Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="John Quixote" data-source="post: 4987941" data-attributes="member: 694">Well and good, but to be perfectly honest, the kinds of &quot;player interaction&quot; lauded by the Primer &amp;al. were never really how we played our &quot;old school&quot; games in the first place.&nbsp; We played plenty of AD&amp;D and basic/expert back in the day, and many actions indeed were resolved by a simple roll of the dice.&nbsp; They weren't &quot;skill checks&quot; per se, but that's precisely how they functioned in-game.The character didn't have skill &quot;X&quot; written on his character sheet, but the game might as well have worked that way.&nbsp; That's why I think it all comes down to a simple and bare-bones character sheet, vs. one laden with player-customized details and abilities.&nbsp; WotC ushered in 3rd edition with the motto, &quot;Options, not restrictions&quot;, and this is a perfect motto for the whole idea of &quot;new school&quot; D&amp;D.&nbsp; That's precisely what it is.&nbsp; Options for character creation and advancement.&nbsp; To embrace the old school, players have to embrace the idea of &quot;restrictions, not options&quot;, with the implicit understanding that this isn't necessarily a bad thing or a step backwards in the evolution of RPGs.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sometimes, restrictions mean player inspiration and role-playing opportunities.&nbsp; (To give an admittedly lame sort of example, when it came to creating 3e characters, I frequently couldn't decide what combination of race and class to play, so I would often roll my 4d6k3 in order, and let that guide my choice of class, thereby inspiring the character I would wind up playing.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="John Quixote, post: 4987941, member: 694"] Well and good, but to be perfectly honest, the kinds of "player interaction" lauded by the Primer &al. were never really how we played our "old school" games in the first place. We played plenty of AD&D and basic/expert back in the day, and many actions indeed were resolved by a simple roll of the dice. They weren't "skill checks" per se, but that's precisely how they functioned in-game. The character didn't have skill "X" written on his character sheet, but the game might as well have worked that way. That's why I think it all comes down to a simple and bare-bones character sheet, vs. one laden with player-customized details and abilities. WotC ushered in 3rd edition with the motto, "Options, not restrictions", and this is a perfect motto for the whole idea of "new school" D&D. That's precisely what it is. Options for character creation and advancement. To embrace the old school, players have to embrace the idea of "restrictions, not options", with the implicit understanding that this isn't necessarily a bad thing or a step backwards in the evolution of RPGs. Sometimes, restrictions mean player inspiration and role-playing opportunities. (To give an admittedly lame sort of example, when it came to creating 3e characters, I frequently couldn't decide what combination of race and class to play, so I would often roll my 4d6k3 in order, and let that guide my choice of class, thereby inspiring the character I would wind up playing.) [/QUOTE]

Verification