Now, granted, he's talking about the OSR's relevance to him. He's not crazy enough to think that posting a couple combat flowcharts is going to cause everyone who is considered "part of the OSR" to just give up. But, even with his explanations in the post, and further explanations in the comments, I don't understand what he's talking about. On the one hand, he has an unusual fixation on the AD&D 1e combat system being the core of D&D and everything else is just filler; on the other, he says one of the goals of the OSR is freedom from prescriptive rules (eh, I can see that...) and says
I think what's interesting is that you've got the same rules-prescriptive BS in one of the OSR's foundational texts. Which, for me, implies that nobody ever played this game "by the book," and nobody's forcing you to play 3e or 4e or whatever "by the book" either.Now, my first instinct was to point out that the OSR is more than just AD&D 1e. My second instinct is to point out that the combat system is the least important part of D&D, which is why it gets changed from edition to edition or table to table, or even completely replaced (by Chainmail or The Fantasy Trip or Arms Law, back in the day, and by gods alone know what these days.)
For now, I'm just going to post the link and quotes. I'll have something to say tomorrow.