a rare person who truly is indifferent to that. If people do not always like your thing, then it may be harder to find people to share it with. Even if that isn't a concern for any number of reasons, the success of another thing still represents change when the status quo is enjoyable (or perhaps ending the status quo of another thing is the goal sought).

So for all the emotional weight that is packed into the moniker "old school" (original, first, best) it was still a bad choice because it was choosing ground that could not be yielded. No other group could claim the term; they would be scoffed at. So taking it up was simply to invite a greater degree of opposition and people going around crying "gatekeeper". Strategically it should have been left on the field unclaimed so that the fans of the other thing could only talk about the play differences instead of mean unfair illegitimate old-schoolers who call themselves something that I think should also apply to more things than they validate.

 

[Osrnoob]

Have you all heard of the great rift in the twin city gaming group ?

Barker split his players into specific nights.

This is pre I6

 

[squeen]

Have you all heard of the great rift in the twin city gaming group ?

Barker split his players into specific nights.

This is pre I6

I had not!

@EOTB : Thanks. Makes sense now. I never liked the "old school" slang in any context. I'll also add this: when it comes to D&D, I think there were several cycles of reinvention, growth and bust. Sounds like each one was different, and that each one had it's heyday (...err...except 4e!).

 

[The1True]

1982/1983 is also when Gary becomes mostly hands-off on the actual gaming side of TSR

Just curious where 'Temple of Elemental Evil' - Gygax/Mentzer '85 fits into this timeline. Is this a Trad adventure?

 

[PrinceofNothing]

For me, the next phase will be looking at publications outside of TSR's immediate influence (JG is 3rd party but working under a licensing deal) for people echoing Gygax's norms autonomously. I would consider texts that did so to be strong evidence in support of the existence of that culture. Recommendations are, of course, appreciated.

The Role Aids line begins at around 82', maybe a little earlier, so that's a decent place to start. I would put forward the modules Beastmaker Mountain ('82), Quest for the Nanorien Stones ('82) and A Question of Gravity ('82). You might enjoy the inclusion of a powerful NPC in that last one, but will still mark the lack of railroading.

There's also the Dimension Six. stuff: Nine Doctrines of Darkness parts I & II, Furioso and Temple of Athena. These are all 1980.

Beholder Magazine was a monthly british fan-magazine that had one sample dungeon with every issue with the first issue being published in 1979.

As a base of comparison with several deviations, I would probably recommend David Hargrave's Arduin supplements, which go back as far as 1977. I think its easier to establish the existence of a common ancestor if you observe two species that are clearly related but markedly different.

You could also take a look at White Dwarf but the relationship GW had with TSR at the time is not clear to me so a minor caveat. Regardless, most of the material that was sent in is fan made material and is only edited. In this case, issues 9, 12, 18 and 20-24 should provide sufficient material to ascertain the truth.

I expect you are the Indiana Jones type of scholar that will have methods of procuring said artifacts in the name of science.

 

[Pseudoephedrine]

Just curious where 'Temple of Elemental Evil' - Gygax/Mentzer '85 fits into this timeline. Is this a Trad adventure?

Good catch! ToEE shows trad influence (all the boxed text), but I'd agree that it's the last major text of a potential classic style.

Very well, we can say institutional support dwindles after 1982 (when Gygax begins getting pushed out) and ends after ToEE (when Gygax and Mentzer leave TSR).

Thanks for the recommendations @PrinceofNothing, I'll check them out.

 

[EOTB]

I would say that nearly all the 198-1982 hires TSR made in the design department were of the Hickman school, even if Hickman hadn't become known yet. A very common answer to an interview question of "why did you join TSR" with this group, both contemporary and later in the 2008-2015 "looking backward" style, was "well, I wanted to be a novelist, but I also played D&D and I think its really cool to make adventures".

D&D has always drawn "I wanna tell you a story" DMs. Even if "I wanna tell you a story" wasn't in the minds of the creator.

 

[squeen]

I didn't think Mentzer left after ToEE --- I thought he went on to do the BECMI rule re-writes (1983-1986).

Oh! ToEE was quite late (1985), Metzner left in 1986. Checks out. I figure the BECMI silliness could only have happened without Gygax being there---but I guess he was just estranged on the West Coast.

Also, Trent wrote a pair of nice articles on how Mentzer screwed the pooch with ToEE over on his blog.

 

[PrinceofNothing]

D&D has always drawn "I wanna tell you a story" DMs. Even if "I wanna tell you a story" wasn't in the minds of the creator.

I think that makes sense, I'm not even sure you can be a great GM without that creative impulse (or maybe not a story but a world), its just that you need to channel it in the right conduits where it becomes an asset and not a detriment. To me DnD is deeply entwined with the Appendix N that has brought it forth, to the point where I would consider knowledge of some of the material therein required in order to fully grok DnD. I can imagine someone running a hearty challenge-based game of pit traps and goblins thats excellent fun but the moment when someone asks where goblins are from and the GM closes his eyes and answers with insufferable smugness "p. 47 of the Monster Manual." my soul still dies a little bit. The only problem is that world building, like character building, is like crack cocaine and this disgusting and shameful habit must be mostly kept from the sight of others, or perhaps slyly introduced in the form of item backstories or implied via subtle details, there for the taking if the PCs want it, but never forced upon them. It should operate as a force multiplier, not as a substitute of the core principles of DnD.

Have you all heard of the great rift in the twin city gaming group ?

Barker split his players into specific nights.

This is pre I6

You are like the weird kid brother I never had.

 

[PrinceofNothing]

One day I shall have a hall that is dedicated to trad gaming. Through gates of gold and ivory, marked with the motto 'Roleplayibus non Rollplayiberent' the players will enter, leaving all their mortal burdens behind. Amid thick wallpapers daubed with the masterpieces of Michaelangelo, Donatello and Da Vinci and marble statuary of frolicking satyrs and nymphs we will recline on couches made of rare hardwoods and cushions stuffed with the swan's eiderdown wrapped in silk and languidly roll up our characters with polyhedral dice cast from platinum, electrum, gold and bronze, with the numerals laid out in precious stones. The GM will present everyone with the novel he has written about the campaign world, and once, while idly enjoying the exquisite liqueurs and stuffed nightingale fingerfoods, the backstory has been absorbed, each player will lazily recite his character's backstory, pausing to dip their fingers in a copper bowl of water scented with rose petals while the others are fed grapes by sultry and voluptuous librarians of exotic parentage. When the GM and the players have reached an amiable agreement, every detail of the character, including a complicated genealogy going back five generations, will be lovingly put down on thick, creamy rolls of vellum with rare inks imbued with powdered gemstone. The game itself will be narrated in iambic pentameter, with the common tongue being the English of Shakespeare, Milton, Peake, Eddison. Entire sessions will be spent enjoying a parade of lavish banquets through a richly detailed and beautiful land of plenty, a parallel to the idolent debauchery taking place within the hall proper and with breaks so the players may indulge in a dalliance with the beautiful dancing girls, or perhaps go on a merry chase to catch the live hummingbirds that have escaped from yet another roasted boar while the GM prepares the plot for the next scene. After a trip to the vomitorium, the players, who are obviously naked, will be hoisted in gilded palanquins and carried to the tepidarium, where the warm water will allow them to unwind from the stresses of a 4 hour duel against an equal number of GM NPCs with equally complicated backstories and enjoy an evening of inter-character roleplaying while the GM recovers from the burden of his authorial duty with a relaxing nap. After the 12 hours have concluded, both GM and players will give a contented belch and sigh blissfully "In Roleplayo Veritas est!"

 

[EOTB]

I think that makes sense, I'm not even sure you can be a great GM without that creative impulse (or maybe not a story but a world), its just that you need to channel it in the right conduits where it becomes an asset and not a detriment. To me DnD is deeply entwined with the Appendix N that has brought it forth, to the point where I would consider knowledge of some of the material therein required in order to fully grok DnD. I can imagine someone running a hearty challenge-based game of pit traps and goblins thats excellent fun but the moment when someone asks where goblins are from and the GM closes his eyes and answers with insufferable smugness "p. 47 of the Monster Manual." my soul still dies a little bit. The only problem is that world building, like character building, is like crack cocaine and this disgusting and shameful habit must be mostly kept from the sight of others, or perhaps slyly introduced in the form of item backstories or implied via subtle details, there for the taking if the PCs want it, but never forced upon them. It should operate as a force multiplier, not as a substitute of the core principles of DnD.

I'd agree - it is the difference between using a game to tell a story, and using a story as the background and detail for a game. Which produce entirely different results. There's no easy bright line; it isn't as if one can easily say "this far but no further". But love of the story, as opposed to the fuel in the story, is a warning sign I think.

 

[Palindromedary]

I would say that nearly all the 198-1982 hires TSR made in the design department were of the Hickman school, even if Hickman hadn't become known yet. A very common answer to an interview question of "why did you join TSR" with this group, both contemporary and later in the 2008-2015 "looking backward" style, was "well, I wanted to be a novelist, but I also played D&D and I think its really cool to make adventures".

I've seen you mention this a few times; do you have a link to this? Thanks.

 

[Beoric]

@Yora, who you may recall started this thread, had a link on his most recent blog post to a series that deals with some of the issues we have been discussing here. First post is here, you might want to look in particular at footnote no. 2.

 

[EOTB]

I've seen you mention this a few times; do you have a link to this? Thanks.

No, I don't have links. The only ones that would have links are OSR-blogger interviews from several years ago (dragon mag columns wouldn't), and I wasn't bookmarking those pages for later citation. Just my recollections.

EDIT - so I went on Grognardia, popped the interview tag, and here's the first one from that group most recently posted (2020)

Interview: Doug Niles (Part I)

Douglas Niles worked at TSR between 1982 and 1990, during which time he worked on many different products and game lines, most notably D&D, ...

grognardia.blogspot.com

2. How did you become employed by TSR?

I had always wanted to be a writer but early in college had chosen teaching as a more pragmatic career path. I wrote a lot of short stories for fun (and independent study credit) in high school but by college that hobby sort of dropped out of my life. Once I got enthused about D&D, however, I began reading lots of fantasy fiction and got motivated to write again. I spent most of 1981 writing a fantasy novel in my spare time – I finished it that summer. At the end of summer, I learned through a friend at the hobby shop that TSR wanted to hire more game designers. I decided to take a shot, and applied in September, 1981. I went through a total of 5 interviews that fall. I am proud to say that through those interviews I never once mentioned that I knew Gary Gygax and had taught his daughter in high school! Instead I showed them my novel, designed a strategy mini-game at the company's request, and submitted some of my home dungeons and campaign maps. In November, they offered me a job on the design staff. It actually meant a small pay cut from my teaching salary but I leaped at the chance. I resigned my teaching job at the end of that semester and started as a professional game designer in mid-January 1982.

The company hired a number of designers in 1981 and the first half of 1982, drawing people from as far away as Iowa, Pennsylvania, New York, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri and Utah. Many of these designers had had previous professional designs published, but others, like me, were hired "off the street." I think I was unique in that not only did I not have to move to take the job, but I actually had a shorter commute (15 minutes) to Lake Geneva than the 25 minutes I had been driving to Clinton High School!

Compare with what Yora's post says about Doug Niles:

This broad style of play support—location-based exploration, perhaps with a thin veneer of plot to jumpstart things (e.g. U1 The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh)—predominated until about 1982. That year had some good releases (B4 The Lost City is a particular gem), but also the first non-tournament TSR module that really broke with the above. When making a list of the usual suspects credited for ushering in the demise of the old school, X3 (Curse of Xanathon), by Douglas Niles, is not generally featured. And yet, it's the first clear break in the freewheeling exploratory trend that had predominated to that point.

 

[The Heretic]

Compare with what Yora's post says about Doug Niles:

Doug Niles wrote X3 Curse of Xanathon? That thing is a train wreck.