Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Vespucci" data-source="post: 5586957" data-attributes="member: 6675688">OK.&nbsp; Here's an attempt to frame the discussion, and to incorporate some insights from a parallel thread.1. Is there a difference between the &quot;Old School&quot; and the &quot;New School&quot;?The burden of proof is on the affirmative.&nbsp; Those that don't think there is a difference essentially can't prove their case, though they need to make sure that their standards of proof are not unreasonable.&nbsp; These terms need not be universal or monolithic, but should represent identifiable game standards to which hobbyists more or less adhere.&nbsp; Finally, the terms don't need to be exhaustive in order to be valid - there could be other Schools altogether.For me, there is a difference.&nbsp; If nothing else, the advice from the industry leader on how to run the game has changed significantly.&nbsp; Whether that means you can label someone's campaign as one school or the other is unclear, but the terms are legitimate for describing an important difference between the ref advice given for 1e on the one hand, and, Pathfinder and 4e on the other.2.&nbsp; Can whole game systems be called &quot;Old School&quot; or &quot;New School&quot;?This is a more demanding question.&nbsp; Again, those who simply answer &quot;no&quot; don't need to press their case, but instead need to offer reasons for rejecting the options on the affirmative.&nbsp; For those claiming that a system can belong to a school, they need to show how the rules reinforce (or explain) the tenets of that school.My own answer is &quot;maybe&quot;.&nbsp; A resolution mechanic, or even a scheme of resolution mechanics, doesn't commit one to either school.&nbsp; (So a game can be Old School but use d20+modifier, aiming high, for just about everything.)However, reinforcing the 1e/PF+4e split, there's clearly an invitation to players in the more recent games to &quot;script&quot; their characters ahead.&nbsp; One can sit down and plan out what a character will get as they go up in levels, all working towards - if not an end-point, at least definite way-points.&nbsp; While one could do so in 1e, the scope of such activity is very minor - a character's advancement is much more dependent upon which magic items the ref would allow them to acquire.&nbsp; (Note that this emphasis on the &quot;script&quot; mirrors the advice to the ref.)3.&nbsp; Do &quot;Old School&quot; and &quot;New School&quot; need to apply to other RPG families in order to be valid?A &quot;yes&quot; to this has been implied by some posters.&nbsp; They need to work on that case.For me, they don't.&nbsp; &quot;Old School&quot; and &quot;New School&quot; mean something in music - typically, referring to different artistic movements in hip-hop.&nbsp; I don't know if there is such a thing as &quot;New School&quot; Baroque, but whether there is or not has no bearing upon using the term to describe different Hip-Hop works and artists.&nbsp; Going back to RPGs, it's enough for me that &quot;Old School&quot; means something in the context of Pulp Adventure games.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Vespucci, post: 5586957, member: 6675688"] OK. Here's an attempt to frame the discussion, and to incorporate some insights from a parallel thread. [B]1. Is there a difference between the "Old School" and the "New School"?[/B] The burden of proof is on the affirmative. Those that don't think there is a difference essentially can't prove their case, though they need to make sure that their standards of proof are not unreasonable. These terms need not be universal or monolithic, but should represent identifiable game standards to which hobbyists more or less adhere. Finally, the terms don't need to be exhaustive in order to be valid - there could be other Schools altogether. [I]For me, there is a difference. If nothing else, the advice from the industry leader on how to run the game has changed significantly. Whether that means you can label someone's campaign as one school or the other is unclear, but the terms are legitimate for describing an important difference between the ref advice given for 1e on the one hand, and, Pathfinder and 4e on the other.[/I] [B]2. Can whole game systems be called "Old School" or "New School"?[/B] This is a more demanding question. Again, those who simply answer "no" don't need to press their case, but instead need to offer reasons for rejecting the options on the affirmative. For those claiming that a system can belong to a school, they need to show how the rules reinforce (or explain) the tenets of that school. [I]My own answer is "maybe". A resolution mechanic, or even a scheme of resolution mechanics, doesn't commit one to either school. (So a game can be Old School but use d20+modifier, aiming high, for just about everything.) However, reinforcing the 1e/PF+4e split, there's clearly an invitation to players in the more recent games to "script" their characters ahead. One can sit down and plan out what a character will get as they go up in levels, all working towards - if not an end-point, at least definite way-points. While one could do so in 1e, the scope of such activity is very minor - a character's advancement is much more dependent upon which magic items the ref would allow them to acquire. (Note that this emphasis on the "script" mirrors the advice to the ref.) [/I][B]3. Do "Old School" and "New School" need to apply to other RPG families in order to be valid?[/B] A "yes" to this has been implied by some posters. They need to work on that case. [I]For me, they don't. "Old School" and "New School" mean something in music - typically, referring to different artistic movements in hip-hop. I don't know if there is such a thing as "New School" Baroque, but whether there is or not has no bearing upon using the term to describe different Hip-Hop works and artists. Going back to RPGs, it's enough for me that "Old School" means something in the context of Pulp Adventure games.[/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification