Specifically, in very linear adventures, especially most organized play like scenarios, "what do you do now?" is almost irrelevant. There's only one thing to do; the question is moot. Therefore, "What's you modifier" is the only question that really matters. But, again, that can be true regardless if you are playing OD&D, 4E, Shadowrun or any other traditional RPG.
I have to disagree. Even in the most linear adventure,
how you so somethig still matters a lot. Now matter how linear the plot, the situations that appearstill have to be overcome.
GM: You come to a dead end.
Player: 36!
GM: What?
Player: That's my Search roll
GM: So you are searching? Where?
Player: I just spend 10 minutes searching the entire area for secret doors.
GM: Ok, NOW you can roll Search. (Secretly rolls a disbelief save against the illusory wall the character is now interacting with, disregarding the Search rolls completely)
This is a very simple example, but numbers without context are pointless.
Because the systems themselves reward such analysis via escalating DCs and defenses. It is simply because the systems are designed to challenge the construct building abilities of the player over any other. 4E lessened the traps and made the path broad and easier to follow but the underlying theme was still there.
Looking at the most skill-intense class, the thief, in 1E you had a slowly escalating % to manage a situation. How is this really different from later editions, except in that by having changing difficulties, a 1st level rogue in 3E actually has a decent chance to pass these tests.
In 2E, you got to divide your skill percentages yourself between different skill. The way this played out around here is that you picked 2 skills (the least split you were allowed) and increased them until you got competent (90%), then you picked two other abilities to improve. How did this not "reward such analysis"?
This along with the attitude toward action resolution which was, if there isn't a die roll then nothing is really happening produced a game that was less interesting for me.
This bit I can really respect. The dice are not needed; they are something that are brought out when the issue has to be decided by chance, or when either the GM or player just doesn't feel like playing out the details of the situation.
Edit: I guess the playstyle difference is old school or not. If you narrate your every action, the character's mechanical numbers matter a lot less. But even Amber Diceless Roleplaying had attributes, tough they were (of course) not randomly determined.