Why is there a rush to define vintage gaming?

[thedungeondelver]

Or...sigh... "OLD SCHOOL" ?

Not just the two threads here, but many threads scattered hither and yon, I see this "What exactly is old school? Is this module old school? Is old school just how you play? The mindset? The rules? The..."

Fact is, some people are going to say "Vintage gaming is like this \\ " and some people are going to go "Vintage gaming is like that //".

I guess, if I were going to don my conspiracy hat, I'd wager that it's a drive by some people towards a revealing point where they can yank the tablecloth off and go "AHA! Not only are the dishes still standing, but there is no 'old school' and the people who are part of that movement* can't tell you why the old games are good, they're just being contrarians, and in fact the old games aren't good!" If I were going to don my conspiracy hat, that is.

Is it just the human desire to cut things down to fit a particular shaped opening and so pigeonhole things and people? Is it a genuine desire by some folks to know exactly what the real physical manifestations of vintage gaming are so they can know what books to buy and what attitude to take to "be old-school"?

I myself don't care, particularly, all that much. I've tried out ideas in my AD&D straight out of EXALTED, tried alternate systems presented by fellow gamers, and so on (yes! quickly discarded, but there we are). Since I jumped back on board with AD&D in '99, after years of CHAMPIONS and ... psh, about a dozen other RPGs, I didn't have an overriding philosophy. This was before I was acquainted with Gary beyond seeing his name in D&D books, before I knew about enworld, or anything.

I grabbed the stray PLAYERS HANDBOOK on my bookshelf and said "Hey, is this still cool to play?" I read through it and went "Hell yeah, that's still cool sounding to me." and sallied forth. I sailed smack dab in to rec.games.frp.dnd and witnessed the supreme stupidity and arrogance there regarding the forthcoming 3e (I wish I still had the email - someone took time to send me an email! - after I asked about surprise and initiative wherein they basically said "don't bother with it, in a few months you'll be playing 3e like everyone else"). I looked at 3e, I was aghast at some of the changes, but I kept giving it a try every now and again, even ran it for a good bit, but it never suited me. It wasn't good enough, didn't fulfill what I wanted out of a game called D&D. The AD&D books I'd collected (thanks in no small part to Paul Stormberg), those were.

I could go in to the hows and whys but I'd be beating up on 3e and then the mod squad would ban my ass, so suffice to say "I found I preferred AD&D to its successors."

Ultimately, isn't that all that matters? That people grab the ol' efreeti covered DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE (fie on you Easley people! ), or their Tom Moldvay edited red and blue Basic D&D boxes, or even their three little booklets and play?

Why are you picking at it? Why are you turning over every stone in the D&D forest looking for the Old School gnome**?

I'm not being nasty, not snarky, I just want to know why it's that damn important that some formula or category be found, and then people put in it.

* - there is no "movement"
** - "because he's not a player race any more and I want the XP" is not an acceptable answer

 

[kitsune9]

Or...sigh... "OLD SCHOOL" ?

Not just the two threads here, but many threads scattered hither and yon, I see this "What exactly is old school? Is this module old school? Is old school just how you play? The mindset? The rules? The..."

Fact is, some people are going to say "Vintage gaming is like this \ " and some people are going to go "Vintage gaming is like that //".

I guess, if I were going to don my conspiracy hat, I'd wager that it's a drive by some people towards a revealing point where they can yank the tablecloth off and go "AHA! Not only are the dishes still standing, but there is no 'old school' and the people who are part of that movement* can't tell you why the old games are good, they're just being contrarians, and in fact the old games aren't good!" If I were going to don my conspiracy hat, that is.

Is it just the human desire to cut things down to fit a particular shaped opening and so pigeonhole things and people? Is it a genuine desire by some folks to know exactly what the real physical manifestations of vintage gaming are so they can know what books to buy and what attitude to take to "be old-school"?

I myself don't care, particularly, all that much. I've tried out ideas in my AD&D straight out of EXALTED, tried alternate systems presented by fellow gamers, and so on (yes! quickly discarded, but there we are). Since I jumped back on board with AD&D in '99, after years of CHAMPIONS and ... psh, about a dozen other RPGs, I didn't have an overriding philosophy. This was before I was acquainted with Gary beyond seeing his name in D&D books, before I knew about enworld, or anything.

I grabbed the stray PLAYERS HANDBOOK on my bookshelf and said "Hey, is this still cool to play?" I read through it and went "Hell yeah, that's still cool sounding to me." and sallied forth. I sailed smack dab in to rec.games.frp.dnd and witnessed the supreme stupidity and arrogance there regarding the forthcoming 3e (I wish I still had the email - someone took time to send me an email! - after I asked about surprise and initiative wherein they basically said "don't bother with it, in a few months you'll be playing 3e like everyone else"). I looked at 3e, I was aghast at some of the changes, but I kept giving it a try every now and again, even ran it for a good bit, but it never suited me. It wasn't good enough, didn't fulfill what I wanted out of a game called D&D. The AD&D books I'd collected (thanks in no small part to Paul Stormberg), those were.

I could go in to the hows and whys but I'd be beating up on 3e and then the mod squad would ban my ass, so suffice to say "I found I preferred AD&D to its successors."

Ultimately, isn't that all that matters? That people grab the ol' efreeti covered DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE (fie on you Easley people! ), or their Tom Moldvay edited red and blue Basic D&D boxes, or even their three little booklets and play?

Why are you picking at it? Why are you turning over every stone in the D&D forest looking for the Old School gnome**?

I'm not being nasty, not snarky, I just want to know why it's that damn important that some formula or category be found, and then people put in it.

* - there is no "movement"
** - "because he's not a player race any more and I want the XP" is not an acceptable answer

Well, old school is kind of the new hot topic. Every once in a while, the forums pick up on a term, buzzword, or a fad and we'll thread it with a billion different opinions, but as long as we're all having fun, it's all good!

 

[ggroy]

Because people are bored?

 

[Nifft]

So we can insult the lineage of those who disagree, of course.

Alternately: to rummage through the cold ashes of our ruined childhoods for shiny things we can use to spruce up our current games.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Invisible Stalker]

Because people are bored?

You get the years supply of Turtle Wax and the Rice a Roni.

 

[Obryn]

I think the same poster is the one asking all of the various questions you're referring to.

Why not just ask him?

-O

 

[Invisible Stalker]

We shouldn't have talked about how much we were enjoying playing the old games. They sniffed out our happiness and now we must suffer like the rest.

Well, they can suffer. I'm taking my Red Box and going home. And play!

 

[Crothian]

It can also be really hard to talk about something if people are using two very different definitions Old School.

 

[Mallus]

People enjoy partisanship.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I guess, if I were going to don my conspiracy hat, I'd wager that it's a drive by some people towards a revealing point where they can yank the tablecloth off and go "AHA! Not only are the dishes still standing, but there is no 'old school' and the people who are part of that movement* can't tell you why the old games are good, they're just being contrarians, and in fact the old games aren't good!" If I were going to don my conspiracy hat, that is.

Seems unlikely. The definition of old school/new school is a hotly debated topic on Knights & Knaves Alehouse forum.

What was the first new school rpg?

I think it's mostly down to Bullgrit. The man likes his terms precisely defined.