A Key Concept That You Need to Run OSR Games!

I’ve been hacking together all kinds of rules from different systems in order to make up for the things I think 5e is missing or that I feel my game is lacking

Player1: How deep is the well?
DM: You can't see the bottom.
Player 1: I drop a big rock in it, to get an idea of how deep it is.
DM: Make an investigation check.
Player 1: What? Um... alright. [ 7 ]
DM: You can't tell. Could be 100 feet; could be 5 feet. You're completely clueless.

5e PLAYERS & DMs CANNOT UNDERSTAND JUST HOW WRONG THIS IS!

Well said! Thinking about the idea of the open vs closed systems in a game really helped me put my finger on what I like about OSR games over modern editions. I’m excited to discuss the idea with my group. Thanks for the video!

Been playing since mid-February 1977 (over 46 years). This info is so spot on it's almost painful that it has to be explained. Covid forced me out of A2e, and into VTTs and 5e. Staying with the older methods has allowed my players to enjoy the transition with minimum trouble - the streamlining in 5e can be appreciated (no more THAC0, thank you!) without disturbing the flow we've become used to for literally decades.

Thanks for the nod.

It's tough because you don't want a system to confine you or your players choices, but the whole point of getting a game system is so you don't have to figure things out on your own, such as fall damage, or aiming your swings at a specific body part, or crafting poisons. I'm gonna start trying more OSRs I think they may fit my GM style a little better, but from the vids I have been watching it sounds like a modern ttrpg system comes up with mechanics for the player to use to role-play their character, whereas OSRs create a system that promotes and withstands player freedom and problem solving. One of the reasons i think they have a rep of being hard or meat grindy is because the "numbers" are against the players. The dice probably should be mostly against the player to encourage players find solutions to the problem they are facing.

I never ran OSR but coming from PBTA, I'd probably run OSR no problems. The philosophies align with one another.

To sum up, use your nog not the dice to determine the outcome.

As someone who was raised Basic/BECMI, yeah. This pretty much nails it on the head. Not having a character sheet with 5000 skills and feats on it we had to pretty much convience DMs something could work. Our imaginations set more rules and guidelines than any actual rules. This was we we rejected wotc early on after they took over. I never played 4 0r 5e but it was clear with 3e where it was heading, players stop using their imagination and only did what their skill and feat tree told them they could do.

One of the most important points you made Travis, IMHO, is that the ability to adjudicate a player's actions depends a lot on your life experiences and your exposure to storytelling in the genre of your chosen game. When I started GMing at age 14, I knew very little about life even though I'd read fantasy stories (especially Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar S&S novels). We played the way kids play -- a lot of imitating what we found in published modules, etc. I craved guidance from rules because I wasn't confident enough in my life's experiences. As I got older, I gained confidence and my games reflected that.

But something happened starting with 3rd edition D&D -- my friends and I got excited by the unity of the new rules (consistency in damage types, a simplified saving throw system, specific combat mechanisms, etc.). My players also loved the "crunchy" stuff and all the theorycrafting that went with it. In hindsight I saw we were highly influenced (without fully realizing it) by design and mechanisms found in collectible card games, board games, video games, and MMOs.

By the time I finished running 8 years of D&D4e, I knew something fundamental had been lost and you've nailed it. I noticed my players had stopped using their imaginations -- they stopped playing their characters and instead were playing their *character sheets*. I was doing the same as DM. Even with decades of experience we were doing this. Some of us really loved having a distinct set of abilities and actions with strictly defined rules and outcomes we could apply to in-game situations. After a while, though, I noticed I couldn't remember any interesting stories from our games. Everything was playing out like a board game. Nothing memorable was happening -- just endless sessions of players (or me as DM) trying to decide which ability on a character/monster sheet to use to get through an encounter. I loved playing with my friends, don't get me wrong, but I ended up feeling like I was just a computer to my players -- something that would react the way a computer game reacts when you do one of the limited things a computer game allows you to do.

I have been using the past 7 years of running D&D 5e "return to my roots" so to speak. It started when I read the rules of the Dungeonworld RPG and had a "light-bulb" moment: the game rules serve the fiction of the game (the game doesn't exist to serve the rules).

I don't hate rule sets like 3e or 4e but now any game I run, I remind myself that the playstyle I enjoy (and the only kind I want to GM) is one where players feel free to try anything (and hopefully do) and only refer to the rules (or their character sheets) occasionally rather than constantly.

The only way this works for me is to ask my players to describe their actions, not their rules choice. If they say something like "I want to roll a perception check to search the room" I politely but firmly ask them to just describe what their character is doing and why. Then, just as you explained in the video, I think about what they said and then decide whether a die roll is needed. It may sound draconian, but it is literally the single most useful tool I have to keep the game from sliding back into a computer-game style of RPG.

Nicely done. Subbed!

As an old Evil DM I approuve of this video 🧔open DMing since 1984 !

Just leaving a comment to give my support and show my appreciation for your content! As a younger generation player, thank you very much for explaining the difference between the Old School and New School rpg essense.

You can summarize a lot of this video down to: use your imagination and make something up.
No rule set can actually cover every possibility. With 5e the expectation is the GM will cram their story and random situations into 5e rather than expecting the rules to bend. Which can never work. The result is a rule set that is overly complicated yet lacking at the same time.

That doesn't mean you go XP To Level 3. Never go XP to Level Three. Where the rules mean nothing and the "Chad DM" just drops the big bad at the end when they feel like it.

5e is "here is this world you will be having an adventure in."
OSR is "here is a world, have an adventure in it."

I started playing tabletop rpg's with 5e and admit that I've grown to dislike that kind of style. 5e games can tend to be like "here is the quest you will be doing, there is a solution to it you need to find it". They can feel very restrictive. I would much rather give my players situations and see what solutions they can find using their own creativity. I want to just fill a world and let my players interact with it and let them carve their own path.

This guy looks like he's called Travis. Love your work btw!

Ah, yes, the good, old dychotomy between "If it's not on the book you can't do it" and "If it's not on the book, but it makes sense, we'll find a way to do it" xD

Here’s a thought. “Open System”, as explained in Kuntz’s book, means that the referee can amend the rules at will, even while playing the game. I think the original brown box booklets even discussed the concept in the Introduction. Pretty cool!

I was once part of a v3.5 game where this player had an extremely high Diplomacy skill check bonus. Instead of trying to articulate a well thought-out speech or persuasive comment, he would simply look at the GM and say, "I roll a Diplomacy check to try to convince this person." Nothing else, just "Let me roll the die to see if I convince him."

This video helps explain a lot as I started with the white box set and AD&D but until recently did not play for about 40 years.

This video and the books in the box on your bookshelf just earned you a subscriber. Glad I found you.

Interaction with the game world and skill checks are the main things I've been confused about since starting my recent exploration of OSR. I'm so used to rolling skill checks for literally everything in 5e that seeing little to no rules describing basic character to world interaction threw me a bit. After this video, I think I'm starting to get it.

The way I interpret it, OSR games and old-school D&D function a little bit like text adventure games. The scene is set, and the player describes what they do. For example:

DM: "You enter a room that appears to be an alchemist's workshop. There is a table with many papers strewn across it, and a mug haphazardly left on top of a small scribbled map."

Player: "I pick up the mug."

DM: "The mug is empty, but leaves a large circular stain on the map."

Player: "I look at the map."

DM: "As you look, you realize that the map's layout looks vaguely like the room you're in. The stain seems to surround a rectangle in the same area as a nearby bookshelf, and the words "4 down, 3 right" are written inside the circle. What do you do?"

Player: "I pull the third book on the fourth shelf."

DM: "You hear the sound of metallic cranking as the bookcase slides to the side, revealing a secret passageway."

No real focus on perception or investigation checks. Just basic logic and problem solving. Does that about sum up how this works in OSR?

Been GMing since 1975. Open is the way.

Great stuff! It would be really cool to have you show us various examples of what you're talking about here to help us clear out the "junk". 🤓🤣

Great video. Very clearly explained something i couldn't find the right words for

I balked at having to make a roll to walk up stairs in a 5th ed game.

I've been playing D&D since 1980. In the past year we started playing a highly modified version of Pathfinder 2e (3 action economy), but most everything else is stripped down to nearly an OSR. You want to do something, go ahead try it sort of attitude. The problem is the younger players (in their 30's) all want to reference the rules. 80% of the rules are optional to help you if you need them, you don't have resolve everything through multiple dice roles.

As a grognard with a long-running game the way we use the 'open system" is in character description trumps dice rolls - roles over rolls we say - essentially diceless. The only mechanistic resolution is combat and even then it's dependent. On combat: xp for gold makes combat very optional and the parties do more fighting retreats than pitched battles. The Pc's actively look for ways around fights and avoid them as much as possible. I track actual HP values as the DM; Players only know the HitDice of damage they have taken not the value of an actual hit - this causes real tension in the Players. Encumbrance is a real thing in Xp for gold gaming as you need to track the carried loot - we use a simplified version based on the pound and pound equivalents. Its interesting as the party want Henchmen not for added fighting ability so much as for two-legged beast of burden. Light sources become more important as well ( no demihuman in our world has "darkvison" or equivilant although Dwarves have limited ability to navigate in pitch black tunnels, its not sight based). Mapping is very important and the Map artifact very much a tresured item. While in a dungeon the Players have adopted a "stick and ball" diagram style with measurements annotated on the stick and ball to speed the process. The "who" is mapping, who is carring light etc are also a critical decisions.

Good stuff! I much prefer open-system RPGs.

This is a cool gaming point of view. But I would argue that the modern gaming era is way past things like 4e D&D and those "more closed systems". Powered by the Apocalypse and Forged in the Dark games i.e are the very front line of tabletop rpgs today and on these, this idea of "the open system" exists as "the fiction", which is the most important element in the game. You play the game by working with the fiction and the rules all follow the fiction as a basis, this is something true for both PbtA/Story Games and OSR games, the difference is just that the OSR is more concerned with the adventure and immersion in the fantasy rather than creating a dramatic story.

All great advice, mate. Thank you.

What you are saying is pretty much spot on. New games try to codify everything and older games didn't bother. I personally think its easier to run older games because you don't have to reference rule books for everything.

Great video

I've been slinging dice since 1984 and am enthralled (failed by Saving Throw vs Spells) by that tea analogy. Much more succinct than how I've been describing it to my homies coming to my OSR-style games (primarily OSE, but also Mork Borg and , to an extent, Death In Space) from 3e/5e.

Those Old School Habits in 5e were put there by Zack S on purpose. They do not credit him anymore or want to acknowledge him anymore.

YESSSSSSS

Please teach me your OSR secrets

I like this video a lot and i learned some good stuff here. Thank you for sharing some old school knowledge

Have new DMs (new to Old School Play) read the Old School Primer and Principia Apocrypha: Principles of Old School RPGs, or, A New OSR Primer. Then hand out a copy to the players. See below for the links. The GM may want to read about the FKR s well (see link below).

Great video. I really liked Rob's book. I hope he finishes the longer one he's working on. And his thesis about open vs. closed systems nails it on the head. You've managed to articulated it perfectly.

I think the main thing new DMs coming from a more modern system struggle with is realizing they don't need mechanics for a lot of the game. Life or death stuff (combat, saving throws) or supernatural things (magic), sure. But you don't need bargaining/haggling mechanics. You can just role-play out the interaction. Maybe use a DM-rolled 2d6 reaction check. You don't need stealth/hide mechanics for a character hiding behind a large crate that fully obscures their body as the guards pass by. If the guards have dogs? Maybe use a DM-rolled d6 surprise check to see if the dogs pick up the scent.

The secret is letting the game happen and not letting the dice become an obstacle to the game. As a DM, I telegraph traps. I give clues to the ranger who looks for them. I want to give the players enough information to make an informed decision or figure out their own solution. I hear people say sometimes, "Players like rolling dice." I get that, but I find by setting DCs and skill checks for everything, you risk stopping the game due to failed dice rolls. For me, that makes rolling dice for combat, saves, etc. more exciting.

Great analogy with the cup of tea! Perfect explanation of how to run an OSR, so refreshing.

The wisdom comes from the beard.

I run games for twenty years now, and I guess I somewhat do the open system method, even though my teabag is rather full with narrative tropes and thus it plays usually not like a setting simulation sandbox that I see so often OSR games becoming, which feels rather bland to me, but more concerned with character arcs and pacing.

Any video about how to dm a sandbox? Im trying to get there

Thank you very much, Sir! This was extremely helpful to understanding that "mindset" for OSR games that I've always been curious to learn.

Really helpful ty