Grab your copy here.
This personal diary is devoted to the unveiling of the old fantasy role-playing games of the past (1975-1989),especially those which - for whatever reasons - are lesser known, forgotten, obscure or neglected. A journey into the abysses of fantasy.
2017/01/24
2017/01/12
Papers & Paychecks
A roleplaying game of workers and students in an industrialized and technological society, based on Will McLean's original cartoon.
Check it out at THIS link.
2017/01/11
Knights & Magic (Volume I, 1980)
From Wikipedia:
Knights and Magick is a fantasy/medieval miniatures system designed for mass or single combat, in individual battles or large political-economic-military campaigns.[1] The game includes rudimentary role-playing rules, magic spells, and guidelines for use with other RPGs
http://rgho.st/79tbXdwyY
2016/11/22
Are old & dusty fantasy games germane to OSR?
Do you really think that OSR audience is really interested in old fantasy games from the past?
As time passes, i am losing more and more faith in this. Every time i have a look at forums and communities (such as the huge OSR community located at G+) i can't help but notice that everyone is getting excited at the new release of that shiny and brilliant tome with that cool and up-to-date graphic content that just catches the eye and looks gorgeous.
Aesthetic matters a lot; it guides the choices of many in buying a new OSR product. As i said, a shiny and cool "2016" look of an old game's clone is an important aspect.
There is nothing wrong with this, even the AD&D premium reprints have a different and somewhat "more modern" covers, if i am not wrong, but nonetheless this made me think.
Would old and dusty boxed sets have the same allure today for the -literally thousands- of users who daily browse the OSR communities?
Would they get so excited in dealing with antiquity as they are when they hold in their hands that hardback new D&D clone which smells of fresh paper that just came out of the printer?
I have always been of the opinion that the entire OSR phenomenon has just been a revamping of our affection for D&D and all its clones and simulacrums, and nowadays i hold this view more strongly than before.
Hoary, boxed set precursors of our hobby are dismissed when compared to new renditions of old texts.
As time passes, i am losing more and more faith in this. Every time i have a look at forums and communities (such as the huge OSR community located at G+) i can't help but notice that everyone is getting excited at the new release of that shiny and brilliant tome with that cool and up-to-date graphic content that just catches the eye and looks gorgeous.
Aesthetic matters a lot; it guides the choices of many in buying a new OSR product. As i said, a shiny and cool "2016" look of an old game's clone is an important aspect.
There is nothing wrong with this, even the AD&D premium reprints have a different and somewhat "more modern" covers, if i am not wrong, but nonetheless this made me think.
Would old and dusty boxed sets have the same allure today for the -literally thousands- of users who daily browse the OSR communities?
Would they get so excited in dealing with antiquity as they are when they hold in their hands that hardback new D&D clone which smells of fresh paper that just came out of the printer?
I have always been of the opinion that the entire OSR phenomenon has just been a revamping of our affection for D&D and all its clones and simulacrums, and nowadays i hold this view more strongly than before.
Hoary, boxed set precursors of our hobby are dismissed when compared to new renditions of old texts.
2016/11/16
How many "Capacity-for-living" points does your character have?
[...] the question is - am i right?
(That's what the author is asking at the end of this brief but interesting article). What do you think?
I'd like to hear your opinions on the matter.
2016/11/14
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
