In Defense of OSR as a Term
RAGS (Roleplaying Adventure Games) is a term started by Ben Milton of Questing Beast and propagated by Luka Rejec of Wizard Thief Fighter. Both people who I admire greatly and who I hope don't seem my disagreement as reducing my respect for either of them. They are great.
However, a lot of times, these sort of changes, started by people of influence within the community spread very quickly as people seem to be very quick to jump on the bandwagon.
This is one bandwagon I will not be jumping on.
I understand why people might want this to change. The OSR got to be a controversial space as the end of G+ drew near. Things happened which caused people to question the community itself and some would rather just let the title die so that they can be freed of these events utterly. Now that G+ is going away, this is an opportune time to do just that.
Another reason is because OSR has always been something of a vague and slightly divisive term. It has never really defined the community and defined it less as games like Into the Odd and Mothership came out, games that really had no connection to the older versions of D&D.
If we are going to abandon OSR can we at least find a better term? Roleplaying Adventure Games just sounds so watered down. It sounds like we are losing any kind of identity which this movement once had.
This identity is precisely what I would like to preserve by keeping the term OSR alive. Breaking it down, the Old School Renaissance fairly perfectly describes what this movement was and is.
It is a renaissance out of the old, not just a revival but a renaissance, implying not just rediscovery but progress. We are taking the substance of old games and rediscovering their value and building something new off of their principals. This continues to define what this community does.
The OSR logo was a mark that you could put on your work and it would act as a seal of quality: letting people know precisely what school this came from and what to expect within. It is this kind of identity that I would like to maintain. Maybe that is impossible in the downfall of G+, but I don't think so.
I also fear what being too much disconnect from old games will mean for the community. Will another Old School Renaissance be needed later as RAG games become more and more disconnected from their source, spiraling the way of Trad games? This may not be logical, but the term OSR would seem to be a nice basic anchor to the ideas that started the movement.
OSR was never a restrictive term, most people allowed quite a bit under that banner even if they disagreed what exactly fit as OSR or not. Games like ItO, DCC, Mothership, and the GLOG were allowed and embraced even though their connections to the past were dubious. The old term certainly never held back creativity.
I know some of these arguments may not be completely logical. Let me try to put it succinctly:
Claim: The term OSR is perfectly functional and ought to be kept as the identifying marker of this movement which is not done.
Proof I: Precision is not of first importance for the titles of movements, but a unifying standard is.
Proof II: The term is a reminder of the roots of the movement and an ideological anchor to tie us back to what people reacted so positively to and that has caused this great outpouring of creativity.
Proof III: It has functioned just fine for this long.
Proof IV: I like it and I am not willing to give up on this movement yet! G+ may fall but I have come to love this term and the community it represents!
RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LIGHT!
However, a lot of times, these sort of changes, started by people of influence within the community spread very quickly as people seem to be very quick to jump on the bandwagon.
This is one bandwagon I will not be jumping on.
I understand why people might want this to change. The OSR got to be a controversial space as the end of G+ drew near. Things happened which caused people to question the community itself and some would rather just let the title die so that they can be freed of these events utterly. Now that G+ is going away, this is an opportune time to do just that.
Another reason is because OSR has always been something of a vague and slightly divisive term. It has never really defined the community and defined it less as games like Into the Odd and Mothership came out, games that really had no connection to the older versions of D&D.
If we are going to abandon OSR can we at least find a better term? Roleplaying Adventure Games just sounds so watered down. It sounds like we are losing any kind of identity which this movement once had.
This identity is precisely what I would like to preserve by keeping the term OSR alive. Breaking it down, the Old School Renaissance fairly perfectly describes what this movement was and is.
It is a renaissance out of the old, not just a revival but a renaissance, implying not just rediscovery but progress. We are taking the substance of old games and rediscovering their value and building something new off of their principals. This continues to define what this community does.
The OSR logo was a mark that you could put on your work and it would act as a seal of quality: letting people know precisely what school this came from and what to expect within. It is this kind of identity that I would like to maintain. Maybe that is impossible in the downfall of G+, but I don't think so.
I also fear what being too much disconnect from old games will mean for the community. Will another Old School Renaissance be needed later as RAG games become more and more disconnected from their source, spiraling the way of Trad games? This may not be logical, but the term OSR would seem to be a nice basic anchor to the ideas that started the movement.
OSR was never a restrictive term, most people allowed quite a bit under that banner even if they disagreed what exactly fit as OSR or not. Games like ItO, DCC, Mothership, and the GLOG were allowed and embraced even though their connections to the past were dubious. The old term certainly never held back creativity.
I know some of these arguments may not be completely logical. Let me try to put it succinctly:
Claim: The term OSR is perfectly functional and ought to be kept as the identifying marker of this movement which is not done.
Proof I: Precision is not of first importance for the titles of movements, but a unifying standard is.
Proof II: The term is a reminder of the roots of the movement and an ideological anchor to tie us back to what people reacted so positively to and that has caused this great outpouring of creativity.
Proof III: It has functioned just fine for this long.
Proof IV: I like it and I am not willing to give up on this movement yet! G+ may fall but I have come to love this term and the community it represents!
RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LIGHT!
When the term OSR first started being used it was a helpful pointer to material that someone like myself who plays AD&D could use. Then people started slapping OSR on all sorts of stuff. It became useless for me, looking for AD&D style material. I don't know when the term started causing problems for people but it became a meaningless term for me a long while back.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Old School Compatible would be a good term for such material?
DeleteI have a foot in both camps. On the one, OSR/DIY is a useful descriptor of a playstyle, beyond compatibility with older editions of D&D (Mothership is OSR) - I like my threefold path of usability, hackability, and the sensibility of rebellion.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, I know that there's a great deal beyond the D&D framework that ethos can be attached to. And that there are a lot of bad actors parading around with term (which I don't feel should be abandoned to them, but I understand being exceptionally tired of the constant bullshit)
In the end, labels are both useful and silly.
I understand the desire to leave it behind even if I personally disagree with it. Things did get pretty ugly, but I would rather not admit defeat in the face of that ugliness.
DeleteOSR can be a label that means more than the original acronym. I'll stand with you to the last! Huzzah!
ReplyDeleteGlad to have you in the fight, battle brother! To arms!
DeleteIn the video game community, there are rogue-likes (games which follow the basic design principles of Rogue) and rogue-lites (games that have Rogue-ish elements, but differ in some fundamental ways). I propose a new term: OSI (Old School Inspired) as an equivalent to rogue-lites. Following the basic principle (rulings before rules) but perhaps varying greatly in other areas.
ReplyDeleteI like OSR as an encompassing term for the movement but OSI sounds like a useful subcategory.
Delete