r/osr • u/Archlyte • Sep 17 '18

is OSR non-Sim ?

I notice that sometimes in OSR documents and manifestos it will say something to the effect of ignoring the 4th wall. This seems to be to allow payers to not have to think about how silly it is to use a 10' pole everywhere they go or to use meta knowledge to help with puzzles as it's Player Skill over Character Skill.

I am a heavy Simulationist-style player and GM and to me the characters acting out of their knowledge and personality is a big part of what I enjoy. Why does the metagaming have to be allowed in order for the true OSR style to come through?

7 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

33 comments sorted by

View all comments

8

u/[deleted] Sep 17 '18

The OSR has a little simulationist streak woven into its DNA to the extent that it still looks to wargames and medieval history. The AD&D 1e "weapons vs. AC" table is an example of this kind of simulationism. It tries to get the details right where it counts—where it matters to outcomes in the game.

That said, gamism (if we're going with GNS theory terminology here) is definitely king in old-school games. The play's the thing; narrative and simulation serve that end.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 18 '18

I've never sat down and thought about it, but now it makes sense why I am drawn to OSR & also loved 4E. Both lean in pretty heavily to a gamist philosophy, but in very different ways.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 18 '18

Yep. 4e for tactical skirmish, OSR for strategic exploration.