Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Old-School is 5th Edition? Can it even do Old-School?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Yora" data-source="post: 8497807" data-attributes="member: 6670763"><p>I feel that this is going down the path of whether you want to play with dice and mechanics, or to play with a fictional world.</p><p>It's not really an old-school thing, as the earliest D&D games were designed with clear mechanical structures and procedures to produce a 15-minute-gameplay-loop in a dungeon environment. But the idea that encounters are chalenges that have to be solved with game mechanics and dice rolls is something that became very prominent in 3rd and 4th edition.</p><p>I feel that this approach to playing the game and preparing adventures is one of the main things that originally motivated people to look back at how the games handled things in the past.</p><p></p><p>If there's any one thing I would consider central to the old-school ideal, it would be to not look at obstacles in the characters' path as game-mechanical problems, but to return to a mindset of thinking of the PCs as characters in an unfolding story first. Ideally, an approach to overcoming an obstacle should either not require any rolls at all, because it is obvious what will happen, or come down to a single roll that takes into consideration all the deliberations and planning of the players.</p><p></p><p>I believe skill checks have come up several times in the discussion about things that people often complain need better mechanics. I think the way by which the GM calls for skill checks can have quite an impact on how the game as a whole feels. First of all, skill checks should always be called by the GM, never announced by the players. Too often an obstacle devolves into "I want to roll X so you will tell me the solution".</p><p>"Is there a trap?" "How do we get the door open?" "Where is the item we're looking for?" "Is the guy lying to us?" These are things that could be played as scenes. Or you could skip them with a die roll. Now, the characters all have skills and the players customized their charaters to have various different skill modifiers, so we of course don't want to throw them out completely. But you can always call for a skill check after a player has explained a plan to deal with an obstacle, and you want to check if the character has the skill and luck to actually pull it off in that moment. What you don't want to have is skill checks being made without any plan or interaction with the obstacle or environment. Or as it has been put before, "you can not roll dice to avoid playing the game".</p><p>Insist that the players are being specific about what they do. "I search the room" is not specific. Neither is "I use my engineering skill to see if I can bypass the mechanism".</p><p>"I search the desk drawers" is a lot more specific. That's when you can call for a Search check to see if the character spots something that appears noteworthy in all the junk. In a room that has only a desk with drawers and nothing else, that doesn't make any meaningful difference. But in larger rooms with a lot more stuff in them, it does. Especially when there is time pressure and a chance of being discovered (wandering monster checks!) for every container you search. A player could study a mechanism with a skill check to find a way to disable it, and on a successful roll you can tell the players that the character spotted something that could be expoited, like a rusty gear that already has a crack in it. But the players still need to come up with some kind of plan on how they want to break that gear to disable the mechanism.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Yora, post: 8497807, member: 6670763"] I feel that this is going down the path of whether you want to play with dice and mechanics, or to play with a fictional world. It's not really an old-school thing, as the earliest D&D games were designed with clear mechanical structures and procedures to produce a 15-minute-gameplay-loop in a dungeon environment. But the idea that encounters are chalenges that have to be solved with game mechanics and dice rolls is something that became very prominent in 3rd and 4th edition. I feel that this approach to playing the game and preparing adventures is one of the main things that originally motivated people to look back at how the games handled things in the past. If there's any one thing I would consider central to the old-school ideal, it would be to not look at obstacles in the characters' path as game-mechanical problems, but to return to a mindset of thinking of the PCs as characters in an unfolding story first. Ideally, an approach to overcoming an obstacle should either not require any rolls at all, because it is obvious what will happen, or come down to a single roll that takes into consideration all the deliberations and planning of the players. I believe skill checks have come up several times in the discussion about things that people often complain need better mechanics. I think the way by which the GM calls for skill checks can have quite an impact on how the game as a whole feels. First of all, skill checks should always be called by the GM, never announced by the players. Too often an obstacle devolves into "I want to roll X so you will tell me the solution". "Is there a trap?" "How do we get the door open?" "Where is the item we're looking for?" "Is the guy lying to us?" These are things that could be played as scenes. Or you could skip them with a die roll. Now, the characters all have skills and the players customized their charaters to have various different skill modifiers, so we of course don't want to throw them out completely. But you can always call for a skill check after a player has explained a plan to deal with an obstacle, and you want to check if the character has the skill and luck to actually pull it off in that moment. What you don't want to have is skill checks being made without any plan or interaction with the obstacle or environment. Or as it has been put before, "you can not roll dice to avoid playing the game". Insist that the players are being specific about what they do. "I search the room" is not specific. Neither is "I use my engineering skill to see if I can bypass the mechanism". "I search the desk drawers" is a lot more specific. That's when you can call for a Search check to see if the character spots something that appears noteworthy in all the junk. In a room that has only a desk with drawers and nothing else, that doesn't make any meaningful difference. But in larger rooms with a lot more stuff in them, it does. Especially when there is time pressure and a chance of being discovered (wandering monster checks!) for every container you search. A player could study a mechanism with a skill check to find a way to disable it, and on a successful roll you can tell the players that the character spotted something that could be expoited, like a rusty gear that already has a crack in it. But the players still need to come up with some kind of plan on how they want to break that gear to disable the mechanism. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How Old-School is 5th Edition? Can it even do Old-School?
Top