iserith
Magic Wordsmith
The difference may seem subtle, but there are many consequences of these different methods that may not be obvious to one who has not tried both. For example, in the former method, rolls are often called for that have no consequences, or trivial consequences, for failure. In the latter method, many more actions succeed or fail without a roll being called for. The methods demand different levels of engagement with the fiction from the players and from the DM. There are many ways these techniques affect the play experience, despite seeming at a glance to be more or less the same.
Absolutely. Small differences at the fundamental level can make for large differences in the outcome of play. Veteran players and DMs usually don't bother to read the sections on "How to Play" in the PHB or the entirety of the DMG, for example, so it just gets missed. I made that mistake when converting from D&D 3.5e to D&D 4e. I couldn't figure out why my 4e game wasn't as good as it could be. Then I read the books with an eye toward what was different between the editions, modified my approach, and everything snapped right into place. I did the same for D&D 5e and the approach I talk about here and in other threads is derived from the PHB and DMG rather than from some other game. Play in my D&D 4e game and few of the things I say here about D&D 5e will apply. (Though I won't run 4e anymore since they discontinued the online tools.)