Comments on: The Old School, Smiting It Hip and Thigh http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/ Killing Someone Else's Darlings Tue, 24 Jan 2012 00:06:55 -0800 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Uncomplicated Fun: Results from the D&D 3.5/DCC RPG Experiment « The Mule Abides http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-2526 Uncomplicated Fun: Results from the D&D 3.5/DCC RPG Experiment « The Mule Abides Wed, 26 Jan 2011 19:52:27 +0000 http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/?p=332#comment-2526 [...] way of this kind of house-ruling, and all the indications are that it also follows the flip side of asymmetric design and pay equal attention to how the rules it does have contribute to the shape of the game. [...] [...] way of this kind of house-ruling, and all the indications are that it also follows the flip side of asymmetric design and pay equal attention to how the rules it does have contribute to the shape of the game. [...]

]]> By: wickedmurph http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-193 wickedmurph Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:59:29 +0000 http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/?p=332#comment-193 These are pretty much my thoughts about the "old-school movement" as well. It's like a false utopian memory that is being peddled as "history" and "truth". I've enjoyed Greywulf's posts where he re-creates the feel and theme implied (but rarely accomplished) by old-school rules. Personally, I think people should play what they like, but the factionalism, reflexive dislike of newer systems and general neck-beardedness that I encounter in a lot of the old-school blogs turns me off completely. I don't even read Bone Scroll, Jeff Rients or James Malizowsky (sp?) anymore because of that attitude. I tend to be an argumentative poster, so I'm sure they don't miss me, though. @satyre - I'm not sure that you are accurate in saying that 4e is aimed at new gamers and MMO fans. I've been playing D&D for 20 years, and I love it - simplifies and adds options at the same time. I'm a DM with limited time, though. These are pretty much my thoughts about the “old-school movement” as well. It’s like a false utopian memory that is being peddled as “history” and “truth”. I’ve enjoyed Greywulf’s posts where he re-creates the feel and theme implied (but rarely accomplished) by old-school rules.

Personally, I think people should play what they like, but the factionalism, reflexive dislike of newer systems and general neck-beardedness that I encounter in a lot of the old-school blogs turns me off completely. I don’t even read Bone Scroll, Jeff Rients or James Malizowsky (sp?) anymore because of that attitude. I tend to be an argumentative poster, so I’m sure they don’t miss me, though.

@satyre – I’m not sure that you are accurate in saying that 4e is aimed at new gamers and MMO fans. I’ve been playing D&D for 20 years, and I love it – simplifies and adds options at the same time. I’m a DM with limited time, though.

]]> By: satyre http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-191 satyre Thu, 23 Jul 2009 07:47:56 +0000 http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/?p=332#comment-191 Cool article. Absolutely with you on the benefits of asymmetric/modular design (I'm a fan of the 'Say "Yes and.." or roll dice approach) and think it has a lot of strength in the realm of Actual Play. I've noticed increasing obnoxiousness from old-schoolers to 4e players; I get frustration of having to show someone yet another system but the name-calling does nothing for them. It's a bit playground frankly. I agree 4E does do some very old-school things well and it also has limitations. It's targeted at new players with some gaming (and MMO) experience and it caters to them very well from what I can see. @magicbox: If you're hoping to get some re-use out your 3.x E kit, I can commend Pathfinder - you'll need to spend some time converting but that's nothing new if you have 3E and 3.5E books... :) Cool article. Absolutely with you on the benefits of asymmetric/modular design (I’m a fan of the ‘Say “Yes and..” or roll dice approach) and think it has a lot of strength in the realm of Actual Play.

I’ve noticed increasing obnoxiousness from old-schoolers to 4e players; I get frustration of having to show someone yet another system but the name-calling does nothing for them.

It’s a bit playground frankly.

I agree 4E does do some very old-school things well and it also has limitations. It’s targeted at new players with some gaming (and MMO) experience and it caters to them very well from what I can see.

@magicbox: If you’re hoping to get some re-use out your 3.x E kit, I can commend Pathfinder – you’ll need to spend some time converting but that’s nothing new if you have 3E and 3.5E books… :)

]]> By: kelly http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-189 kelly Thu, 23 Jul 2009 05:00:42 +0000 http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/?p=332#comment-189 there are plenty of fantasy games out that are a reaction to d&ds rules. so I'm not shirr why you are so upset buy a few insular grog nards wanting to play a game with rules closely emulating there favorite edition. what would be the point of radically redesigning d&d and slapping on the label "old school"? there are plenty of fantasy games out that are a reaction to d&ds rules. so I’m not shirr why you are so upset buy a few insular grog nards wanting to play a game with rules closely emulating there favorite edition. what would be the point of radically redesigning d&d and slapping on the label “old school”?

]]> By: magicbox http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/2009/07/22/dnd-rpg-old-school/comment-page-1/#comment-188 magicbox Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:45:12 +0000 http://www.mobunited.com/mobunitedmedia/?p=332#comment-188 I don't know enough about the Old School fanboys, but I do know that they are similar to the "Why oh why did they make 4E?" group, who in general irritate me. 4E is definitely a weird mix of old school ideas and a need to codify things too much. Most of the 3.X crowd tend to see the negatives of 4E (necessary grids and figures, a million different powers per class, etc.) and don't notice that hit points are being treated in a core book like the non-health-related entities that they have really been meant to be for years or that cutting down on skills actually makes them more like the non-skilled characters of 0E or the secondary skills from 2E. I was confused about the lack of crafting skills in 4E until I realized that it was easier to tell a player that they carved a beautiful hilt for a dagger because they wanted one than make them take points in a skill and make a bunch of rolls to let them be interesting. My problem with 4E is that the designers didn't seem to realize that there were a bunch of cool things about the game that they simplified and made more "old school", since there is almost no emphasis on these points in their promotion of the new edition. Instead they focussed on combat and how much simpler grappling is now. This has fostered the opinion that 4E is all combat, all the time and that's not a basis for swinging over a group of people who bought every 3.X supplement out there. That said, there are things you can't do with 4E that you could with 3.X. Thus why I might pick up Pathfinder. I don’t know enough about the Old School fanboys, but I do know that they are similar to the “Why oh why did they make 4E?” group, who in general irritate me. 4E is definitely a weird mix of old school ideas and a need to codify things too much. Most of the 3.X crowd tend to see the negatives of 4E (necessary grids and figures, a million different powers per class, etc.) and don’t notice that hit points are being treated in a core book like the non-health-related entities that they have really been meant to be for years or that cutting down on skills actually makes them more like the non-skilled characters of 0E or the secondary skills from 2E. I was confused about the lack of crafting skills in 4E until I realized that it was easier to tell a player that they carved a beautiful hilt for a dagger because they wanted one than make them take points in a skill and make a bunch of rolls to let them be interesting.

My problem with 4E is that the designers didn’t seem to realize that there were a bunch of cool things about the game that they simplified and made more “old school”, since there is almost no emphasis on these points in their promotion of the new edition. Instead they focussed on combat and how much simpler grappling is now. This has fostered the opinion that 4E is all combat, all the time and that’s not a basis for swinging over a group of people who bought every 3.X supplement out there.

That said, there are things you can’t do with 4E that you could with 3.X. Thus why I might pick up Pathfinder.

]]>