My Response to the Grognardia Essay "More Than a Feeling"

[Mallus]

Many OD&D players don't want Anime influences like Japanese Roleplaying games and Anime in their fantasy.

And that's fine. However, it gets dodgy when self-proclaimed 'old-schoolers' conveniently forget all the weird influences/elements found in earlier editions. Say like the monk, who is a refugee from 1970s-era Shaw Brothers kung-fu flicks.

Which isn't to say anyone is wrong in their preferences (just wrong in some of their characterizations of the game).

Old D&D had the traditional elements as the core and all the other tastes could be added in and taylor made.

It's more accurate to say 'old D&D' had a combination of traditional elements and whatever other wacky shi stuff tickled its creators fancy. Which goes a long way towards explaining it's charm.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I see what you're getting at...

Its not the "nostalgia" part you're having a fit about, its the "just".

Nope. I'm not having a fit about anything, but it's nice to see that you can still throw the odd ad hominem attack in where it isn't needed.


RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Nope. I'm not having a fit about anything, but it's nice to see that you can still throw the odd ad hominem attack in where it isn't needed.


RC

Are you sure you aren't a little to oversensitive and seeing an insult where none is intended?

 

[Doug McCrae]

It is a matter of taste more so than "just nostalgia". Many OD&D players don't want Anime influences like Japanese Roleplaying games and Anime in their fantasy. Many OD&D players want races based in literature and not made up arbitrarily by designers.

Is there any Japanese influence in the newer editions? Or is 'anime' code for non-naturalistic armour, big swords and a shocking lack of 70s moustaches in the art? Styles in fantasy art have changed, it's less naturalistic than it was 30 years ago, but that's not due to Japanese influence. I actually think there *should* be more manga and anime influences in modern D&D even though it doesn't appeal to me personally, as it's very popular these days, but afaics there isn't any.

Lots of ideas in 1970s D&D came from all over the place - comic books, TV shows, movies, sci fi, kids toys. Whatever appealed to Gary and the other early players. Much that seems traditional to us now isn't generic fantasy, it comes from very specific sources - halflings, orcs, Vancian magic, the arcane/divine split.

If the races had come from Conan instead of Tolkien, there would've been ape-men, tieflings and serpent people instead of elves, dwarves and orcs.

 

[Mallus]

As for the original blog post...

It rubbed me the wrong way. Dismissing a person's preferences as mere nostalgia is dumb. But dismissing the role, and nature of nostalgia, is also dumb. Nostalgia indicates you liked something in the past, that perhaps you'd like to recapture some of feeling you had when that thing was new to you. There's nothing wrong with that.

(and perish the thought we should discuss our 'feelings' and talk about the games we enjoy using 'nebulous and quasi-emotional' language'. FYI, I'm preparing a combination legal brief and mathematical proof of why I like the recent Animal Collective album Merriweather Post Pavilion. Would anyone care to read it? )

Apparently it's okay to dismiss people who feel a large part of 'old-school gaming' comes from the way you approach the rules, not from the rules themselves. If you encounter a bloke like that, nod and move on, as if they were muttering to themselves on a crowded street.

This alone makes his whole analysis of old-school gaming look suspect to me. AFAIC, the core of old-school' is a reliance on DM judgment --I prefer that to more prejudicial term 'fiat'-- and player knowledge to resolve tasks/conflicts.

The whole thing strikes me as less an answer to certain (unseen straw man) critics and more a (thinly? badly?)-veiled attempt at saying 'the games I like are objectively better than yours'.

"If one actually believes, as I do, that games like OD&D, Tunnels & Trolls, Empire of the Petal Throne, and so forth offer something unique that no game published in the last 20 years can match."

Then again, I might be reading (a lot) into this. Like I said, the way it was written rubbed me the wrong way. Perhaps that obscured the point he was trying to make.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Check out this 'anime' from 1967:

No more Japanese influences please Mr Moorcock! I want traditional fantasy!

 

[Mallus]

Is there any Japanese influence in the newer editions?

Not really, no.

Or is 'anime' code for non-naturalistic armour, big swords and a shocking lack of 70s moustaches in the art?

'Anime' is this context is a code for 'contemporary'.

Lots of ideas in 1970s D&D came from all over the place - comic books, TV shows, movies, sci fi, kids toys. Whatever appealed to Gary and the other early players.

These are the weird influences and elements that conveniently get forgotten I mentioned earlier.

 

[Nellisir]

I think there's room for nostalgia in the old school movement, but it's definately not the only thing under the tent. Alot of people, including myself, never played the earliest editions (I started with 2e), and of those that did, many probably remember why they switched away from it (I certainly do). 0e and 4e are different games. They read differently, they play differently. Some people play 4e, some people play GURPS. So what? Swords & Wizardry is my current game of choice, not because of some impossible nostalgia for a game I never played, or reverence for Gary Gygax, whom I do not consider some kind of gaming god, but because it's a faster, looser, less structured game that's easier to write mechanics for. And it has ascending AC.

 

[Mournblade94]

Is there any Japanese influence in the newer editions? Or is 'anime' code for non-naturalistic armour, big swords and a shocking lack of 70s moustaches in the art? Styles in fantasy art have changed, it's less naturalistic than it was 30 years ago, but that's not due to Japanese influence. I actually think there *should* be more manga and anime influences in modern D&D even though it doesn't appeal to me personally, as it's very popular these days, but afaics there isn't any.

The DM's guide specifically mentions the Avatar nickolodean show. I think the power system and the art to a large extent is influenced by anime. Granted Warhammer art is even sillier with their uber, impossible to wield weapons. I have a problem with unlikely armour and over large weapons becoming the norm. This was actually one of my biggest criticisms to third edition and BALDUR's GATE 2. I found the art conceptually ridiculous starting with 3rd edition. Great art to be sure (as far as quality), but anachronistic, cartoony, and unlikely. The art is very much Anime inspired.

Lots of ideas in 1970s D&D came from all over the place - comic books, TV shows, movies, sci fi, kids toys. Whatever appealed to Gary and the other early players. Much that seems traditional to us now isn't generic fantasy, it comes from very specific sources - halflings, orcs, Vancian magic, the arcane/divine split.

If the races had come from Conan instead of Tolkien, there would've been ape-men, tieflings and serpent people instead of elves, dwarves and orcs.

Right. There was no generic fantasy. I said originally I like the races to be based from literature. Many of the races introduced in 3.5 were cool for thier crunchiness, and the fluff had a lot to be desired. Tolkein was the one that decided to use actual myth, where Howard, Leibner, and Moorcock made up their own. D&D for the large part established a tradition to fantasy. That is one of its contributions. Pern is as much fantasy as Melnibone, Hyperborea, and Gondor, but D&D quantified it for RPGs. No one is saying that 4e should not allow the rainbow group that it does now. Some of those that prefer the older versions want to play this quantified traditional fantasy RPG just out of the box.

I like 3rd edition as a system, and after 1st edition I ran that exclusively.

Even in 3rd edition I never allowed anything but a human or dwarf to be a paladin, and the only non core things I allowed were good feats, spells and prestige classes. I kept (and still keep) the race restricitons from 1st edition as far as what classes races can be. That was easy to house rule. When I play Pathfinder I most likely will not break from the 1st edition tropes. It has nothing to do with nostalgia and everything to do with taste.

When I listen to cheesy 80's pop to reminice(sp?) about the comics I was reading or the lakes I was camping at... that is nostalgia. I will never say that 80's pop is better than current pop. Current pop is just as bad as 80's pop.

Old D&D is a preference for a style, not so much a desire to pretend I am playing a game at my lake house.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Are you sure you aren't a little to oversensitive and seeing an insult where none is intended?

Positive.

You?

Dismissing a person's preferences as mere nostalgia is dumb. But dismissing the role, and nature of nostalgia, is also dumb. Nostalgia indicates you liked something in the past, that perhaps you'd like to recapture some of feeling you had when that thing was new to you. There's nothing wrong with that.

Agreed.

Apparently it's okay to dismiss people who feel a large part of 'old-school gaming' comes from the way you approach the rules, not from the rules themselves. If you encounter a bloke like that, nod and move on, as if they were muttering to themselves on a crowded street.

I didn't get that from the blog post at all.


RC