The Poster's Code
In my position as a community member of the purple OSR RPG server these past years I've seen many good and bad discussions. I have compiled here a guide and an FAQ both for the newcomer and the long-time poster pursuant of a better posting culture.
This isn't meant as a cudgel to beat the inexperienced or the ignorant with, nor is it required reading. This is a challenge to the community: these are all the things we have already discussed, make something new or die trying.
To link a header directly, click one of the links on the table of contents and then copy the URL at the top of the screen directly.
Table of Contents
Part I - How to post
I.1 - Pay attention and follow the conversation
Due to the quick nature of Discord messaging, many a Poster tune into the channel, read the latest couple of messages being sent, and feel the Call of the Void - the instinct ingrained in them from years of Twitter addiction - to post their own opinion and say their piece.
Resist the urge. You do not need to have an opinion on all things; you do not need to say your piece. But if you will, make sure you have read the discussion up until the point you are jumping into. This will require scrolling back a little while and, yes, reading text. It is vitally important you do this.
Do not ask "what are you all talking about". This is disruptive to the conversation. If someone who is involved is your friend, you may ask them in their DMs, but remember this is a public venue.
Remember: You are speaking to a person, you are not speaking to an audience, and you are not speaking to the wasteland of Twitter or Reddit. Before saying something, consider the following:
A. Does the person already know the information I am about to impart?
B. Is the information relevant to the conversation at hand? How do I expect to further the conversation by saying this? Am I interrupting an ongoing conversation and trying to make it about myself?
C. Is the information true? Do I know this for certain?
D. If making a declarative statement about verifiable facts, do I have evidence or a credible source I can quote if someone requests it? Or is this hearsay?
E. If it is hearsay, have I made that fact clear?
F. Am I being ambiguous, overly long, or scattered? Is this the most effective and brief way to communicate the information I would like to communicate?
G. If about to bring yourself up: is this about me? Does the information related fit my self-image? If not, why do I believe it is referring to me? Refer to this.
Once you have mastered these maxims, you may begin to flaunt them intentionally, but not before.
I.2 - Asking a good question
Having made sure your query was not to be found in the FAQ, the Poster finds herself wanting to interact with the community. However, not all questions are made equal, so these are some things to keep in mind - the PRS principles - before asking a question:
Purpose. Why are you asking this, and what kind of answer do you hope to obtain? The more context you can provide around your question, the better. Do not ask one question hoping to get an answer that will lead you to your true question, be forthright in your speech. Importantly: "winning an argument with my friends" or "with the voices in my head because I have read too much rpg.net" are not good reasons to ask a question; search your feelings and get over it.
Research. Have you already attempted to look into this question using your human brain and a search engine? If not, then do it. But if you already have, then make that explicit, and inform the people of what you already know - or think you know - to give them a jumping off point.
Specificity. Don't ask questions that are too broad and require a full dissertation, or can already be answered by simply looking into the book itself. Be specific, use the reason you are asking the question and drill down at what exact nugget of information you hope to obtain by asking this question.
Let us use what we have learned. Here is an example of a bad question:
Curious about the RPG "RuneQuest", the Poster makes her way towards #rpg and asks: How does RuneQuest work?
This is a terrible question, so let's refer back to the PRS.
P - Why does the Poster want to know this? They have heard that the videogame Morrowind has its lineage in the RuneQuest RPG, and would like to know how alike they are.
R - They have googled it and know it refers mostly to the setting, but they are not interested in this.
S - Using the two previous points, Poster realises she wants to know about the mechanics, particularly the skills, and how they relate to one another.
Let us help Poster out and reformulate the question:
Hey! I read on Reddit that Morrowind traces back to RuneQuest in its mechanics, particularly its skills. Does anyone know how far does this connection go and how similar they are on a mechanical level? I am unfamiliar with RuneQuest but I have played Morrowind before.
Much better! Now Poster can have her question addressed and get a fruitful conversation out of it.
I.3 How to give an answer
Answering a question is easier than making one, but there are still some pitfalls we fall into sometimes. Here are some of them, and how to avoid them:
Giving a snarky response that does not advance the discussion. Jokes are fine, of course, but if all you have to contribute to the conversation is a joke, make sure you are not the first person to respond. There is nothing more infuriating than asking a question only for an unhelpful jester to pop in, make a poor excuse of a jape, and run away cackling to himself.
Soapboxing and circlejerking. Do not take the question as an invitation to induct someone into a polemic you have in your heart; the mindgoblins are yours, do not spread them around.
If making claims, make sure they are true. Refer to section I.1-C and D, make sure you know what you are talking about and are ready to explain it further in case of further questioning or pushback.
Assume competency, be charitable, do not be unnecessarily dismissive. Avoid empty platitudes such as "Because that is all bullshit" or "That doesn't matter" or "Google is free". If need be, refer to this guide and inform the asker they are in violation of the Code, but there is no need for the attitude.
Responding with a question that is ultimately unnecessary. If someone asks, for instance, how to make Beholders fit in their setting, do not take this as an opportunity to have them digress on the minutiae of their setting. Stick to the topic, if you want to know more, ask the question in another channel. Otherwise you risk burying the original conversation with your digression.
I.4 How to receive critique
It is assumed that anything posted to the server will be subject to critiquing. It is a public venue, and those who would rather not have others read what they post and say what they think are better served by not posting at all.
With that in mind, not everyone is used to being critiqued, and it can be a difficult process, so here is some advice on how to handle it:
Do not take it personally. No one here really knows who you are; even if they are being rude, nothing of what they are saying is - or should be - targetting you as a human being. If someone calls an idea you have "bad", this does not mean you are a bad person, or that they are calling you stupid, it simply means they believe that idea is inappropriate.
Don't get defensive or clam up. If someone is engaging with what you have to say in this public venue, don't hit them with monosyllabic "Ok" or "Gotchas", and also don't start explaining yourself or evading the criticism with self-deprecating humour. A simple "I hadn't thought of it that way" or "Thank you for the feedback" is quite enough of a conversation-ender.
Do not be afraid to disengage yourself from the conversation if you feel like it is affecting you too much. "I am sorry, I feel too strongly about this, I will be stepping away" and then leaving your phone or computer behind for a while does wonders, and prevents you from saying something you might regret later.
Remember to involve the mods if a significant line is crossed. Rule 1 is to treat members with dignity, and if you feel like that has happened, feel free to call on them to either intervene or even mediate, if you feel like your personal skills aren't up to the task.
I.5 How to request constructive feedback
We have a "workshop" channel where people can request feedback for the thing they are working on, but much like having a conversation, there is a way to make the process more efficient and painless to all involved.
Have a goal and a reason as to why you are doing what you are doing. Do not request people to look over your new rules without any context, as the only purpose of a rule is for it to accomplish a goal. Why are you making a rule about this? What do you hope to get from it? Do you need this rule in the first place? If substituting a rule that already exists, why is that one not good enough for you?
Do not try to have people make choices which are ultimately personal. "Should I do X or Y to achieve a specific goal" is a question people can answer; but "I am indecisive on which of these two things I should go with" is impossible for anyone other than yourself to know. When in doubt, pick any and test it, then if it doesn't work, change it later.
Like a conversation or a question, good feedback requires specificity. You have to provide relevant details so that the people you are requesting feedback from can make an informed opinion on what you should do.
So, for example, someone goes to the workshop and says:
I have made this magic system, but I don't know if I should use 2d6 or 1d12 for it, what do you think?
This is a terrible request for feedback, after all there are hundreds of ways to do magic in RPGs. Now, if the Poster had said, instead:
I have made this magic system based on the D&D one, I dislike the element around having to sleep to get the spells back for such and such reason, so I have made this one instead. I want it to feel similar and be predictable. Should I use 2d6 or 1d12?
It's still not perfect, after all they should ultimately try it out, but people can more confidently recommend a 2d6 there as it will more predictably have the results 5 to 8, unlike the d12.
I.6 How to search for an answer
Many discussions you might want to have have already happened and a good way to learn is by looking them up. One of the best ways of doing this is the Remembering channel, which collects links, advice, and other noteworthy things which might pass you by.
Another good way is by using the search function on Discord and looking up keywords that relate to what you want to know. So for instance, looking up "Glorantha" is useful, but you'll want to append a "in:#channel" and select the main channels to filter out off-topic conversation.
A more advanced technique is, after looking up these conversations, noticing which users are either most mentioned directly or participate in them and seem to be taken seriously and speak with conviction, then appending "from:user" in your search and looking for keywords within the log of conversation of that specific user. We have many older and experienced players who love to share that experience, so identifying who they are and checking what they have to say can be an invaluable education which few other servers can offer.
A fun one to try is looking up the username of the author of a book or blog post you enjoy and checking if they ever expanded on it or were questioned on it in the past.
Part II - Frequently Asked Questions
II.1 - What is the OSR, the "Old-School Renaissance"?
Ask 3 people about this and you will get 4 different answers. Overall, however, the OSR began as a platform to run, publish for, and discuss old D&D and a few other games from the time period, such as Traveller and RuneQuest; and the community of like-minded persons which sprang from that. It came about in a period where acquiring those old books was quite difficult, and since these days it isn't, some believe the OSR is "dead" in the sense that it has become obsolete.
Either way, that community and platform kept existing and quickly metastasized into a few different meanings, such as these:
OSR as nostalgia. Some say that the only "true" OSR was the community they participated when they were younger. I.e. "The OSR" were the games of OSRIC they played back in the 2000's and posted about in their forums, or it was the G+ community from the 2010's and the many games it spawned, etc. To these gatekeepers, "kids these days" don't know what an OSR is and are wrong however they slice it. It is pointless to discuss them. The OSR is not a centralised movement, it is many things - as will be discussed - so if their OSR is dead, then long live to our OSR, which is alive and well.
OSR as a specific playstyle. In tension with the above idea is that of the OSR as a Play Culture, as explained in the Retired Adventurer post which generated much debate. Many have tried to explain what makes this style of play "Old-School", often including sweeping claims about how "this is how the game was played back in the day" and appeals to authority that metamorphose into reactionary calls for a "return to good form". Regardless of the historicity of these claims - which is still much debated - the most notable works which expound on what makes a game "OSR" are the Principa Apocrypha and OSR Primer. These encapsulate what someone might mean when they talk about such and such game they played "being very OSR" or "feeling very OSR".
Let it not be left unsaid: despite the OSR having had its start with Dungeons & Dragons, it does not confine itself to it in any of the perspectives from here on out.
OSR as aesthetics. Many believe the OSR looks or feels a certain way, either in terms of art or concept. Art-wise, it is believed that the OSR either looks like the old traced-over, black-and-white, crusty and ugly (yet considered quaint and nostalgic) art from the original D&D books, sometimes emulated in modern day retroclones such as Labyrinth Lord; or it looks like the colourful version of it, typically inspired by 80's Heavy Metal magazines and Frank Frazetta's art.
In terms of concept, many OSR gamers enjoy psychedelic aesthetics, gleefully delighting in collating strange and seemingly dissonant concepts together in what they erroneously refer to as "Gonzo". Thus a world where all of your favourite Pulp literature elements can play together - ancient-yet-hyper-advanced alien wizards, medieval knights and vikings rubbing shoulders with raygun-wielding saucer-flying astronauts, and so on.
There are also those who enjoy - and believe it to be particularly OSR - what some call "mudfarmer aesthetics". It refers to a pseudohistorical affectation which places the player characters at the bottom rungs of the social ladder permanently. Pursuant towards some measure of "realism", those who enjoy these aesthetics typically conceptualise the characters as dirty, violent, thuggish, rustic, and mercenary, often having to scrape to get anything, be it food or money. "Mudfarmer" refers to how the world of the game itself is typically Hobbesian, with the lower rungs of society locked in a nasty and brutish life of hunger and toil where happiness is a distant dream (though they aren't 'nice' either, but often scabrous yokels), while the upper rungs delight in their misery and callous exploitation.
Whenever someone says that something "looks" OSR, they are usually referring to one of the above, or even all three at once.
OSR as a philosophy or ethos. An offshoot both from the OSR as a community and the OSR as a playstyle, and one of the prevailing attitudes in the OSR purple server writ large, is that of OSR as a specific ethos to guide play and module creation. Specifically, it favours a DIY attitude towards games - an outsizing of "rulings instead of rules" for the entire game, encouraging referees to create and collaborate themselves rather than relying on bought modules or rules as written. For this view, which walks hand-in-hand with OSR as a playstyle, "the OSR" refers more to the community of like-minded people who, whatever game they may be playing, are focused primarily on what they and their table makes, rather than products.
This has overlap with another server and community, the one known as "Thinking Adventures", which is umbilically connected to this server itself and shares many of the same members and creators. Both have the attitude that there should be less systems being published and more practical theory on running better games, as well as practical objects for running the game - adventures which invite the referee to collaborate in their creation, such as Gromb's Mandog or Blark's 1000 Statues being considered good examples of this.
OSR as marketing. "The OSR" became an attractive marketing term, such as "Young Adult" in the fiction publishing world, and therefore many rulebooks have branded themselves as "OSR" or "encouraging OSR play". In this prism, any product which explicitly espouses the acronym or its associated aesthetics for marketing purposes counts as "the OSR". Refer to I.2 for further details.
OSR as ??? There are other communities which adopt the name "OSR" and they will have their own idea of what that means, this is but a slice of the cake and refers mostly to the OSR purple server and its adjacencies. Like it was discussed: the OSR is not a centralised movement.
II.2 - Is this rulebook OSR? What is the difference between a "rulebook" and a "game" anyway?
The thing which has the rules written in it is the rulebook. When that rulebook is read and interpreted by human beings and converted into play, then you have a game on your hands. The game exists solely around the table and in the minds of those who play it.
This distinction might seem pedantic, but it is crucial to understand why most of the server would say that no rulebook can be "OSR". After all, if OSR is anything you can call OSR for marketing reasons, then sure, anything can be OSR; but if you're a serious person who does not hate RPGs, and your concept of the OSR refers more to how the game is played or the ethos around the relationship one might have towards it, then it is impossible for a rulebook to "be OSR", since the rulebook cannot actually control how you play, it can only suggest.
II.3 - What is the NSR? Are you guys the NSR?
The NSR, or New School Revolution, are people who believe the "OSR" label to have been irredeemably associated with bad actors and fascists, or usurped by marketing and corpos, and thus have chosen to distance themselves from it. Some in the server sympathise with the feeling and believe that the OSR acronym should be dropped in favour of... something else. Some prefer the simple label of "Adventure Games", others like "Thinking Adventures" as previously mentioned. Be that as it may, the discussion regarding the OSR acronym is ongoing.
Regardless, the purple OSR server does not consider itself to be part of the NSR. That is a specific community of creators with their own ethos and interpretation of what that means for them, and further questions about them should be directed to them, not to us.
II.4 - Is the OSR only for chuds and white men from the American Midwest?
No.
II.5 - Why is there animosity towards...
...Lamentations of the Flame Princess? Because the creators are known bad actors and collaborated with chuds, as well as being fond of purity tests. Otherwise, LotFP is a perfectly fine B/X retroclone.
...Adventurer Conqueror King System? Because the creator is a known bad actor and right-winger. If interested, BECMI is better.
...Questing Beast? Because he is known to collaborate with notorious bigots and bad actors, willing to do whatever it takes for the money. On top of that, he is emblematic of the worst impulses of the commercialisation of the OSR and the conversion of that label into a marketing buzzword. Also, many think Knave 2e was half-baked and grew tired of how praised it ended up being.
...Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition? Mostly because many ended up in a position where their groups did not want to play anything other than it, or could only get players who refused to engage with any game that wasn't it, and expanded this hate to the source material itself. There are many, however, who think 5e is a perfectly decent rulebook in the hands of a skilled dungeon master; and many who dislike it due to their own taste or philosophical disagreements with the book itself, but these aren't typically the ones you'd find openly hating on D&D 5e. Lastly, many resent the chokehold it has on the global RPG industry and the commercialisation engaged with by Hasbro and Wizards of the Coast, mercenary-like dilapidating the name and legacy of a game they love.
...Critical Role? Most people don't actually have an opinion on the show itself because they haven't watched it. The animosity mostly comes from run-ins with their most vocal fans who promote D&D 5e as the only game worth playing, and Matt Mercer and his players' style of playing to be the only correct style of playing. I.e. the famous Mercer Effect and inflated expectations that clash with the perceived tenets of the OSR.
II.6 - Which retroclone should I play?
Do not play a retroclone. Instead, acquire one of the original books - found freely on the internet or the high seas - and use those instead. If you are already experienced with RPGs and would like a bit of a challenge, take the very first version of D&D, the "Little Brown Books", and use those. They are short but a bit scattered, and you will have to get used to doing rulings to resolve things. If you're not particularly experienced, or would rather have a smooth experience, then most recommend going with the Dungeons & Dragons Basic and Expert Sets (B/X) by Tom Moldvay, David Cook, and Stephen R. Marsh; or the second publishing of it by Frank Mentzer, usually referred to as "BECMI" (Basic, Expert, Companion, Master, and Immortal, which are all expanded sets of rules). These expand on the chassis of the original rules and are comprehensible enough that children were able to play them growing up, so you should too.
Alternatively, for an experience that is also a bit more challenging than the Basic Set but potentially very rewarding, though more rules-dense, utilise the original text for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition instead.
If, for whatever reason, you prefer to not play those books and would rather a retroclone, then pick one that is free. They are all deeply similar and whichever one you pick will inevitably end up mutated through play, so don't stress it, and more importantly: don't pay money as a toll to get in the hobby. After playing these games and getting familiarised you may look into other editions, pretty boxes, etc, but none of that is necessary for someone just starting out.
The usual suspects for free retroclones are Basic Fantasy RPG which is a retroclone for the Basic Set with its own idiosyncrasies, and Delving Deeper, which is a retroclone and interpretation of the Little Brown Books that formed the original edition of D&D.
If you already bought a retroclone like Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lord, Lamentations of the Flame Princess, etc, then... run it. Run that one. Run what you have on your hands, you do not need any other book. It's D&D, it's all the same thing.
II.7 - What is a West Marches game?
Many believe "West Marches" to be synonymous with "sandbox game at a consistent time and place where multiple players can drop in and out without much commitment, and the DM will run for whoever shows up". This is a misconception. The described game is merely an Open Table.
The West Marches Experiment style of game, innovated upon by Ben Robbins, is a very specific construct that relies upon a few features:
Players organize/schedule Sessions. They have to work together and communicate to the referee when they will be attending, who will be attending, and what goals they want to accomplish
It operates on a Shared Map, so that all players have a good idea of where parties are and what discoveries have been made
It was designed for 3rd Edition, and leverages some of the Encounter Balancing mechanisms from those games to "ease" Referee Burdens.
It is important to call a duck a duck in these circles, otherwise "open table" risks becoming synonymous with "West Marches", which makes for confusing communication.
II.8 - How do I set up an OSR game?
Assuming that, by that, one means a "dungeon focused game utilising an old version of D&D with room for expanding outside of the dungeon", follow the rules in this post by the excellent Weird Writer.
II.9 - What does "rules elide" mean? What is "gunfuckers"?
The full idea of it is that "rules elide play", it usually refers to an essay by Jared Sinclair which argued, in essence, that the "system" of a game mostly skips over the bits of the game which us, the players and referees, do not want to linger upon and discuss in greater detail and minutia.
"Gunfuckers" is a (intentionally comical and exaggerated) thought experiment that illustrates this, and it goes as follows:
there are two hypothetical games.
One is run in a system called DRAGONS & DAMSELS, and it has a comprehensive rule subsystem designed specifically to convince dragons of things. To convince a dragon to free a princess, you must roll 2d6+princess, and interpret the result.
The other is run in a system called GUNFUCKERS, which has only rules for combat and, like, crafting bullets. There is a statblock of the dragon in the book, which makes it very clear that the dragon could easily kill an entire party of gunfuckers.
There are two campaigns following the same beats, one in DRAGONS AND DAMSELS and one in GUNFUCKERS. Both campaigns come upon a settlement where the princess has been kidnapped by a dragon. "Please!!!" begs the king. "you must find some way to get the dragon to return the princess!!!!"
The Gunfuckers group wants to shoot the dragon, but they can't. Instead they spend basically the entire session figuring out how to convince the dragon to return the princess. The Dragons & Damsels group uses the rules provided. It takes them about 10 minutes.
Which game is more about convincing the dragon to free the princess?
Thus, the main gist of the thing is that rolls are meant to substitute conversation and abridge the game, and therefore one cannot "rules-your-way" into a specific kind of game, it requires instead participation from those at the table and effort from the referee.
For many reasons, Jared Sinclair did not feel comfortable having it still be up and around - including harassment by overzealots - thus the original text is unquotable in this juncture. However, he's worked on a refigured and extended essay called Jouer sans jeux which you can read.
II.10 - Does system matter?
"System" here is understood as sets of rules used as a means for adjudication. You might come across the sentiment that "system does not matter" in the server. What people generally mean by that is that the choice of a specific ruleset, while it might affect the result of play, won't be the sole determinator of play; nor will it be the most significant factor. Table culture and facilitation will be much more defining to the end result of a game than if the players are playing Dungeons & Dragons or Call of Cthulhu.
The point is considered particularly moot in the server because most people will be playing either with some flavour of a D&D ruleset, or with the general assumptions and facilitation techniques commonly utilised for that ruleset, therefore the play of the same group with different rulesets will be more alike than the play of two different groups with the same ruleset.
II.11 - What is the FKR?
"FKR" means "Free Kriegsspiel" and was an acronym coined by Mike Mornard (aka oldgeezur), one of the players of the original Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, and Phil Barker's campaigns, on the Odd74 forums, semi-humorously, as a way to try and define a guiding principle of some of those old campaigns differed from the concept of refereeing that is common today. That is, with referees feeling beholden to the rules, rather than using rules to aid the fiction, and nothing more than that.
Note, however, that FKR wasn't meant to emulate the old campaigns, but rather to learn from them and move on from them. "Kriegsspiel" was a wargame used to train Prussian army officers, where the "Free" variant introduced an umpire to make rulings utilising his actual war experience to adjudicate scenario plausibility.
Eventually a community formed around it and strange associations started being made, such as associating FKR with extremely light rules, or creating "refereeless FKR games" - something which necessarily contradicts the base concept of FKR.
This is all a great simplification, Weird Writer has written about it in more detail here, and Justin Hamilton has exlpained before how FKR has no direct connection to rules-light games.
II.12 - What is the implied setting in OD&D?
Contrary to popular belief, the original version of D&D wasn't explicit about its setting, so people have tried to reconstruct the setting implied by its rules and see what comes out. This typically refers to Wayne Rossi's interpretation, found in this PDF.
II.13 - What does "diegetic" mean in the context of games?
"Diegetic" is a word thrown around a lot in RPG circles, but it is often conflated and confused with abstraction.
"Diegetic" and "diegesis" refers to in-fiction elements which are conveyed inside of the game itself, be they abstracted or not. For example, health points in an RPG are diegetic, but they are also abstracted - someone with 10 out of 20 health points cannot say "I am at 10/20 HP" inside of the fiction, but they do understand, inside of the fiction, that they are pretty battered. Likewise for attributes or ability scores; a hypothetical ruleset which substitutes having 16 in Strength by the word "Muscular" does not make it any more or less diegetic, it simply swaps the chosen abstraction.
Contrast this with, for instance, Initiative and turn order. We do not believe that, inside the world of the game, people are waiting for their turn to whack one another in the head, it is purely a concept made up to make the adjudication of fights easier, and therefore it is not diegetic.
For another example, take advancement: many old D&D versions use XP for gold, where 1 coin = 1 XP obtained. This is ultimately diegetic but abstracted, because the coin stands in for adventures and hardship which the character overcomes to improve. Meanwhile, session-based XP - such as 1 XP per session - is not diegetic, because it is purely a fiction invented to facilitate the running of the game.
Ultimately, the way most people utilise the word "diegetic" or "diegesis" is flawed and not useful for discussion, especially when things which are "diegetic" (in the flawed sense) are treated as better and superior than those which are not. In reality, they are all tools for running the game, and it is more fruitful to think of what different forms of abstraction and elision should be used for a game, rather than pursuing a confused ideal of "perfect diegesis".
II.14 - What is "incentive"?
"Against incentive" is an old blog post which ended up being inflammatory both for what it says, and also due to people misunderstanding it and taking it out of its context.
Mainly: what the author was talking about was chiefly the situation where a player either refuses to take an action because "it won't give me XP", or feels compelled to take an action because it will give them XP, such as killing as many monsters as possible because the game rewards this, or saving a village for the same reason.
Some people misunderstood this and tried to apply its thesis writ large, making ridiculous arguments such as "Having HP in the game is an incentive not to get hit" - a hypothetical example so as not to single out any member. These people unfortunately took the argument to be universal, when it was, in fact, specific.
A few took the tone of the article to be more judgemental than it was intended and felt defensive, on account of enjoying the incentives laid out by the post. Again, the umbrage here lies in a misunderstanding rather than on the thesis of the argument.
Many others understood the thesis but disagreed with it. By their view, XP and other such rewards are a key way to scaffold and structure the game; that is, if the players optimise their play for the purpose of "making the correct choice", as laid out in the original post, then that is a desirable and good outcome. Therefore the "tyranny" of Number Go Up, in the words of the post, is no tyranny at all, but rather an elected state of play which all the players have agreed upon previously.
This conversation has raged for years and gotten stale. Emotions have cooled out and most people nowadays are tired of talking about it, especially the author, therefore we humbly ask that you keep your conclusions to yourself.
II.15 - Are megadungeons / hexcrawls the only way?
No. Despite much of the advice in the OSR assuming either that you will be playing inside a dungeon or a hexcrawl map, these are just preferences, they are not prescriptive.
The dungeon is considered an "easy" environment to set a game in because it is controlled, presents clear choices on a moment-to-moment basis, has a key component of resource management, allows for clear consequences for going in and out, and presents a compelling place for challenging teamwork. It is, therefore, a microcosm of what many people want out of a D&D campaign, and thus it is a time-honoured method of gaming, but it is not for everyone.
The hexcrawl is but one of the many methods of wilderness traversal (as laid out by Chris Kutalik in this blogpost), particularly effective for simple exploration where hopping from hex to hex provides a good structure for the campaign.
As explained in this blogpost by Nathan Press the Beast, however, there is a sort of obsession within the OSR for these two methods of creating a campaign, but they're far from the only ones. Other RPGs recommend structuring campaigns on a mission-by-mission basis, some have no singular structure and instead rely on moment-to-moment to figure out where to go. These are meant to be in service of the game you will run, not the opposite.
II.16 - Do I have to run modules?
No. Much of the OSR movement has traditionally relied on published adventures and material as a jumping-off point to a broader campaign - a low-prep and therefore low-commitment mode of play, perfect for those who want to avoid stress.
However, as a scene we encourage people to not rely too much on these, and instead make their own. Many people don't play modules for one reason or the other, utilising them is a personal preference. Buying them, though, does not an OSR campaign make.
II.17 - What is the best OSR game for newcomers? What is the best way to induct someone into the OSR?
If you are already familiar with RPGs, it is widely recommended that you run whatever you are most familiar with for newcomers, as it is easier to teach people and bring them up to your level than it is for everyone to learn a new game at the same time. That said, Cairn is usually pointed to as a good option for introducing people to the hobby, as is Mausritter.
Many recommend using pre-generated characters, as character creation can be a bit overwhelming for some players; blank pregens are typically recommended, but having a few more fleshed out ones for those who are unsure can't hurt either. If you do go ahead with generating characters talk to your players about what character they would like to play on the table, and help them through the process as best you can, acommodating their ideas and incorporating them as best you can in the rules.
Be clear and concise in your pitch, do not try to "surprise" people into playing a game they do not want to play. It is very important that trust be established. If they are not interested in a very lethal game, do not run a lethal game for them. You can try to convince them to give it a shot, but no one was ever successfully deceived into enjoying old D&D.
Don't underestimate them. Just because they're new to RPGs, or new to "playing the world", does not mean they are stupid. Be gentle and do not engage in purity tests, meet your players where they are.
Lastly, using a module can be a big help. Try this one if you're running Cairn or some other D&D; if running Mausritter, use the one in the book itself.
If you're already familiar with RPGs and an experience GM, try blackboxing them - that is, give them vernacular descriptions of their characters and their abilities but handle all of the dice rolling on your end. It can be a lot of fun, and it ensures they focus on the fiction.
II.18 - Should there be art in RPG rulebooks?
There is a recurring conversation regarding art in RPG rulebooks that happens in the OSR server, and it usually boils down to a few different stances.
The first stance, not championed by many on the server, is that there should be as much art as possible inside and outside of the book. The main argument varies, but it usually boils down either to the fact that it is easier to sell a book with a lot of art inside of it, or it is said that more art provides a venue for the players to conceptualise the game better, set expectations of what they would like to imagine together in the game, and provide lubrification for the shared world that will be created.
The second stance argues that there should be less art in books, but that it should be of much higher quality than it currently is. Many, such as the former Chaosium art director Jenx, argue that filling out the entire book with art will oftentimes result in worse art overall, therefore if a choice has to be made, there should be less art in books but more well made; suchas the illustrations from early to mid 20th century fantasy and fairytale books.
The third stance argues that art inside of the book will almost certainly result in grifters taking control of the project and selling it almost entirely based on the art, which leaves the contents of the book by the wayside. Furthermore, it argues that the overreliance on art enforces bad writing practices, taking away from what should be the main utility of an RPG ruleset.
II.19 - How do I get into the Glorantha setting? And what is the best ruleset for it?
In the server, the two best and main options for playing in Glorantha with minimal change of rules are OpenQuest 3rd Edition, for those who prefer a ruleset with less rules, or Mythras (originally published as RuneQuest 6th Edition), for those who prefer a ruleset with more rules. They are both well-liked by the community. Alternatively, picking up a copy of the old RuneQuest 2nd Edition from 1978 is also perfectly acceptable, though it is also recommended you pick up the books Cults of Terror and Cults of Prax - or the Cult Compendium, which compiles both - as the base book is slim on these details.
Most do not recommend the most recent Chaosium edition, RuneQuest: Roleplaying in Glorantha, due to certain rules differences being considered backwards, difficult to understand, and overbearing. However, if you already have it, prefer running it rather than buying a new book - the distinctions are not sizeable enough to affect most people.
Note that all of the books outside of RQ:RiG are setting-agnostic, and while they imply Glorantha, they're not built specifically for it. Similar to how D&D has certain assumptions that have compatibility with the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and Mystara, but the rulesets itself aren't made for either.
As to Glorantha, the setting of RuneQuest, the Glorantha Sourcebook is the best entry-point. Ultimately, however, reading just the rules book and then the Cults books and inventing the rest of the setting yourself is a perfectly fine alternative.
II.20 - What is a GLOG?
The GLOG, or "Goblin Laws of Gaming", is an adventure ruleset invented by Arnold Kemp of Goblin Punch which prioritises "hackability" and player or DM invention of bespoke rules elements, particularly classes.
In its 10 years (as of writing) of percolation, the GLOG has developed its own scene, sense of style, and shared commonalities based upon the contributions of many of its members. For that reason, "the GLOG" most often refers to the general scene, cousin to the OSR purple server, than it does specifically to the ruleset.
Many on the GLOG still consider themselves part of either the OSR or the NSR as the GLOG is meant to be compatible with the older versions of D&D, and therefore utilise its language as a lingua franca.
II.21 How big must my hexes be?
A surprising question that comes up surprisingly often. This post lays out why you may want each size of the common sizes of hexes, and asks you to consider why you need hexes in the first place.
II.22 How do I do factions?
The most recommended method is the one found in Mausritter, at the bottom of the linked page.
For a more involved procedure, the ones found in Sine Nomine's games - such as Worlds Without Number, An Echo Resounding, etc - cover much of what you could need, though perhaps too involved for most people.
Part 3 - Adding things to this code and FAQ
The right is reserved to add or remove things from this code through spontaneous generation or good counsel.
Those who suggest the addition of elements to the code which are already present will be referred to section I.1 and ignored, for if they cannot be trusted with reading the code, they have no business adding to it.
REMEMBER: RESPECT THE LEGACY, BUT KEEP THINGS STRAIGHT. RPGS FOREVER!