D&D General Defining "New School" Play (+)

[Chaosmancer]

What we've learned from this thread:

Old School: Harshly judges and believes itself to be superior to the things they call New School.

New School: Harshly judges and believes itself to be superior to the things they call Old School.

Tribalism: it's what's for dinner.

Honestly, I try not to harshly judge people who say they like Old School DnD. I really don't. If someone told me their game is going to feature tracking water and arrows, then I'd say "hey, not my cup of tea." If they wanted to know why I'm not a fan of doing that, I would point out I don't see the point in doing so, and explain my reasoning. If they wanted instant death traps, I'd point out why I don't think that fosters the kind of play environment I want at my table, because it causes too much paranoia for my players.

But instead, every time we try and discuss this topic, I get told I don't appreciate role-playing. That we are playing on easy mode, that we don't want a challenge, that we are less intelligent, less dedicated.... and yeah, it gets under my skin. I don't often talk about my DMing style or the challenges I give to my players on this site (until I start getting a little heated) because I am endlessly told that I am not challenging them, that my way of doing things is too easy. I'm not a real DnD player.

And if it was once or twice, it wouldn't be a big deal. But every time this comes up. It is the same song and dance.

 

[Chaosmancer]

But who, in your example, is the author of the fact that the symbol is a symbol of Asmodeus? My initial impression is that you are talking here about the player recognising a symbol, not deciding what it is a symbol of.

I was imagining the DM showing the players a picture.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I have some complex feelings about this, but they only apply to settings with some serious scarcity issues.

As an example, in a post-apocalypse setting where some supplies are possible to purchase, but only in some places that PCs may be away from for extended periods. In extreme cases this is, of course, less like routine supply tracking and more like tracking consumable magic items, but there can be some interim cases (crossbow bolts come to mind).

Mind you, this only matters if its the sort of game that's focused at least in part on the survival elements of that kind of setting, and its hard to get those to be interesting and not annoying, but if that's what you want to focus on in part, some tracking here seems warranted.

In most sorts of games, its just tedium; set a maintenance cost for characters and move on.

Oh yeah, I've played a few post-apocalypse games using DnD. And we started tracking resources for the early levels. We also quickly secured enough food and water (game usually takes place in a destroyed city) that by around level 5 the DM asked us to stop tracking, because we usually use those style of games as a "rebuild society" game, where we start having towns with dozens of individuals dealing with food and water, while we deal with hostile neighbors.

But I could see a game focused on long term travel across a desert or something. It would be a game that doesn't quite "fit" standard DnD, but I could see someone billing that for a campaign.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sounds like a choice to me. I don't see it as any different then the player that ignores the game for an hour on an "important" phone call, then stumbles back in and says "what is going on in the game?" for the third time. Yea, I would penalize that player and tell them they need to pay attention. Oh...and kick them out of the game. But note, this is just my own personal viewpoint.

How about a NS example? A NSDM has a houserule of no PVP. I join the game and have my character attack the other characters. The NSDM would tell me I need to stop....right? And if I kept doing it....

So, you see reading three books of wood elf lore as the equivalent of a house rule banning a specific action. And the not having time to read those three books and memorize their contents (with notes) as equivalent to intentionally stabbing another PC after being told no PVP...

But it isn't required that you read the books and memorize them. It is a choice. A choice that is a rule whose enforcement can lead to being kicked from the game.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

NO. We don't play like that. That's what I keep trying to tell you. You have no idea what the style you are critiquing is actually like. You just have some disdain and some memes.

Yeah that's what he does in every one of these (+) threads, he makes absurd claims about new school players that don't resemble reality, then claims to be positively contributing by just "pointing out differences between playstyles" (his playstyle and the nonexistent ones he makes up). All you can do is ignore it and respond to the actual (+) content

 

[pemerton]

I was imagining the DM showing the players a picture.

Right, that's what I thought.

When I posted this:

What school is it where the player takes the lead in providing this sort of PC knowledge and memory?

I was imaging that the player shows the GM a picture, and tells them that this is the holy symbol of <whatever temple/church/god the player's PC would know about>; or that the player decides and then tells the GM (and the rest of the table) what the stabling practices of this particular cavalry troop are, etc.

As per my other post upthread,

I probably associate it most strongly - in the context of published games - with HeroWars (2000) and Burning Wheel (revised, 2004).

It was also a recurring feature of my 4e D&D play.

Anyway, whatever school it belongs to, it avoids both your objection to @bloodtide's approach, and @bloodtide's "the GM telling the player" objection to your approach!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I am curious what you consider OS in 5e, all the parts I care about seem thoroughly purged / made obsolete by spells etc.

Brutally lethal levels 1 and 2 (and sometimes 3), swingy dice, extremely low competence for early adventurers (proficiency starts at a whopping +2, wowzers, I'm so underwhelmed!), the philosophy of "DM Empowerment" and all its ills, extra ultra simplicity of Fighters, punitive design (particularly WRT Exhaustion), and the use of a very large number of saving throws with wildly varying degrees of actual utility (e.g. Charisma saves are both rare and generally not all that dangerous, while Wisdom saves are common and extremely dangerous.)

 

[Oofta]

I don't think I did?

D&D General - Defining "New School" Play (+)

This is a deeply problematic thing for me. You cannot make informed choices if you do not know the rules. You cannot make informed choices if the DM might change how things work at the drop of a hat. And when you are no longer making informed decisions, then it doesn't really matter. You end up...

www.enworld.org

Old School: When the character meets a group of wood elves the player must talk to and interact with them in real time. The player must use the game lore, elf lore, and nature lore to say relevant things. ​

​

If you simply expect someone to act in character and make up what they think might be an appropriate greeting, that has nothing to do with OS or NS. If you mean they have to study 3 books to understand what the proper phrases are in you head canon I have a hard time seriously believing any DM would still have players.

By the way, what 3 books? What are the titles, authors, and where can I get access to them?

Anywhere I want too? I have all of everything to pick from. I'm in no way talking about any sort of offfical game books, if that is what your thinking.

Yes...I do point out one way hard and one way is easy. But, again, it is everyone else that keeps adding the rest. Easy is not bad and hard is not good no matter, ok?

In no way does "easy" represent every NS game. Heck, some OS games probably just relied on a herd of hirelings* to set off all the traps and protect the PCs. For me I don't want a game to be easy, I want choices and decisions that matter, I want risks and rewards. It has nothing to do with NS or OS.

Which is something people repeatedly keep pointing out, that you are incredibly dismissive of anything that contradicts your statements. This is similar to someone telling bigoted jokes and then just saying "I was just kidding". Except that in your case you seem to simply blame everyone who points out your clear bias and elitism for being wrong because only you know the truth.

*Maybe that should be a grovel of hirelings? A meat wall of hirelings? A cannon fodder of hirelings?

 

[payn]

and the use of a very large number of saving throws with wildly varying degrees of actual utility (e.g. Charisma saves are both rare and generally not all that dangerous, while Wisdom saves are common and extremely dangerous.)

I dont think this is particularly an old school element, I think thats lazy shoehorning in a save for every ability system without reworking spells.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I dont think this is particularly an old school element, I think thats lazy shoehorning in a save for every ability system without reworking spells.

Perhaps, but I strongly associate "lots of weird saving throws with little rhyme or reason" with old school rules, because of the whole "Wands" vs "Death" vs etc. and how it was...really really hard to actually tell what anything would be at any given time. E.g., why is Banishment a Cha save? Who knows! It just is.