Jon Peterson posts Mordenkainen in 1974

Look at those stats, talk about a munchkin!

 

[Ratskinner]

I don't know what to tell you. If you don't see a difference between someone thinking, reacting to, and talking about the in narrative facts of the game, and worrying about what is going on in the plot, and someone who is looking and thinking about how he can keep and manage a +2 proficiency bonus, then you just don't see it and that's fine. I am talking about the facts in the encounter, and my buddy was talking about the facts on his sheet. I half wanted to say in character "what is a proficiency bonus?" Keep on managing your stats and playing based on your stats if that makes you happy. I will play in the moment, and if the stats serve my play so be it, and if they don't I will cope. But I certainly would never think about not taking a logical course of action because I might lose a +2 proficiency. I wouldn't even be thinking about such a thing. I don't know why you would think a DM should ban me from making an in game realization. Why would a DM ban good playing, which is what paying attention is. I wouldn't play with a DM who banned me from using my head.

I see the difference, but I reject the notion that they are edition-centric. I've seen similar differences in playstyles in other game systems. Heck those kinds of differences are why people invent other systems and prefer one edition over the other. As [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] pointed out, a 1e player might act the same way with even more mechanical influence on his decision. My group right now has a guy who runs at the first sign of non-optimisation, regardless of edition (and we just left a period of playing AD&D and Boot Hill).

 

[Jay Verkuilen]

A) he could have grabbed it and passed it to someone else

That one seems to be on the player, not the system (but see below).

A lot of players won't take actions that essentially mean they don't get to use their class abilities or otherwise feel like the DM has blocked them or is trying to force them to take an action that requires not doing core class functions as they see them. I can understand it, which is why that kind of DM blocking needs to be done very, very sparingly and with some guidance.

I'm not sure that's particularly new either.

B) put the sheet down and don't worry about BS like if he will lose a proficiency bonus and just go with the story. It's an obsession with stats over roleplaying. That is where the Es differ.

I played a lot of 1E and 2E; people could be just as rigid and nuts back then, although what they would be more rigid and nuts about might differ. Categorically not being able to use a weapon, for instance, or control-freak alignment rules were examples of classic 1E issues.

I do agree, however, that a much more defined system like 3.X or, especially, 4E, encouraged more "play from the sheet". But players balking at something like "get the sword!" isn't new.

 

[Jay Verkuilen]

I don't know what to tell you. If you don't see a difference between someone thinking, reacting to, and talking about the in narrative facts of the game, and worrying about what is going on in the plot, and someone who is looking and thinking about how he can keep and manage a +2 proficiency bonus, then you just don't see it and that's fine.

The thing is many of us have have long and sordid careers playing this game (mine dates back to 1982, when my aunt gave me the Erol Otus red box) and recall encountering plenty such folks back in the day on both sides of the DM screen.

But even as a 1e Magic User if I saw a Holy Avenger, damn straight I am taking it and figuring out how to get it to my Paladin buddy. I never said anyone should break a rule or campaigned for it.

And that's the main reason I see this as being on the player. Some people are just inherently Lawful Neutral and uncreative.