Quote from: Batman;805902To me-

Old-School: Any D&D game previous to 2000

New-School: Any D&D game from 2000 to present.

Done.

3.0e, Players' Option, Complete Handbook of Ninjas — old school.

OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, the whole damn OSR — new school.

Yup, flawless logic.

Quote from: The Butcher;8059043.0e, Players' Option, Complete Handbook of Ninjas — old school.

OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, the whole damn OSR — new school.

Yup, flawless logic.

3.0 (published August 1st, 2000)
Complete Ninja's Handbook (published 1995)

So.....try again?

Well I was attempting to be pretty specific by saying "D&D", the ACTUAL game with the title Dungeons and Dragons on the book and not just any ol' RPG that has some similarities to a game that has dragons and sometimes Dungeons in it.

Apparently that wasn't specific enough.

Old school = this shit reminds me of the shit I was playing before the internet existed.

New school = this shit reminds me of the shit I have been dicking around with since internet rpg discussion became a thing.

Quote from: jan paparazzi;805588Yeah, I agree. To me old school rpg's have roots in wargaming. If it has miniatures combat with flanking, backstabbing and line of sight mechanics. But then again Cthulhu doesn't have that either, so I wouldn't call that old school

.
Call of Ctthulhu is simply not D&D, so of course it's not any freaking 'school' of D&D! Believe it or not, people who don't play D&D may care nothing (and even know nothing) about factional squabbles in D&D fandom.

QuoteBut really I think that's old school. NWoD Mirrors has mechanics in it for minatures play. That's is so not WoD. I thought I would never see that in a White Wolf book in a million years. It gives more oversight, but it gets turns the combat into something more tactical and it breaks the narrative flow a little. That's why.

Anyway I am done with this topic. Only point 1 is valid in my opinion. Point 3 and 4 are utter bullshit. And 2 is wrongly named and not relevant. I will make another topic about this "default playstyle" point.

Quote from: Phillip;805987Call of Ctthulhu is simply not D&D, so of course it's not any freaking 'school' of D&D!

Wait, so "old school" and "new school" is only about D&D? At the very least it has to extend to "D&D-ish" games, otherwise nothing is in either school unless it's explicitly named D&D. Is your point that Call of Cthulhu is the wrong genre, or the wrong style of play, to be old school or new school? Maybe we need an entire thread on what's "school" without regard to old or new.

While CoC is obviously not Old School D&D, I would say it could be considered "old school".

Quote from: Phillip;805987Call of Ctthulhu is simply not D&D, so of course it's not any freaking 'school' of D&D! Believe it or not, people who don't play D&D may care nothing (and even know nothing) about factional squabbles in D&D fandom.

I'm not sure what your point is - the post you quoted did not mention D&D at all.

The OP does not mention any particular game, in particular it does not mention D&D.

Are you saying that  Old School/New School only relates to the D&D family?

Surely, it must relate to other games, as the idea is of a change of mindset, rather than a change in the way that a particular game works.

Quote from: Old Geezer;805591"Old School" means the writer was thinking "I made up some shit I thought would be fun!" rather than "Role playing games are DEEP!  and MEANINGFUL!  and MEANINGFULLY DEEP!  and DEEPLY MEANINGFUL!"

What I say is that in rpgs, enthusiasm is more important than skill, and that "old school" is at its best an attempt to make everyone enthusiastic about gaming.

Enthusiasm is more important than skill in the writing of games. This is why people like AD&D1e, which is a convoluted mess, or Rifts or Synnibar, which are just insane. It's one reason GURPS1e was popular and 4e was a flop - the second one was so deliberately constructed and detailed it just took the life out of it. Meanwhile from the same game company, Munchkin is the big money-maker for them, even though it's stupid - it is at least enthusiastic.

Enthusiasm is more important than skill in the playing of games, too. This is why a player who shows up on time and brings snacks and has their dice ready to roll when needed is more popular than one who doesn't do those things. It's why a player who always has an idea of what they want to do next is more popular and useful than one who hesitates and considers and analyses and...

In roleplaying games, enthusiasm is more important than skill. Gaming's like sex in this way.

Quote from: Phillip;805987.
Call of Ctthulhu is simply not D&D, so of course it's not any freaking 'school' of D&D! Believe it or not, people who don't play D&D may care nothing (and even know nothing) about factional squabbles in D&D fandom.

I don't play D&D myself. So welcome to the club.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;806068What I say is that in rpgs, enthusiasm is more important than skill, and that "old school" is at its best an attempt to make everyone enthusiastic about gaming.

Enthusiasm is more important than skill in the writing of games. This is why people like AD&D1e, which is a convoluted mess, or Rifts or Synnibar, which are just insane. It's one reason GURPS1e was popular and 4e was a flop - the second one was so deliberately constructed and detailed it just took the life out of it. Meanwhile from the same game company, Munchkin is the big money-maker for them, even though it's stupid - it is at least enthusiastic.

Enthusiasm is more important than skill in the playing of games, too. This is why a player who shows up on time and brings snacks and has their dice ready to roll when needed is more popular than one who doesn't do those things. It's why a player who always has an idea of what they want to do next is more popular and useful than one who hesitates and considers and analyses and...

In roleplaying games, enthusiasm is more important than skill. Gaming's like sex in this way.

Just.....no.

Enthusiasm is what you bring to the game,  not what the game somehow exudes. It also highly interconnected to the other players and DM. If someone has a terrible time with the people they're playing with they often associate the game as terrible too. Further I fail to see the correlation between "old-school" and enthusiasm or the lack of the latter in more modern "new school"  RPGs.

I like the idea of Enthusiasm vs. Execution. People who love Palladium for example generally accept any of the "inconsistencies" or issues some have with the system. Fans just play the game and enjoy some of the "over the top" ideas in it. :-D

Now, this theory doesn't cover 100% of what could constitute OS vs. NS, but I think the theory has merits.

Quote from: Diffan;806092Enthusiasm is [...]  not what the game somehow exudes.

Depends on the game, old chap. Which was my point.

Quote from: rawma;805993Wait, so "old school" and "new school" is only about D&D?

Other game communities have their own schools. "Skills are new school" is a line I encountered at Knights & Knaves Alehouse, which might fly with AD&D - but can hardly be the case with RuneQuest (published the same year as the 1st ed. PHB) or Traveller (published the year before) or even Empire of the Petal Throne (1976).

Fans of Tunnels & Trolls, En Garde, Chivalry & Sorcery, Bunnies & Burrows, The Fantasy Trip, Champions, Pendragon, Paranoia, Witch Hunt, Ghost Busters, etc., may have their own schools of thought or even edition wars over issues that have nothing to do with controversies in D&D circles - and take for granted things that are fodder for D&Ders' flames.

QuoteAt the very least it has to extend to "D&D-ish" games, otherwise nothing is in either school unless it's explicitly named D&D. Is your point that Call of Cthulhu is the wrong genre, or the wrong style of play, to be old school or new school? Maybe we need an entire thread on what's "school" without regard to old or new.

My point is that it's a different game designed by different people for different reasons - not to push a 'school' against another 'school' in a fight for claim to the One True D&D (or anything else), but just because it was fun. And that was before the current D&D schools even existed!

How would it be if devotees of TFT or RQ started applying the labels to everything based on how TFT-ish or RQ-ish (and more specifically in line with their style of playing the game) they assess the other games to be?

Character sheet design determines if a game is old or new school.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;806409Character sheet design determines if a game is old or new school.

Oh, man, no kidding. Might be a personality flaw, but I love it when characters fit on index cards.:-)