In a similar vein to the Halfling Test:

If Orcs & Half-Orcs are unsavory at best and revel in wickedness at worst: old school.

If they're grossly misunderstood victims of prejudice: not so old school.

Quote from: Ghost;856997There's a much more reliable way to gauge old-schoolness. If the halflings are athletic and badass...it's not old school.

The D&D (Cook) Expert Set.... new school as fuck.

What is old school? I know it when I see it.

In my case, often (but not always) a useful warning label.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;856981Encumbrance is a huge pain in general, does anyone actually use it even in "old school" play? Like you have to keep track of so much stuff, and know all of their different weights, and where each thing is going to be stored, and constantly update all of it every time they sell some off or find new items...

And I don't think it ever even really becomes relevant in 5E.

As the designers of RuneQuest put it, the ideal encumbrance rule is simply that a figure can't carry more than what's reasonable. Writing down a quantified encumbrance value and specific location for each item can be more work than is necessary.

Precision is not essential except as an arbitrary cutoff in edge cases. Usually the cases that really matter are sufficiently different to distinguish at a glance. The big question really is whether we're going to pay enough attention to notice those.

You're fighting with a two-handed sword while hauling a shield, a pike, a bow and arrows, two sacks of about 30 pounds each, and what else? How? (Answer: very awkwardly if at all!)

"Packs off!" was the word to soldiers in the American Civil War when they were to mount a charge with alacrity. Even hardcore French chasseurs could keep up agility for only short periods while burdened. Soldiers today have been known to leave off body armor seen as excessive, as their forebears managed to 'lose' all sorts of equipment on campaign. (It was worth paying a fine to be rid of the saber, but the shovel was a life saver.)

The Spartan mother told her son, "Come back with your shield or on it," because casting the thing aside was a common way for cowards (or sensible fellows) to speed their flight from victory-hastened pursuers.
 
Unrealistic though it may be, slowed movement based on armor type adds a strategic trade-off. It might be rationalized as an abstraction of long-term slowing due to fatigue, plate armor not providing much ventilation and requiring more pauses from exertion to cool off. (That said, ancient light infantry skirmishers generally managed to stay out of reach of the heavies who could slaughter any they caught. The battle rules were simply carried over to the sub-tactical RPG level.)

Anyone who has worn a medieval style helm with padded hood (and possibly mail coif) knows that it muffles hearing and restricts vision as well as being hot and stuffy.

The rate of 10 coins to a pound in old D&D makes for troves weighing tons, not easy to carry off. Gems and jewelry are therefore precious beyond their cash value, for an experience point in the hand is worth more than any number left behind.

Yeah, some encumbrance monitoring is ok but pound by pound arbitrary limits makes one of the most effective possible weapons in the game a simple weight gun. Launch a blob of goo at your opponent that sticks for 0 damage and weighs 1 pound and watch them slow down. Fun for the whole family.

Quote from: estar;856622I did not know that it applied to monsters. Do you know where that stated? I am curious to read it myself.

Application to monsters is in fact what's stated in Monsters and Treasure. For Chainmail Fighting Capability, give the critter one roll of appropriate type per D&D Hit Die, with any bonus pips added to one of those.

The notion that the OSR is about forcing anything on anyone is contrary to what is evidently the main thrust: recovering the DIY, hobbyist to hobbyist, "make the game your own" ethos.

The business of business, convincing players they must buy the latest supplement for the latest non-back-compatible edition, is characteristic of a phase generally regarded as the opposite of "old school."

I'm not sure I can agree with that. Role-playing was a profit-making venture almost from the beginning. Likewise, the very first D&D supplement, Greyhawk, while theoretically backwards compatible, "changed everything" as much as many of the edition changes.

Quote from: Ghost;856997If the halflings are fat, amiable, and no threat whatsoever...it's old school.

If the halflings are athletic and badass...it's not old school.

Bullroarer Took was athletic and badass and definitely old school.

He is of what is called the old school—a phrase generally meaning any school that seems never to have been young.
Charles Dickens, Bleak House

Quote from: Willie the Duck;857239I'm not sure I can agree with that. Role-playing was a profit-making venture almost from the beginning.

I played Cowboys and Indians as a child -- as did almost everyone I know from that time -- and there was no profit in it. Commercial roleplaying games may have been "a profit-making venture almost from the beginning" but role-playing certainly was not.

QuoteLikewise, the very first D&D supplement, Greyhawk, while theoretically backwards compatible, "changed everything" as much as many of the edition changes.

GMs selected what to use from the OD&D supplements (just as they did from third party material. There was no pressure from TSR (or the vast majority of players) to allow everything published into your game at that time.

Quote from: RandallS;857443I played Cowboys and Indians as a child -- as did almost everyone I know from that time -- and there was no profit in it. Commercial roleplaying games may have been "a profit-making venture almost from the beginning" but role-playing certainly was not.

Um... okay.

QuoteGMs selected what to use from the OD&D supplements (just as they did from third party material. There was no pressure from TSR (or the vast majority of players) to allow everything published into your game at that time.

Just as it has been in every other edition.

From Internet discussion, I have the impression that there's quite a bit of pressure from players to have DMs play BtB, if not to include every supplement or 3rd-party product.

Back in the day, I think there were some letters to The Dragon on the same issue. I think the replies were strongly pro-DM, even though that would go against GG's habit of arguing for AD&D orthodoxy in his columns. Probably varies over time, and I didn't read enough to approximate a comprehensive survey.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;857452Just as it has been in every other edition.

Not that I've seen, and not to judge from what lots of other people have said over the years.

There's been a very pronounced shift in attitude, from the game being what hobbyists create in their campaigns to the game being a bought product; from handbooks being tools for the GM, to their being for players to cite (to "rules lawyer" in old parlance, which was a pejorative).

This has a pretty fundamental relationship to "style of play," and (more in the D&D scene than elsewhere) a correlation with complexity of rules sets.