Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6128952" data-attributes="member: 17106">I can see that. But, as [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] said, I don't think that's really what OSR is about. If anything, the d20 system facilitates that kind of play (though plenty of rules bloat has accompanied it over time, to be sure).Actually, it is. Playing make-believe, whether you call it an rpg or not, is a game. Games don't have to be competitive or even have well-defined rules. That in mind, I rather agree with some of the author's sentiment that trying to push restrictive rules on a freeform experience is an inherent conflict. I just don't think that WotC invented it.  The odd marriage of improvisational storytelling and competitive wargaming has been there from the start.Thus, I am in agreement with others who posted in this thread that D&D is probably not the solution to the problem being posited, regardless of edition.Where I don't get his perspective is in framing that argument as old school v new school. IME, the older players are the wargamers, while the younger ones are typically in it for the story. Miniatures and battlegrids, experience points and keeping score, dungeons and trasure-hunting, competitive and antagonistic play, those are all oldster things in my book. The evolution of D&D (up until 4e and maybe late 3e) was towards storytelling and world simulation and away from wargaming. So again, I don't get old-schoolers.</blockquote>