Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7532880" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>Some thoughts (that don't just pertain to the quoted text above but to other posts):</p><p></p><p>1) I agree with AA's post directly above. I'll elaborate:</p><p></p><p>a) AD&D 2e moving xp for treasure/gold from the primary way to advance to an option was no small thing.</p><p></p><p>b) AD&D 2e introducing "Roleplaying xp by way of DM fiat" was no small thing.</p><p></p><p>c) AD&D 2e introducing xp awards for using noncombat skills in a process sim sort of way was no small thing.</p><p></p><p>d) AD&D 2e coming out a few years after the Dragonlance novels in 85, in the thrall of the grey box Realms, then Planescape, and the utter deluge of metaplot surrounding these settings was no small thing. This is what I'm talking about when I say "The Dragonlancing of D&D." The advent of setting and metaplot tourism, inevitable player passivity and/or importence, and GM Force that accompanied it.</p><p></p><p>e) Vampire the Masquerade coming out right in the beginning of the 2e zeitgeist and basically running so hard with rule 0 that a ridiculous number of GM's just took (VtM Golden Rule) to be expected D&D canon:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>f) Due to all of the above, that era's ethos of GMing became one of entitled GM's and their precious setting, NPCs, and metaplot utterly railroading an entire generation of players. GM's Calvinballing/Fudging/Forcing/Illusionisming their passive players through setting and metaplot tourism until their players became either (i) completely disenfranchised or (ii) so utterly annoyed that they just murderhoboed the setting/ignored the metaplot to utter ruin because the only way they could actually influence the gamestate was through violence/combat.</p><p></p><p>The number of anecdotes and refugee players that fled other games into my own game during that period was truly absurd. I've never seen anything like it before or since. And I sat in on plenty of games and talked to GMs and entertained tons of conversations that bore out this idea of unmitigated authority for GMs to basically be the only active player at the table with the players doing little but characterizing a personality and rolling some dice (and hoping the resolution mechanics actually mattered).</p><p></p><p>2) My guess is [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] never played much Basic (1-3 and solely dungeons) or Expert (4-14 and expansion into wilderness but using the same machinery, principles, and procedures) (most people didn't play Champion/Master/Immortal...some played RC)? Exclusively played AD&D? The Gygaxian prose in AD&D (even though he explicitly called out the game as not realistic and not intended to be a simulation) vs Moldvay, Cook/Marsh made an enormous difference in the rules text. Basic and Expert's rules and prose read as (abstract) "game" while AD&D (even if not intended as a simulation) read as granular content generation rather than (abstract) "game" facilitator. I think there is a marked difference there.</p><p></p><p>When I talk about "system matters", I'm working off a premise of "intentful or thoughtful design (as a holistic/integrated product)". Does anybody actually think Environment Scaling/Movement Rates + Exploration Turns + Wandering Monsters/Random Encounters + Gold for XP (and not for monsters) is just a happy accident and not intenful/thoughtful design to create a very specific impetus and environment for player decision-making? </p><p></p><p>3) I do not agree with Celebrim's encapsulation of what Dragon contained in the early to mid 80s. It wasn't a deluge of "realism" conversation. It was letters to the editor about all things gaming (social to silly to rules). It was artwork and interviews. It was commentary on contemporary games like Talisman, Diplomacy, et al. It was advice on how to choose a Dungeon Master (an overwhelming amount of which pertained to evaluating how fair and honest of a referee they were, whether their games were interesting, how good of a command they had of the rules and procedures, how whether house rules they made favored one archetype/class over another, etc...there was very little commentary on their command of ecologies, economies and feedbacks, etc). It was miniature rules. It was various rules modules (that didn't have an overwhelming bent toward "realism"...some did...some didn't). It was new classes or new takes on classes. It was satirical articles and silly, short fiction. It was advice on map-making and lots of "scaling controversy". It was articles on wargaming. It was Sage Advice (that didn't hew excessively toward "realism").</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 7532880, member: 6696971"] Some thoughts (that don't just pertain to the quoted text above but to other posts): 1) I agree with AA's post directly above. I'll elaborate: a) AD&D 2e moving xp for treasure/gold from the primary way to advance to an option was no small thing. b) AD&D 2e introducing "Roleplaying xp by way of DM fiat" was no small thing. c) AD&D 2e introducing xp awards for using noncombat skills in a process sim sort of way was no small thing. d) AD&D 2e coming out a few years after the Dragonlance novels in 85, in the thrall of the grey box Realms, then Planescape, and the utter deluge of metaplot surrounding these settings was no small thing. This is what I'm talking about when I say "The Dragonlancing of D&D." The advent of setting and metaplot tourism, inevitable player passivity and/or importence, and GM Force that accompanied it. e) Vampire the Masquerade coming out right in the beginning of the 2e zeitgeist and basically running so hard with rule 0 that a ridiculous number of GM's just took (VtM Golden Rule) to be expected D&D canon: f) Due to all of the above, that era's ethos of GMing became one of entitled GM's and their precious setting, NPCs, and metaplot utterly railroading an entire generation of players. GM's Calvinballing/Fudging/Forcing/Illusionisming their passive players through setting and metaplot tourism until their players became either (i) completely disenfranchised or (ii) so utterly annoyed that they just murderhoboed the setting/ignored the metaplot to utter ruin because the only way they could actually influence the gamestate was through violence/combat. The number of anecdotes and refugee players that fled other games into my own game during that period was truly absurd. I've never seen anything like it before or since. And I sat in on plenty of games and talked to GMs and entertained tons of conversations that bore out this idea of unmitigated authority for GMs to basically be the only active player at the table with the players doing little but characterizing a personality and rolling some dice (and hoping the resolution mechanics actually mattered). 2) My guess is [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] never played much Basic (1-3 and solely dungeons) or Expert (4-14 and expansion into wilderness but using the same machinery, principles, and procedures) (most people didn't play Champion/Master/Immortal...some played RC)? Exclusively played AD&D? The Gygaxian prose in AD&D (even though he explicitly called out the game as not realistic and not intended to be a simulation) vs Moldvay, Cook/Marsh made an enormous difference in the rules text. Basic and Expert's rules and prose read as (abstract) "game" while AD&D (even if not intended as a simulation) read as granular content generation rather than (abstract) "game" facilitator. I think there is a marked difference there. When I talk about "system matters", I'm working off a premise of "intentful or thoughtful design (as a holistic/integrated product)". Does anybody actually think Environment Scaling/Movement Rates + Exploration Turns + Wandering Monsters/Random Encounters + Gold for XP (and not for monsters) is just a happy accident and not intenful/thoughtful design to create a very specific impetus and environment for player decision-making? 3) I do not agree with Celebrim's encapsulation of what Dragon contained in the early to mid 80s. It wasn't a deluge of "realism" conversation. It was letters to the editor about all things gaming (social to silly to rules). It was artwork and interviews. It was commentary on contemporary games like Talisman, Diplomacy, et al. It was advice on how to choose a Dungeon Master (an overwhelming amount of which pertained to evaluating how fair and honest of a referee they were, whether their games were interesting, how good of a command they had of the rules and procedures, how whether house rules they made favored one archetype/class over another, etc...there was very little commentary on their command of ecologies, economies and feedbacks, etc). It was miniature rules. It was various rules modules (that didn't have an overwhelming bent toward "realism"...some did...some didn't). It was new classes or new takes on classes. It was satirical articles and silly, short fiction. It was advice on map-making and lots of "scaling controversy". It was articles on wargaming. It was Sage Advice (that didn't hew excessively toward "realism"). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e Compared to Trad D&D; What You Lose, What You Gain
Top