Old school not cool

[jaerdaph]

Everything old is new again.

Youth is wasted on the young.

Age before beauty.

Never trust anyone over 30.

Never ask a woman her age.

Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter. (Mark Twain)

Old age is fifteen years older than I am. (Oliver Wendell Holmes)

You can live to be a hundred if you give up all the things that make you want to live to be a hundred. (Woody Allen)

 

[Hairfoot]

Wow. Great thread. I'm surprised no-one made these sorts of comments a few years ago so that they could be discussed to death on every forum under the sun, leaving only deliberately obtuse or provocative posters to not even bother consulting the lengthy threads on every permutation of this debate, then pop up in 2010 and think they're saying something novel.

Hang on...

 

[Glyfair]

I think I understand where you are coming from. I have an attraction to the idea of playing an "old school" game. However, when I think about the various games I used to play in the 70s and very early 80s, I don't really want to play one of them for any length of time. I just want a game that hearkens back to those days, while fixing the things that drove me batty about them in the day.

Of course, I have to admit I was a player who moved away from D&D after a couple of years of playing exclusively. Even in the beginning D&D had things built in that I strongly disliked (lets start with the whole racial powers being "balanced" by having them stop leveling at certain points). I moved from game to game trying the experiences and hoping to find the "one true game" that had no significant flaws.

I never did find that game. I did, however, find quite a few games that I enjoyed enough that I didn't mind those flaws. I would play them when available, especially with a good GM.

I came back to D&D a while after Unearthed Arcana because a good friend ran a game. He ran two "school year" long campaigns and that was my last D&D until 3E was released.

So, for me, old D&D only has a small amount of nostalgia. I want games that recreate what I loved about games in those days, without the things that drove me nuts.

 

[Sadrik]

This is why there are different games. Different people like different things in different systems and not every game is good for everyone. Personally, I see value in most editions - most RPG systems, in fact. I do not begrudge old school D&D one iota because the game moved along at a much faster clip than any version of D&D since 3E. Not that 3E is worse, because the level of freedom and cohesion in the system is nice too.

In short, different strokes for different folks.

I agree, and I will try and take my straw man down a bit here.
I play and have played many games other than D&D. I suppose because I am a fan of D&D itself and my extensive play of 1e, 2e and 3e I personally cannot see going backwards. What needs to happen is a new edition. Hopefully, it will contain aspects of every edition. I suppose this is bemoaning a bit of the 2e time period when no two games where the same. So it is today as well, however rather than running a loose amalgamation of rules (2e) we are all playing different versions of the game. Someone wrote in another thread that during 3e that 80% of D&D players that were playing the game were playing 3e.

Build up my straw man a bit more here now:
When speaking in terms of community, looking at authentic anything it just 'is' and nothing more. Not better, not worse, nothing it is just a choice for the community on a bookshelf of many choices. For 'me' that choice is pretty clear, old school = not for me. No way would I put my players through those 20th century rules after having played 21st century rules.

 

[Darrin Drader]

For 'me' that choice is pretty clear, old school = not for me. No way would I put my players through those 20th century rules after having played 21st century rules.

Well, as long as we're talking about personal choice, I pretty much agree. That's the reason why when I want to scratch my old school itch, I'll pull out Castles and Crusades along with an old school adventure. This way the rules play fast but they don't contain many of the rules elements that were arbitrary and somewhat nonsensical while still enjoying the modules as they were originally written.

I understand why you would make the choice you've made, and I understand why old schoolers would make the choice they make, but I don't see much of a point in suggesting that people who want to play old editions are having bad-wrong-fun. It's really not much different than any other edition wars thread. If anything the last year have taught me, it's that if you don't like a game, don't play it. Find other people who are willing to play the games you like, and have fun with it.

 

[the Jester]

I am all for old school gamers reminiscing and rehashing the glory days of 0e, 1e and 2e through the use of old rules. It is neat in its own historical way. On the same token it is not the only true sauce in town and what preceded is just some ill conceived after thought that should have been thrown in the waste basket.

Wow, badwrongfun.

What needs to happen is a new edition.

Yeah, after a little more than two years, clearly it's time.

 

[pogre]

I'm using Labyrinth Lord to introduce roleplaying games to my younger kids. My eldest who is 10, and started with 3.5 ed. is a little frustrated by some of the limitations - he is playing an Elf. However, even he enjoys the relatively quick combats. Just tonight my kids heard the legendary Goblin warning "BREE-YARK!"

I really am enjoying it, mostly I admit for nostalgic reasons. The whole thing tempts me to spend a wad of cash on pig-faced orc minis from OtherWorld miniatures.

I still think old school is the best way to introduce the game to others.

 

[booboo]

Another 4tard crapping on every thing not 4e nothing new hear move along...

 

[Hairfoot]

And just because it is old does not make it good.

Correctamundo. That's why the old-is-good claim is made so often. It's all over the internet. Every time the topic of classic gaming comes up, its proponents always say that it's good for the sole reason that it's old. Retro-clone players have been completely unable to explain in any detail why they prefer those games and/or their philosophy over newer systems.

Don't take it from me. Go to the OSRIC or Swords & Wizardry forums, or Dragonsfoot, and politely ask the members to explain why they prefer classic games. I guarantee you'll say, "because they're old".

As everyone knows, games are like technology, and each generation is an objective improvement on the last. That's why Monopoly in 2010 is so utterly different to the original edition released over a century ago. Same with cyber-Scrabble.

After all, if the classic play-style is so good, with its light rules and reliance on imagination over props, why would publishers be so keen to promote a game model that requires dozens of books, boxes of overpriced plastic figurines, and recurring subscription fees? That would be stupid.

You can tell older games are dumb, because WotC stopped selling them. Why would they do that unless every gamer loved 4E and the playng style its design dictates?

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I am pretty sure I am going to ruffle some feathers on this one but it really needs to be discussed…I like new…old is not new…

Doesn't need to be discussed, dude. You said it all.