What are "the above two"?The right wing of the OSR tends to congregate with the above two, with the exception of the newer "hacks" like Knave.
"rules-light" became incorrectly applied as a supposed sacred tenet of the OSR as a whole by 2013. That this supposed tenet would invalidate AD&D 1st edition, a game that could hardly be called light in most cases and also the pre-eminent old-school edition, only speaks to how divorced from old-school origins those that popularized this principle were. This non-existent generalized tenet was in turn adopted as a justification for increasingly thin rulesets that left out more and more of the central old-school gameplay loop in the name of reducing complexity and page count, a zebra's tail wagging the dog.
I wrote it. Pretty much as soon as I got into the OSR I decided to write my own game, not really because of any issues per se but because I've been tinkering since I was a kid for whatever game I get into. But I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing, so I needed to research; being a historian, research comes natural and I quite enjoy it. Also, being older, forums are my preferred way of interaction online. So I naturally looked for forums first, started at the beginning of Dragonsfoot's General Discussion and Simulacrum subforums (skipping the C&C threads, but even seeing the vast sea of them and then their dying out almost overnight once Labyrinth Lord came out was quite telling), and just started reading. After a year or two I felt I had things reasonably down, but the more I thought I figured out, the more I also noticed that no one could seem to agree on what the OSR was and how things were supposed to work, which was weird because I thought it was pretty damn clear, having read what I'd read.Did you write this? I enjoyed it. How did the research happen? Web scraping?
Yep, that's me there. I don't post much on the forums, but I read them all the time. I don't get the feeling too much was stirred up though, other than DD / Silvey getting angry that I didn't give him the credit he feels he deserves. But I didn't want to get into that kind of discussion as a newcomer over there vs a very longstanding regular because no one appreciates a new guy rolling up to an established space and making a mess, and I'm not sure what I'd say about it in any case other than "I didn't see any evidence that you created the OSR". Maybe I'll find it later or someone will chime in in support of him, in which case I'll edit it in like I've done a lot of other bits thus far, but it seems a pretty singular opinion, not shared by anyone else that I've noticed.
I fixed this: thanks for pointing it out (it should have been "the above two subgroups"). And thanks for the kind words.Also, I couldn't connect this paragraph to the ones above it
What are "the above two"?
It would help if you give me an angle. I'll just throw up some thoughts and start from there?@PrinceofNothing I am struck by your recent blog posts and this at a core level. Not surface mind.
I wanted to discuss this as it alo... well I don't want to categorize, organize, seperate and stifle discussion.
Artpunk is not equivalent to storygames, but it is not equivalent to OSR either. In my now (in the name of peace and light, expurgated) essay I went into my disscetion of PS's defenition of it and noted that for the most part, it barely covers fundamental aspects of what oldschool play is about. It is primarily an aesthetic movement and as such its focus is on layout, aesthetics and creativity. It doesn't greatly care about the rules, self-selecting for rules-lite games because it is easier to deal with, and it is agnostic about both Dragonsfoot and Appendix N. I postulated that the current trend of Artpunk material: Troika and Mork Borg junk, is terrible probably as a result of this. Any vestigial OSR assumptions have been expurgated and the result is a movement that is not a movement. There is no consensus of what Nu-OSR is supposed to be about, besides be pretty and creative and some lingering OSR assumptions like Random Tables, so that is what you get. But that is also ONLY what you get.I have no love for the direction LotFP went, but Raggi is perceptive in his dissection of "entertainment", "otherness" and how they pertain to D&D.
Artpunk or nu-OSR...story games...whatever --- they are all strangers to me. I got burned with Silent Titans, realizing that art-book had no relation to D&D and was a complete waste of my money. Blue Medusa was a similar revelation in that I recognized I could never make it work at my table. I've not in "the marketplace" any more. I'm done consuming except in very special cases. I bought No-Art Punk because it was a worthy cause, not because I thought I'd be using the content, even though it was well above average. I'm an (A)D&D maker, not a consumer.