The state of Post-OSR content

1:1 time is for DMs who have one campaign no matter how many player groups are playing in it at the same time. "At the same time" being the key term. There is one calendar for everyone, and while it can be stretched forward by individual groups it waits for none of them.
It only matters if the players have a reasonable chance of affecting one another. Generally, it works out that simultaneous campaigns are set in different regions of the Majestic Wilderlands. One group is adventuring in the City-State of the Invincible Overlord and the other is in Viridstan. Even when in the same region the two groups are often in different social or cultural circles so their chances of interaction are low.

The nice thing is I don't have to metagame this. I just do my usual thing of saying "Here are some places to adventure in, some situations for characters to deal with. Which one do you want to try for this campaign?". It is rare that the two different groups pick something where I would have to track time strictly. But I do always keep track of the calendar.

Later when their characters are most established and capable of having a wider impact (i.e. wealth, power, at an Olympic caliber level of experience, etc.) interaction between different groups is more common but still rare. And since the late 90s easily handled by getting the involved folks connected via email or posts rather than having them show up at a session. Prior to that I would ask for instructions from the involved parties independently along with passing along any letters or notes.

I never had a situation where I was located at a place (house or game store) and had to track multiple groups doing their own thing. The closest was running various game store campaigns. And most of the time it worked out that a plausible reason could be created why a character wasn't there one week but not the next. For example, if the party was exploring a vast dungeon, like Tegal Manor, the missing character left and returned to the party's camp.

After playing a lot of live-action roleplaying in the 90s and running buffer LARP events, I experienced firsthand what would happen if you had dozens of adventurers milling around all doing their own thing and pursuing their own agenda. As much of a genius Gygax was, the whole keep strict time record business doesn't really do the job compared to how it really works. So like any good referee, I use that experience in my tabletop to play things by ear to create enough verisimilitude to make the experience feel right when it pertains to time, and characters dropping in and out.
 
I've seen that term a couple of times over the last year. What's that even supposed to mean?

NuSR is a term floating around the internet for a while. It's a semi-arbitrary delineation between different generations of OSR games like ACKS or DCC and the newer stuff coming around like Troika, Mork Borg, Mothership, Into the Odd etc. etc. There probably is some sort of hard point of divergence to be found, but it is not identified.
 
*ahem*

Is this an oblique way of saying that your position as a site admin lets you get information beyond the pseudonym? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it does leave the rest of us confused, sometimes.

(also don't rely on little birds, they tend to crap all over the place)

No. I do not abuse this site's admin powers for any reason. I have never felt the inkling to peek at everyone's covert information for nefarious purposes and I never will. If I get absolutely fed up I might do the odd edit or silly title but revealing or misappropriating information is another matter.
 
Last edited:
Referring to Pundit as my "master" is also pretty funny if you know anything about our very public disdain for one another. If you don't, feel free to go search the theRPGsite for this username. I particularly enjoy this one: "Whiny Bitch Pseudoephedrine Proves the Pundit Hater Theory". Sometimes when I'm feeling down, I go and read it until I burst out laughing. If that thread isn't sufficiently entertaining, I recommend the one where he loses his shit and bans me from theRPGsite when I bring up the mildly antisemitic Robotech fan fiction that he wrote on Usenet as a teenager (sadly, most of it is lost with the rest of Usenet).

Lmao, I didn't refer to Pundo as your master bucko, I was well aware of your prior antipathy (and prior collaboration would have been highly unlikely in any case for ideological reasons). I'll try to be more explicit so as to avoid further confusion on your part. You strike me as a candidate for a GNS theory guy, I was referring to Ron Edwards. I know I know not everything is a monolithic conspiracy theory put down the tinfoil hat blah blah but you can hardly blame me for asking.

Edit: Credit where it is due, that thread is extremely funny and aged like absolute fine wine. Peak Pundit fragility must have been the early 2010s.

This is an extraordinarily funny way of saying that it's a publicly known fact, easily discovered across my internet presence, that I periodically interact positively with Ava, Warren, Marcia, and even Gus. But beware! The conspiracy grows - there are tens, perhaps even dozens, of other people I interact with, read the works of, and sometimes even comment on the ideas of. Who else belongs to this nefarious order, and how are right-thinking individuals to spot them?

So some banter in fact may be extracted from your otherwise dry, doddering soliloquys if a little pressure is applied to you, that is good to know. Can you point me to the appropriate stimuli to inhibit your passive aggressive, weasel-like tendencies? I am positive we can turn you into a real boy.


Whatever the reason, I would rather Prince didn't hound him off the site; I think he adds to the conversation in a way that, say, DP and Logruspattern didn't, and unlike them I don't find him obnoxious at all.

There will be no hounding. Pseudoepinephrine can certainly stand up to a bit of verbal horseplay if he actually got Pundo to ban him instead of just turning tail and running.

More substantively, I think if "artpunk" is meant to describe an aesthetic, it's fine, but when it's inflated into just kind of a empty signifier that floats around to designate one's enemies, its analytical power evaporates and it becomes basically a personal term of opprobrium of little interest or value to others. As a great believer in power of dialectical reasoning, I think the latter is basically a failure state for any sort of analytical term.

Like any man-made label with vague attributes it is always going to be variably applicable depending on personal interpretation but much like the term 'OSR' it can be applied definetively to a small group of self-defined authors and adventures and more broadly to a larger group with varying degrees of accuracy. It is, how do you like to say it, a spectrum?
 
Last edited:
Ive run all the classic Vecna adventures. Two in 2.5e and one converted to 3.0 I believe. Fighting Vecna was significantly more difficult for my players. Maybe the rules systems, maybe players inexperienced with high-level play?

Come to think of it, is this really the same Vecna, or is it the "Vecna(s)" from Stranger Things?
 
Come to think of it, is this really the same Vecna, or is it the "Vecna(s)" from Stranger Things?

I would argue that WotC's Vecna, though ostensibly the same entity as TSR's Vecna, is an unworthy impostor. Ironically, WotC's Vecna does make a surprisingly good Kas: life-draining and hard-hitting attacks, high mobility. Swap his dagger out for a sword and he *is* a vampire-lord extraordinaire.
 
Referring to Pundit as my "master" is also pretty funny if you know anything about our very public disdain for one another. If you don't, feel free to go search the theRPGsite for this username. I particularly enjoy this one: "Whiny Bitch Pseudoephedrine Proves the Pundit Hater Theory". Sometimes when I'm feeling down, I go and read it until I burst out laughing. If that thread isn't sufficiently entertaining, I recommend the one where he loses his shit and bans me from theRPGsite when I bring up the mildly antisemitic Robotech fan fiction that he wrote on Usenet as a teenager (sadly, most of it is lost with the rest of Usenet).

This is a fascinating read, particularly if the accompanying RPG.net thread is included (start at page 1). I essentially accuse you of being in cahoots with a bunch of unpleasantly smelling shady characters that indulge in backhanded double-dealing and smear campaigns to advance their interests and make a point of calling out the duplicitous modus operandi of accusing people behind closed doors and allowing them no means of defending themselves. I provide for these two points no factual basis or evidence whatsoever. Your response appears to be to agree that my initial assessment is entirely accurate while also trying to make a a point that this should be obvious (not understanding that this was not obvious to the spectators I was addressing), make a big point on how you prefer dialectic (thereby signalling that you consider yourself well versed in these types of exchanges), then provide evidence of yourself accusing a person of various perceived misdoings in a location where he cannot defend himself and deadnaming poor Jonathan Urbanovski.

I don't know how one usually handles conflicts in your circles, I assume lots of pig noises, hair pulling and purse swinging is involved ( perhaps with the occasional unaccountable 80% disparity in upper body strength) but I must admit that the current configuration has me baffled. Am I adressing the rhetorical equivalent of Wimp Lo? Is this verbal Face to my Foot technique?
 
Last edited:
Logruspattern sort of lost it instantly when Prince asked him to tone down the politics. It was weird.

All this stuff between Prince and Psuedo is sailing right past me. I haven't a clue what they are talking about.
 
Logruspattern sort of lost it instantly when Prince asked him to tone down the politics. It was weird.

All this stuff between Prince and Psuedo is sailing right past me. I haven't a clue what they are talking about.

Yeah, not sure why we're picking a fight here. Maybe it's all in good fun to the participants? We're doing that thing where we start digging into the syntactics of the opponent's response from which there is rarely a good outcome...

Where's @Osrnoob when we need him?!
 
Logruspattern sort of lost it instantly when Prince asked him to tone down the politics. It was weird.

All this stuff between Prince and Psuedo is sailing right past me. I haven't a clue what they are talking about.

I am glad you said so because I thought I was the only one. I even Googled "Jonathan Urbanovsky" but still came up empty. I understood Prince of Nothing's early posts in this thread but the recent, cryptic diatribes are Greek to me.
 
I have no idea why they think that's better than drawing a clear connection to the infamous Eye of Vecna and Hand of Vecna by making those parts be missing.
My guess would be that it was either that:
•Having a villain who was missing an eye and a hand would be "ableist" (even if he's an all-powerful immortal wizard).
Stranger Things did not set up the expectation that Vecna would be missing an eye and hand, therefore that's not an important trait.

Or perhaps both.
 
My guess would be that it was either that:
•Having a villain who was missing an eye and a hand would be "ableist" (even if he's an all-powerful immortal wizard).
Stranger Things did not set up the expectation that Vecna would be missing an eye and hand, therefore that's not an important trait.

Or perhaps both.

I can buy #2 but I don't understand #1. Isn't showcasing a disabled NPC as powerful the opposite of ableist? Or do you mean specifically because he's a villain?

I dunno, maybe you're right about those being their reasons, but if so those are garbage reasons. Especially #2: chasing pop culture is dumb. And yes, WotC is clearly trying to jump on the pop culture "multiverse" bandwagon already, which is also dumb. But I'm preaching to the choir...
 
I can buy #2 but I don't understand #1. Isn't showcasing a disabled NPC as powerful the opposite of ableist? Or do you mean specifically because he's a villain?

I dunno, maybe you're right about those being their reasons, but if so those are garbage reasons. Especially #2: chasing pop culture is dumb. And yes, WotC is clearly trying to jump on the pop culture "multiverse" bandwagon already, which is also dumb. But I'm preaching to the choir...
I guess there is an "Evil Cripple" trope, but it is used so infrequently now I didn't remember it until I went to TV Tropes just now - because I was initially going to post that I wasn't aware of such a trope and wanted to double-check. I think this one is currently so underused, and so balanced by the recent inclusion of many disabled heroes and ordinary folks, that I have trouble classifying it as problematic. For every Mr. Glass there is a Professor X or an Odin.
 
Last edited:
And yes, WotC is clearly trying to jump on the pop culture "multiverse" bandwagon already, which is also dumb. But I'm preaching to the choir...

Okay okay, you guys have been going at this for a couple of weeks now because (I guess?) WOTC slapped the trigger-word on the cover of one of their latest books. But honestly, D&D's existed in a multiverse since at least 1e AD&D. Further compounded by Spelljammer with it's Crystal Spheres and Planescape. Manual of the Planes was a 1.5e product you Unearthed Arcana-hating dinosaurs! There were Boot Hill conversion rules in the old RAW DMG. One of my favourite Dragon adventures was one where you had to retrieve the Mace of St. Cuthbert from 1980's London! Chill out on the 'I liked them before they sold out and got cool' thing. For what I can tell about most of you fellow 40-50-something bros, you liked it when it was cool, then continued liking it when it was no longer cool nor haram, then when it was briefly cool again, then still liked it when it was kind of immature and passé and then more recently when it was once again, le cool. Some of you came back to an earlier edition in your old age and are clinging to it with the zealotry of the recently Reborn in Jaysus.

"But I held on to the Whitebox through thick and thin, along with my cuddly Mr. Teddy!" you wail and clutch your pearls. Fine, you love a deeply flawed but vibrant product written by college students who were just throwing shit at the wall to see what stuck. It's cool. I happen to like 'Sad Wings of Destiny' more than 'Ram it Down', but I don't go around pretending like 'Painkiller' isn't the best fucking thing ever and telling the fresh crowd that everything after 'Stained Class' sucks balls and so do they for liking it.

FUCK

Sorry to go off on you Hemlock. It's (obviously) not you man. It's this edition war bullshit. So friggin tiresome. I'm glad I'm part of a living hobby that hasn't disappeared into obscurity. I'm glad there's a big, filthy, greedy corporate machine out there, pumping out new stuff, bringing joy to new generations and keeping my favourite pastime relevant into my old age. I don't own any of the 5e books. My 4e books are absolutely pristine having seen no use past the introductory adventure. But damn, I'm glad someone wrote them and enough people bought them so they could pay dudes to make more of it and inspire fresh generations of game designers. I hope some of them trickle down to this forum, pick up some awesome tools and tricks and won't feel intimidated by hostile evangelists!

Chill out on the hating and gate-keeping, is what I'm saying dudes. TSR was just as cheezy as WOTC. Just look at some of those cringy old adds James Maliszewski likes to post on Grognardia from time to time. AD&D/BX/whatever is not the fucking alpha and omega. The 70's/80's were better because you were children and everything was easier and your friends were all around you every day.

I just watched Star Wars eps 1-3 with the kids and saw it through their eyes. Those movies aren't half as bad as I remember them.

Toxic ownership is so uch.
 
The1True said:
I just watched Star Wars eps 1-3 with the kids and saw it through their eyes. Those movies aren't half as bad as I remember them.

Most stuff isn't as bad or good as one remembers it.

and don't forget... now you have three new horrible movies to take the edge of from the last three horrible movies :)
 
I'm glad I'm part of a living hobby that hasn't disappeared into obscurity. I'm glad there's a big, filthy, greedy corporate machine out there, pumping out new stuff, bringing joy to new generations and keeping my favourite pastime relevant into my old age.
I get everything you are saying, but for me personally, no. There has been zero benefit gained by the post Gygax D&D. I stopped buying anything after UA---even B/X was a total dead-end for me. It was obvious to my youthful brain then as it is now---none of that great tide product was compatible with the D&D I loved. I wasn't/am-not angry...but I just tuned out starting in 1981 and stopped consuming even though we continued playing for the rest of the decade. I love AD&D/OD&D and weep when I see what it became.

In truth, many of the fan-made OSR products are more exciting than all the late-TSR/WotC garbage-barge output...to me, at least. The real deal is back...in some slightly altered fashion.

I just watched Star Wars eps 1-3 with the kids and saw it through their eyes. Those movies aren't half as bad as I remember them.
I was fine with ALL of the Star Wars episodes until the one-two punch of pure excrement that was Rogue One and the Last Jedi. Seriously, after Rogue One I didn't think I would watch another in the franchise...but Ron Howard's Solo was genuinely good, and Abrams pulled the finale back on target.

Look, this is a big arc in human existence---one of the life lessons we all need to absorb and understand: corporate/human greed sucks all the life and vitality out of individual creative endeavors. Popularity kills things. It happens over, and over, and over in our lives. It is the birth-rise-death cycle writ large. Can't you see it? The hollowness?

What's perhaps most interesting is why? Why is more so often less? What disappears exactly? What dies?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top