Old school is the way too go - the game moves faster.

Once I started digging into old school games I realized how much more enjoyable they are for me to run. I’ve never looked back.

I love the rules lawyer voice.

5e scared me away from running games. All the specific rules and mechanics, needing to worry about encounter balance and providing a satisfying narrative arc to the players and just....bleh. It was too much all at once. Hell, the DMG teaches you about the freaking multiverse at the start, and not how to stock a basic dungeon, a section that's tucked in the back of the book where it's likely to go ignored, if the reader ever gets that far. Maybe that's how they incentivised buying their campaign modules and setting books. "Look at all this work you won't have to do if you just buy more books!" Thank God I found the OSR. With less than fifteen dollars, I can get multiple small, but complete rulesets, and with some dice, grid paper and imagination I can run a game in no time. Old-school play is the cure for DM burnout. The hard part is convincing a 5e group to try it.

My experience has been the other way around. If a question comes up, if we can look up the answer in a few minutes it resolves the problem. If we just make a ruling, it might get debated and discussed for multiple sessions distracting from the rest of gameplay.

Thank You for explaining everything! My knowledge of D&D 2 edition comes only from Baldur's Gate and Spoony One, and they don't really go in depth into rules because they don't need to. They come from a position of knowing the basis already, so I'm really happy to know how Free the old system is. Using your head, being smart is what I absolutley love. If I may go on a tangent; the rules obediance remindes me of a video game called "W40k: Space Marine" where we had oposing ideals on interpreting The Codex Astartes in the form of two marines. There is our main character Captain Titus and Leandros. Titus interprets it as a guidline to your actions, whereas Leandros think's you HAVE TO do exactly as it says. Your examples of different rulesets of different edition reminded me of such an example. I guess it is similiar at the table at times.

I prefer to run old school, but also players do like the options from new school now days too. A combination is best for me.

I have a far superior option. It doesn't even require dices. Whenever I need a roll from the players we decide by rock paper scissors.

I think a lot of 5e players are put off by the claim that old-school games are more lethal, but i (who started in 1981) never heard of a total party kill until i started looking into 5e. I think in the old days the PCs would negotiate or just run away when faced by a more powerful foe. But because of “balanced” encounters, 5e players think they can kill anything, so a misbalanced encounter can go off the rails.

@2.35 having a Nam flashback 😂

Lovely insight! I played old school nearly 40 years ago and it had a specialness I could not put my finger on. You nailed it bang on.

I am a strong fan of the OSR. It is my go to style of play.

The OSR is the real legacy of DnD and is the future of our hobby.

I prefer B/X. My rules assortment is similar. But DnD Rules Cyclopedia is king! I also love OSE. I need the OSE Advanced Players Tome but it's expensive right now. Check out the Pathfinder 2e Basic Box set. Way easier to understand and it's amazing.

What is the difference between OSR and OSE?

I run a B/X close for my kids, 7 and 5. It’s great. I recently bought a lot of RPG Pundit’s books and look forward to starting a campaign as Christians in the old world with them. OSR is awesome. 5e is confusing the way it’s played with so many classes and variations that are unnecessary for good world building.

the best rule in D&D is HAVE FUN

every video has been great man, keep em coming!

I really like your approach to these videos. I also agree that running OSR is a completely different animal to more modern editions and I find myself to prefer them. When I run Patahfinder 1e, I need a ton of books and a computer up to check the online SRD sites. I almost give myself a hernia getting all the books out of my office to the living room. Castles & Crusades requires maybe two books or an adventure module and a core book or two for me and the group. Much simpler. Thanks for the video!

Blah, blah, blah is kinda right. Old School is just an utterly epic and philosophy-of-gaming-changing experience indeed! Like you said though, not that the others are "bad" or without fun at all. Subbed!! 👊I'd appreciate one back, please. 👍"Nice to share it with people" indeed.

As someone who is a big fan of Pathfinder (1e not so much 2e), I like having rules as a reference, but overall for people to keep in mind that at the end of the day not every rule needs to be used and some can be changed. I'm up front about it for my games so there is less arguing, but again, I like the rules because until you get more experience and see why you may or may not like a rule to just run that. Because I know way too many people who overcomplicate making their homebrew rules, or completely overthrow the balance.

Hail the old gods of OSR!!

I use OSR games to introduce new players to D&D and they pick up on it really quickly. I think it's really intuitive for them.

WONDERFUL VIDEO!!!! As you said, one can run OSR style games without much prep. I have a number of drop-in scenarios ready, a few in-town NPC's and you're good to go. Thanks and best of luck with your channel.

I have a three page system of homemade rules from which I can play anything. This is all I really need, but occasionally it is nice to revisit older editions of Dungeons & Dragons.

agree 100%!

I’ve been collecting and playing a long time and it seems I’ve come full circle in the complexity I want in a game. Started with B/X as a child and now want to play super simple like Tiny d6 or Tricube Tales. They are not D&D/D20 based, but I would argue they are old *old* school because they are practically pure imagination with a simple die mechanic. Advanced Fighting Fantasy is in that same category, just slightly more complex.

Having less rules is incredibly liberating. And you get other advantages, such as the game being easier to get into and you don't have to spend 1-2 hours planning and creating your character.

THIS IS THE WAY!

PF and 5/e suffer from a Paradox of Choice for players and too much to memorize for a DM, having run all editions. But the one thing that I personally like about OSR is that it's basic and you can bolt things on from other editions with ease and little push back from players but taking 5e and saying I am stripping this thing away you will get a lot of push back.

I much prefer 2e (which is somewhat OSR) but I can see others not liking it on both sides of the table. It can be easier for a DM who can come up with rules on the fly but there are some DMs who don't have that skill. There are also some players who want to play a tactical combat game and not really roleplay. 4e or Pathfinder is good for that.

SWADE is what I use to run old dnd

Did you start playing TTRPGs with old school/osr games?

Like that OSRIC cover. I saw it on amazon. How is the print quality and paper? Want to pick up a physical copy of it myself 😁

This is why Worlds Without Number is my favorite OSR game: it has what is essentially Traveler's skill system, so mechanically, all bases are covered, but it remains abstract.

I love the commentary, my favorite in the OSR realm is Castles & Crusades, so i was tickled to see you reference it!

Actually we had very crunch roles: it was called GURPS We even make fun that in GURPS you could make a monk elf warlock who hide a talking unicorn. Today Dungeons an Dragons pretty much become GURPS fantasy.

Player: "Well ackchyually, on page 187 the rules book says--" GM: "Is this meant to be your shield?" * rips page * GM: "A piece of paper?" * continues ripping * . . . Player (in disbelief): "Those were Gary's rules..."

I've never understood why people equate Rulings and free form. Rulings still need to be based on some sort of precedent. Otherwise it's just fiat. A lack of rules doesn't make something free form. There are real free form RPG games out there to compare to. Go to the OSE online rules and it's very clear how regimented the game is. Not saying it's bad, but it's not free form. You want free form look at PBTA games, or better yet Microscope. That said I appreciate the simplicity of old school. I think for DMs they should play B/X, or one of its clones, to really understand how the tempo of d&d is supposed to go. The structure the rules give makes it fun. Having everything on a clock made it easy to understand the objective of the game. And just to set the record straight, 4e was the edition that really codified the rulings not rules mentality, outside of combat that is. They gave generic tools to use outside of combat, such as skill challenges, to resolve pretty much any adventuring/social encounter quickly. A lot of the tables and predetermined DCs of 3e were abandoned in favor of allowing the DM to fill in those minor details at the moment. A lot of complaints against the game were likely based on a failure to grasp those concepts, especially by DMs. (That and the tightening up of combat to counter "optimizers" annoyed many people.) The wide spread use of the style 4e uses in newer non-d20 games shows that it is a viable system. I would argue most D&D/D20 players don't like free form. They want the direction. The rise in dominance of APs is clear evidence of that. And while the sandbox style of older versions allows for more freedom than the current popular mishmash of adventure on rails and mother may I, they are still on par with Minecraft.

i always loved the nwp's in ad&d

Im just coming off a massive campaign for 5E (which technically isn't finished, we hit a break point) and I needed to get out of the system for a little while. Combat takes so long 😫 and is my least liked part of the game. We've since been playing Shadow of the Demon Lord but even that gets bogged down with more combat options. I think I'm going to try Shadowdark next as it will give my group the mechanics of 5th but the freedom and brevity of OSR.

It's easier to run 5E, because players are plentiful. It's more satisfying to run OSR or games that are pre-3E because generally, the 5E crowd/culture hates DMs and caters toward players/player coddling (keeping characters alive, making sure they’re going to achieve greatness, making them look badass, and other things that the players should be doing and not the DM). I don't know the Pathfinder 2 crowd so I can't respond to that, but it is rooted off the same game (WotC D&D), so it’s likely same rules apply. There's a distinct misconception around the OSR in general above and beyond the overarching misconception regarding political leanings (which I won’t get in to). This is the misconception that it's all simple hand-wavey games where nobody cares about rules and it’s all just GM rulings. That partially depends on the ruleset you pick and is partially just bunk. Let me explain: If you pick a lighter ruleset there will be more rulings by the nature that there will be less rules there. Microlite20 or White Box will see a lot of rulings by nature of all the empty space where there’s nothing to reference. You will still be playing White Box if you rule a d6 check modified by Dexterity is required to see how well you can play a game of darts in a tavern. It is still possible to deviate and no longer be playing White Box, though. If you rule that searching an entire 30’x30’ room for secret doors only takes one turn and requires a Wisdom check on a d20 vs stat to complete, you have deviated. You’ve essentially walked away from the game system. Elf players would/should be annoyed with a “ruling” of this sort. Because you failed to meet the expectations implicit by sitting down to play White Box. And the OSR like nowhere else will dismiss this behavior as “rulings not rules”. Well it’s not. It’s bad DMing and poor system mastery, especially in an extremely light game like White Box. If you pick a heavier ruleset you will be expected to know it, and rule outside of it just like the lighter ruleset but with less real estate and even more system mastery expected. This means heavier rulesets are for more systemically minded and mechanically invested GMs. For example: if you’re playing Castles & Crusades, the SIEGE Engine will be expected to be present in the game. If you’re playing Hackmaster, Honor, BPs, and advancement rules will be expected features. Managing expectations is key; it’s the thing that keeps you all playing the same game in everyone’s mind. In this regard the ruleset really doesn’t matter and I think OSR has a real problem with this mantra of “rulings not rules”. It’s misunderstood and widely misused. It’s not about ignoring rules. It’s about making rules where none are present, and then keeping them around. If you play darts in White Box again with that group it better still be a d6 roll modified by Dexterity. You made that rule part of the ruleset now. It’s become expected. For this reason I think most older players who know a dozen or more different D&D-alikes are at a distinct disadvantage, myself included, when running a multitude of D&D-alikes and not sticking to one. Sure you can run 350 minimalist games with 4 rules, but it takes real effort and study to remember the nuances of one systemically heavy game, or even multiple systemically medium games concurrently, if they’re all similar but not the same. Example: OD&D is d6 individual initiative modified by Dexterity (higher is better). AD&D is side-based d6 initiative and you have to understand surprise, segments, and weapon speed etc (also that higher is better because you’re rolling for your opponent’s starting segment). AD&D2E is d10 based individual initiative modified by Dexterity and various speed factors, where lower is better as you are rolling for your own starting “segment”. That’s just one rule along one game’s edition lifecycle. It behooves one to pick a single game or very small selection of games and own them, in every sense of the word. Earn that Game Master title.

Mostly running FKR these days - no ruleset, only play

To play devil's advocate here, there is something to be said for thoroughly structured rules. In rules light games since so much is up to interpretation, it forces the dm into more of an oppositional role, rather than a referee. This can lead to conflict between players and DMs. Well structured rules help eliminate that friction.

Hmmm. Is it FAR better or better to run at times?

I run Basic Fantasy (huge fan of it) and considering the cost alone, I don't know why anyone would ever use DnD 5e. Basic Fantasy is free for every PDF in their collection and the books are just a few dollars each if you want a physical copy. The rules are simple but they cover almost every situation you're going to encounter with enough rules for the GM to make logical leaps to create new rules for things on the spot. Not to mention that everything from Moldvay DnD and all of the OSR-like RPG's are compatible with it so if you like something from a different book series, just add it to your game.

I've all those and C&C is the simplest for new players.

Despite “lethality” and (incorrectly) assumed ‘sameness’ of characters in an older iteration or other older game…fans of Pathfinder or whatever else would be surprised at all the fun and awesome stuff their characters could do and accomplish in my game/at my table …be it B/X or WB:FMAG or even RISUS! Fun is king! (Part of that fun is failure from poor decisions, too! lol) Also, I’m frankly kinda weirded out by fans of crunch. Like…I don’t even want to be bothered to read a PF or 5th Ed monster’s stats…let alone read the rulebooks even marginally! Haha! What a waste of fun! I’ve run B/X and other similar games for decades…. Have I read every last word of even their slim page count? Nope! lol Cheers! 🙂

It's funny... All the clones and derivatives of D&D seem slow and tedious to run. And OSR games are no exception. For me, GURPS has been the game where the game really feels fast, fluid and with a lot to do. The last time I played and GMed a D&D clone (C&C), a level 2 group in a combat against 8 enemies lasted 3 hours. 3 hours of just miss, miss, miss, miss, miss rolls... For 3 hours. The last time I played a 5e session the combat felt slow because my party was taking too long to make decisions... Not because the combat itself was 3 hours of failing rolls, and no one asking for surrender or withdrawal. In GURPS a typical combat when I play and GMing does not last more than 30 minutes, even when a miss roll happened, something interesting happens. OSR is not better, it's just nostalgia talking, and nostalgia is not a good argument.

The sheer number of different "to hit" bonuses used in conjunction an attack matrix table. This wasn't a highlight of 1e AD&D.

Pathfinder is vastly easier than DnD 5e. 5e is an absolute hot mess.

I just don’t understand why OSR heads are so at odds with crunchy TTRPGs like pathfinder 2e. They are different games. Different target audiences, different play styles. OSR games are often meat-grindery and not particularly “heroic” feeling, and that’s ok. That’s fun for some players. But Pathfinder 2e makes you feel like a super hero as you reach higher levels, and it targets people who want super crunchy combat with structured rules. Liking lighter games with less rules doesn’t make you some ascendant being. Neither is better than the other, it’s just different tastes.

Old man rant?

Your point isn't really convincing if you have to resort to a "well ackshually" strawman fallacy to make it.