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

[ezo]

In Forbidden Lands, it was capped at d12, and when you were in a settlement you could spend cash to increase the die size up to that point. Forbidden Lands actually uses this for pretty much all supplies - torches, food, and water are all tracked this way, though the conditions that trigger a roll of the die are different.

Starting at d12 you have 20 expected uses before you run out then (on average), with the majority of the time having between 12 and 32 (80%).

That sounds pretty reasonable, but honestly unless you don't go to settlements often, it seems like you'd rarely run out (since you can resupply), which begs the question like other methods: why bother tracking it?

 

[CandyLaser]

Starting at d12 you have 20 expected uses before you run out then (on average), with the majority of the time having between 12 and 32 (80%).

That sounds pretty reasonable, but honestly unless you don't go to settlements often, it seems like you'd rarely run out (since you can resupply), which begs the question like other methods: why bother tracking it?

Forbidden Lands has pretty rough encumbrance rules, as I recall; maxing out your supply of arrows might mean being undersupplied on food and water, and settlements are very rare. Also, rereading the rules, you actually are supposed to roll it every time you shoot an arrow. I didn't actually play it that way, and I found the way I initially described it to be restrictive enough. But if it's every time you shoot it's on average 20 shots, instead of 20 encounters, before you need to resupply.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This does show the difference. I can think of 100 reasons why an archer could not recover arrows all the time in most combats. You don't seem to be anywhere close to that and just say it always happens.

Why would I want to come up with 100 reasons to disprove my own point? Also, how many of those niche reasons [We are fighting in an active volcano, there is sufluric acid raining from the sky, the floor is a massive ooze that exclusively eats wood] are going to happen continuously from levels 1 to 5?

Frankly, if every fight I was in from level 1 to level 5 had my archer character unable to recover arrows.... I'd ask the DM if they have a problem with my character, since they seem bound and determined to prevent me from having arrows.

So money is a factor, but you have also done it the cheap way? You might want to pick a side.

Was typing fast, might not have been clear. The Map also costs money, and if you start just using graph paper, most things you can use for minis are too big for the graph paper.

Well, not every player can do it...some need the visual aid.

Interesting observation. I wonder if that sort of thinking could be extended to OTHER areas of the game...

Well, only if you don't also do it. I'm trying to list unique Old School things.

But you listed use of miniatures as unique to Old School. Which would make Theater of the Mind unique to New School then, right? When you said this?

Though most Old School D&D games use miniatures, and New School does not.

So is the complex Theater of the Mind style unique to New School?

Have you never watched episodic TV? Other then the silly cartoon?

Yes, I have. Which is why I have been explaining to you how they work.

Maybe

No, pretty sure the two schools share a lot of features. Both are DnD after all. Lot of overlap in playing the same game, especially since it is usually the same edition of the game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Does anyone actually play with recovering arrows as a thing? I've always just seen DMs say that nonmagical ammunition is infinite because it's so cheap that no one is going to bother tracking how many you have, and then magical ammunition is consumable on use.

Yep, that is basically how we play. I just also tried to demonstrate that, if played by the rules, you can get so much ammo that you can go multiple levels without needing to buy any more.

I have since had to defend using the rules and assuming common scenarios are common.

 

[Mark Hope]

Does anyone actually play with recovering arrows as a thing? I've always just seen DMs say that nonmagical ammunition is infinite because it's so cheap that no one is going to bother tracking how many you have, and then magical ammunition is consumable on use.

In my Dark Sun games, yes - because resource scarcity is part of the feel of the setting. I let the players roll or just assume they recover 50% of arrows - their choice, so long as they're consistent.

In my homebrew game, I don't really care. I am aware that some players like to track arrows, though, and that's cool with me. It doesn't really matter to me in the long run, though, given that they're easy to acquire or make.

 

[Thomas Shey]

In my Dark Sun games, yes - because resource scarcity is part of the feel of the setting. I let the players roll or just assume they recover 50% of arrows - their choice, so long as they're consistent.

Earlier in this thread I talked about the rare cases where this seemed to make much sense, and I mentioned games with a strong survival-focused tilt; the example I used was post-apocalypse games, but this one works too (well, I suppose you can argue Dark Sun is a post-apocalypse game...)

 

[bloodtide]

Why would I want to come up with 100 reasons to disprove my own point? Also, how many of those niche reasons [We are fighting in an active volcano, there is sufluric acid raining from the sky, the floor is a massive ooze that exclusively eats wood] are going to happen continuously from levels 1 to 5?

Frankly, if every fight I was in from level 1 to level 5 had my archer character unable to recover arrows.... I'd ask the DM if they have a problem with my character, since they seem bound and determined to prevent me from having arrows.

This does show another difference or two:

The New School game does not continuously have fantastical events and things happening. As you say above. Old School does.

The New School player often feels everything is directed at them. Whatever the DM does, they might feel like a target. The Old School player rarely has such feelings.

Was typing fast, might not have been clear. The Map also costs money, and if you start just using graph paper, most things you can use for minis are too big for the graph paper.

They make graph paper in many sizes. You can also make graph paper. I'm a master at zero budget gaming.

But you listed use of miniatures as unique to Old School. Which would make Theater of the Mind unique to New School then, right? When you said this?

No, I said "more likely to" and "often" as qualifiers for Old School. And, well, Old School did invent Theater of the Mind....

So is the complex Theater of the Mind style unique to New School?

Nope

Yes, I have. Which is why I have been explaining to you how they work.

Oh?

No, pretty sure the two schools share a lot of features. Both are DnD after all. Lot of overlap in playing the same game, especially since it is usually the same edition of the game.

They do share a lot of features, though many in name only. But when you break them down they get very different.

 

[tsadkiel]

Who likes lots of caveats? Because if you do, I have a great post for you.

Caveat the first - I'm slightly misquoting John Green here, but much of what we assume to be binary is in fact spectral. There is no easy switch between New School and Old School, because both styles are played in numerous ways. Rather than a line, I think that D&D in particular is a tree, with a complex net of roots underneath and many branches swaying overhead, but every point on the tree is in fact the tree, and lop off the branches or tear out the roots and the tree will die. It needs both to survive.

And as a sidebar, I've been playing D&D in various forms since about 1982, and a lot of what is presented as Old School in this thread is nothing like my play experience. Which is fine, it just means I've been on a different point on the tree than other people.

Caveat the second - New School isn't particularly new at this point; we're talking about trends that have been present in the game for decades.

That said, two broad tendencies I've noticed.

New School tends to be fiction first, while Old School leans toward "play to find out." OS games don't tend to have clearly defined story arcs, they have environments and situations that the PCs react to. This is not absolute; there were some epic (and slightly silly) storylines in my games back in the Eighties, and my current 5E game is a procedurally generated sandbox in the Land of Oz.

Second, New School characters are more defined mechanically than Old School characters, while taking longer to create. OS classes are just three or four things you can do, and the main mechanical difference between two characters of the same class will be the selection of equipment and/or spells they've picked up while adventuring. This one is very D&D specific; I played some Champions in the eighties as well, and that is not a simple character creation system.

And that's really it. No point in worrying about which is better - find a branch or a root that you like, settle in, and don't throw acorns at the other inhabitants of the tree.

 

[Clint_L]

I love the tree metaphor, though I think of it in evolutionary terms. As D&D has developed, there are myriad mutations happening and facing selective pressure. That is producing broad trends, but as with evolution, this doesn't mean that the current varieties of the game are better than earlier ones. Just different.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This does show another difference or two:

The New School game does not continuously have fantastical events and things happening. As you say above. Old School does.

The New School player often feels everything is directed at them. Whatever the DM does, they might feel like a target. The Old School player rarely has such feelings.

Geeze, I wonder why an archer character might feel targeted if in their harsh, near-reality simulation they spent five levels having fantastical events that all "just so happened" to impact their ability to play their character. Must be that darn New School pattern recognition.

But sure man, if the DM specifically goes out of their way to ensure arrows are destroyed after every fight, then it will cost more gold to have arrows for every fight, and you might need to go to town more often.

They make graph paper in many sizes. You can also make graph paper. I'm a master at zero budget gaming.

Good for you. Again, sometimes people don't have the money to get supplies. I'm not sure why you are so dead-set on proving me wrong about this.

No, I said "more likely to" and "often" as qualifiers for Old School. And, well, Old School did invent Theater of the Mind....


Nope

So you aren't only listing things unique to Old School, like you just claimed.

Oh?

Yes, I have seen TV shows. Shocking I know in this day and age where everyone has had a television for the last thirty years.

They do share a lot of features, though many in name only. But when you break them down they get very different.

Not really. Because as many people on this thread have pointed out, most of the things you claim are Old school... aren't.