|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Dec 17, 2020 5:04:00 GMT -6
I know, and acknowledge, that since the dawn of the 21st century we have kind of lived in a golden age for RPGs. There's never been so much creativity, so many options, so many different approaches to gaming. It's really a world where there's something for everyone out there, and that's a great thing. Lord knows it's enabled me to do this professionally for the past 21 years or so. But more and more lately, I just miss and long for the old days. There's something that's been lost in the newer approaches to gaming. They're so focused, so dialed in on ideal unified systems, on using rules to try and account for bad GMs (never a good thing, IMO), on pushing political and social agendas (or railing against them). And of course, people just fight about the "right way" to approach gaming.
Not for nothing, but when my friends and I played Oriental Adventures back in the day, not a ONE of us took it as a realistic portrayal of Asian culture any more than the core books were a realistic portrayal of Western culture. We took it as fantasy with a different flavor, not as "cultural appropriation." Honorable samurai, hengeokai, sohei, wu jen, and ninja shadow warriors were fun to play, but we certainly didn't assume every Asian was a martial artist or that their culture was steeped in tattoos and mystic shadow powers. They were FANTASY.
There's something to be said for the dialogue, but I remember a time when gaming was just...gaming. Games had a degree of "gonzo" to them, where over-the-top was a good thing. They had rules that sure, might have been a bit complex, but were just fun to dig into and had a DIY mentality that in this day and age is all too often frowned upon. Instead of frameworks, if your game takes a toolkit, basic approach that leaves too much to the imagination it's viewed as unfinished, unplayable, or "broken."
I miss the simplicity of OD&D, B/X, and AD&D 1st edition (and YES, 1st edition WAS simple). I miss trenchcoats and Katanas. I miss the weird mish-mash of bonuses, percentiles, package powers, and combat advancement tables from pre-RIFTS Palladium Fantasy, Heroes Unlimited, Ninjas & Superspies, and Mystic China. I miss spy games and post apocalyptic games and space opera games all built with mechanics that were klunky and goofy, but had their own personality--I don't think the WEG Star Wars is the best Star Wars RPG ever, either from a genre emulation or rules standpoint, but come on: who didn't love spending a Force Point and throwing 14d6 for lightsaber combat?
It just seems like there's a sense of wonder, over-the-top dig-in DIY, and just plain FUN that's been lost. Games now are too political, too polished, too shiny. I miss fanzines and snail mail letter columns, and real tabletops with real people. I miss the connection that only coming together in person over a beloved (and fringe) hobby can provide.
Meh. Sorry, I'm not looking to argue or belabor the point. It's just a feeling I have about the overall industry these days and I guess it was inevitable as games developed. It's not even a bad thing that people are more socially aware now. It's certainly not a bad thing that games are wildly popular and available to so many people all over the world, that they can connect in new ways to play.
But it really does make me miss the games, the wonder, and the approach of the old days. There's a feeling that's just not there anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Dec 17, 2020 17:47:29 GMT -6
..., but I remember a time when gaming was just...gaming. Games had a degree of "gonzo" to them, where over-the-top was a good thing. They had rules that sure, might have been a bit complex, but were just fun to dig into and had a DIY mentality that in this day and age is all too often frowned upon. Instead of frameworks, if your game takes a toolkit, basic approach that leaves too much to the imagination it's viewed as unfinished, unplayable, or "broken." It's still there, but it's not mainstream. Kids that age often just don't have the mental stamina to get into these complex rules, which were often presented in a very confusing way. Why bother when there's something similar which has been properly produced to be played by noobs? I miss the simplicity of OD&D, B/X, and AD&D 1st edition (and YES, 1st edition WAS simple). I miss trenchcoats and Katanas. I miss the weird mish-mash of bonuses, percentiles, package powers, and combat advancement tables from pre-RIFTS Palladium Fantasy, Heroes Unlimited, Ninjas & Superspies, and Mystic China. I miss spy games and post apocalyptic games and space opera games all built with mechanics that were klunky and goofy, but had their own personality--I don't think the WEG Star Wars is the best Star Wars RPG ever, either from a genre emulation or rules standpoint, but come on: who didn't love spending a Force Point and throwing 14d6 for lightsaber combat? The mish-mash was never simplicity for me and my group, it has always felt arbitrarily chosen ("Ah, we could include a % system too!") and easily replaced with different, streamlined mechanics (thief skills translated to d20 is easy enough and only climbing loses some granularity. You could also just translate it all to a d% system, including attacks ect, without losing a thing). WEG Star Wars was awesome, agreed. So many days of SW fun...  It just seems like there's a sense of wonder, over-the-top dig-in DIY, and just plain FUN that's been lost. Games now are too political, too polished, too shiny. I miss fanzines and snail mail letter columns, and real tabletops with real people. I miss the connection that only coming together in person over a beloved (and fringe) hobby can provide. Honestly, I'm not sure if new players will approach these games with that attitude, unless it's a game about "these" topics, or the players come from "these" backgrounds. I've ran a couple of con games where new players (without any XP in RPGs) just told me that they "just want to slay some bad guys" and not "talk stuff out", because they wanted to be "heroes like Conan, Hercules, etc." They had tons of fun with my old school DCC and OSE and S&W adventures. There still are players around who play the games as games, without any political or other influence. Gods be praised. But it really does make me miss the games, the wonder, and the approach of the old days. There's a feeling that's just not there anymore. That's probably your own age. No offense, but that's how I feel often enough myself. It's the nostalgia of our games back then which makes be buy old AD&D books on eBay and gently force my group to play them (I do translate them to other systems without them noticing, too). Play with young players, they still feel the wonder. The great thing is, they share it with you. Probably one of the best things about having kids, really  Example: My 4-year old loves Paw Patrol, but when I tell her she can play a warrior with a greataxe and save the village from giants rats, spiders and trolls, she jumps right in. It's all a matter of presentation. I painted her a girl warrior mini to play on a battle map and I use monster miniatures and tabletop scenery. Her ideas to problem-solving are creative and wonderfully naive in the games we play, and that's as close as I'll ever come to my own games in my youth. Being old(er) makes you see things differently, but you can still unlearn applying too much logic and common sense to the games, and just roll with the crazy and gonzo and the fantasy. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Dec 17, 2020 18:28:47 GMT -6
But it really does make me miss the games, the wonder, and the approach of the old days. There's a feeling that's just not there anymore. That's probably your own age. No offense, but that's how I feel often enough myself. Heartily seconded. This is exactly how I feel about World of Warcraft and why the "Classic" version of the game didn't do anything for me, and I just ended up quitting a couple years ago instead. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Dec 17, 2020 18:39:53 GMT -6
Play with young players, they still feel the wonder. The great thing is, they share it with you. Probably one of the best things about having kids, really Being old(er) makes you see things differently, but you can still unlearn applying too much logic and common sense to the games, and just roll with the crazy and gonzo and the fantasy. Troof. I'm no longer "excited" about anything when it comes to gaming or movies or whatever. I'm jaded and cynical and largely bored with gaming and entertainment.. Gaming with Kids lets you introduce all those things you love and get excited about them again. My Son became a big Star Wars and LotR fan. My little girl has been a tougher nut to crack. Getting old sucks |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Dec 18, 2020 1:05:49 GMT -6
When gaming, I found it easier to get back to the sense of wonder when using light rules systems and playing in an unknown setting. By now, I'm sure we've all played our share of "standard" fantasy games with all the ideas and tropes we know from many books and films. As an example, we're playinig Dungeon World from time to time as one-shots in my group. Only my character and another's are the usual cast, the rest of the group mostly joins in spontaneously. I've made a map of the ideas added by our group the first time we played and I've added every idea the other player brought in over time. It started out as a more or less "standard" fantasy world we had created for a group of player who were totally unfamiliar with RPGs, but they already brought in "non-standard" ideas of flying fortresses and a tiny blend of technology and magic. There were elves, halfling, dwarves. Whenever new players joined, the DM asked them to provide more info about the world, and soon enough an extinct race of elephant men were added, the halflings were divided into three cultures, we learned of blind deep elves who use sonar to "see", under a desert there's an underground system of caves used by mad dwarves under a desert who use techno-magical devices to control animals that can "swim" in the desert sand and even dive there. What I'm saying is, we didn't use any setting to play in, but played to create the setting. There's always new stuff to make up and discover. And that's something you can do in any game system. That's what we did in my youth. Sure, we often had some maps provided by the games but changed them or added to them. I remember the cool Earthdawn map which had many interesting spots and enough room in between to fill with our own ideas. Our Dungeonworld game does get some very weird additions from time to time (some players just feel like they have to make it really gonzo), but these elements are usually starving off after one session when the player doesn't return to play again. Many other elements are returning each session. And here's the map we have at the moment in our DW game  |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 18, 2020 5:32:09 GMT -6
Awesome reflection in the OP. In some ways I miss the old days, in some ways I embrace the new days. I had three major game groups in my lifetime: (1) My high school and college years -- OD&D and then some AD&D, plus the older TSR gaming stuff. (2) My early professional years (wife and friends) -- some OD&D and 2E, tried 3E, playtest of C&C, played Amber Diceless and lots of other games. (3) My later professional years (wife and younger family) -- DCC and 5E and some OD&D thrown in. Each gaming group was different, each pile of games slightly different. Each group was fun in its own way. Gaming with Kids lets you introduce all those things you love and get excited about them again. Much truth here. While my son is now all grown up, he hasn't seen a lot of my old tricks and so for him it's all new. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Dec 18, 2020 5:53:57 GMT -6
While I appreciate the insights, and agree to a point, as a librarian I have gamed with, played in games run by, and run games for kids. While I agree to a point that they have a sense of wonder, it's not the same. And again, that's not necessarily a bad thing. These kids are the future of our hobby, and to survive, hobbies and industries have to grow and evolve. But the feeling is different. There was a sort of punk rock attitude towards gaming back in the day that's just not there anymore. It's too pretty, too shiny, too polished. Again, it's the DIY ideal of it which has been lost in favor of sleek and shiny systems that cover everything for you instead of encouraging you to make it up yourself. It's not better. It's not worse. It's just different. And I really miss the way games felt back then, that's all. Rarely, a game still captures that feeling. Labyrinth Lord did it in spaces. I've tried to with my Elf Lair stuff but am not 100% sure I succeed on that particular effort. I feel like Castles & Crusades has it to a degree, but maybe more so in the older printings before we went to full color, so the layout and presentation may well have more than a little to do with it. When I read AD&D, WEG Star Wars, an old edition of Heroes Unlimited or TMNT, Shadowrun versions 1-3, Cyberpunk 2020, FASERIP Marvel Super Heroes, the old TSR Conan RPG, or even Vampire the Masquerade, I still to this day get a feeling in my gut and heart that reading 5e, Dungeon World, Modiphius' 2d20 system games, Pathfinder, even Savage Worlds just doesn't give me. Note that I really love a lot of those games--I dig 5e. I dig Savage Worlds a lot. But they're different.The mish-mash was never simplicity for me and my group, it has always felt arbitrarily chosen ("Ah, we could include a % system too!") and easily replaced with different, streamlined mechanics (thief skills translated to d20 is easy enough and only climbing loses some granularity. You could also just translate it all to a d% system, including attacks ect, without losing a thing). You're not wrong, except (and this is a different discussion entirely) there is in fact an elegance to the use of those supposedly non-unified systems, and they're much more equitably applied than you realize. It's just that they're not properly codified and applied. I did just that in Night Shift--codified them the way they actually work--to give a greater understanding of what each of the three (yes, three) core mechanics in AD&D represent. Percentile checks represent class abilities, generally (but not always) used outside of combat. D20 checks represent combat checks, saves, and (in later books) ability checks used both in and out of combat. Finally, what I call the Rule of 2 sees a die (usually a d6) rolled and a 1 or 2 checked for. This is an easy way for the DM to adjudicate situations on the fly that aren't covered otherwise by the rules. Listening at a door for a non-thief uses this mechanic. Surprise uses this mechanic. Sometimes the odds for the Rule of 2 are adjusted by increasing the range (just 1 or 1-4), or by adjusting the dice (can only be surprised on a 1-2 on a d8). Certainly there are exceptions (every game has exceptions somewhere) but in general, that's how the three basic core mechanics are applied in AD&D. In my O.G.R.E.S. system, we took it a step further and applied % rolls to spellcasting as well. The use of these mechanics is a neat way to tell at a glance exactly what's going on in game at any given time, and while it's not strictly NECESSARY and may even be more streamlined with a unified mechanic, it does add to the way the game feels in play; players react and interact differently when they're making % checks than when they're making d20 checks, because the nature of the game at that moment is different. Extensive playtesting backs this up, but YMMV, as always. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Dec 18, 2020 8:53:36 GMT -6
When gaming, I found it easier to get back to the sense of wonder when using light rules systems and playing in an unknown setting. What I'm saying is, we didn't use any setting to play in, but played to create the setting. There's always new stuff to make up and discover. And that's something you can do in any game system. That's what we did in my youth. Sure, we often had some maps provided by the games but changed them or added to them. I remember the cool Earthdawn map which had many interesting spots and enough room in between to fill with our own ideas. Our Dungeonworld game does get some very weird additions from time to time (some players just feel like they have to make it really gonzo), but these elements are usually starving off after one session when the player doesn't return to play again. Many other elements are returning each session. And here's the map we have at the moment in our DW game And this is why Dungeon World is my fave game-probably of all time. It completely reinvigorated me when I was absolutely sick of traditional RPGs, in particular any and all versions of D&D. As the DM I get to "play" too- with everyone's input into the setting, and the very little prep, and improv nature of the game, I'm just as surprised as the players. In my experience It's pretty easy to reign in anything too gonzo by simply talking with the players before the game starts and giving it a basic outline "Let's keep it XYZ, ok?". Love that map. And yes, I have applied DW's approach to some extent into every game system I've run since. |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 18, 2020 9:06:44 GMT -6
I kind of like where we are at now. There is something for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Dec 18, 2020 9:12:16 GMT -6
I kind of like where we are at now. There is something for everyone. I like where we are now too. Much easier to find other gamers and ideas. Like instant communication! I hated waiting and waiting for mail. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Dec 18, 2020 10:19:38 GMT -6
I'm somewhere in between love/hate where we are today, leaning slightly towards "hate" In general, I tend to prefer "modern sensibilities" as they often align with the way I grew up playing. We were "story gaming" as The OSR Experts would call it today. We weren't playing a resource management mega dungeon crawl hoping to retire at 9th level, etc. So I'm thankful for modern systems like 13th Age, Dungeon World, etc that are designed around this style of play and make it better. Opposite of the coin: I find that "Fantasy" has changed so much, I no longer get along with the majority of fantasy games, settings, and "setting" material. This is particularly true with D&D proper. It's just been studied and codified to death, regurgitated over and over for nearly 50 years. Also the influence of countless Movies, TV, Manga/Anime and Computer game worlds. Perhaps the biggest thing I miss about the old days is that no longer are game worlds informing the ruleset, instead we have the ruleset informing the game world. Sure there is lip service to "Optional" or "Rule 0", but there is a large amount of player expectation/entitlement that if a Dragonborn Monk or 1/2 Orc Paladin is in a corebook, EVERY SETTING will be open to those things. As much as people B&M about it, 2E really did a great job here with most settings having plenty of restrictions to get the setting feel right (Forgotten Realms being the exception of course because it was the "default") And unfortunately the OSR has taken a hard turn in recent years towards the gonzo/doom metal/dark fantasypunk side of things when it comes to setting material and flooding the "market" with a nauseating amount of "my D&D houserule" systems. Early D20 3.0 in the early Y2Ks was pretty bad, but easy, fast and cheap electronic publishing has made it even harder to sift through all the garbage. If the modern gaming scene was a restaurant you ask?  It would be a chinese buffet in a strip mall- easy to find, pretty affordable. More items than you can count and the majority of them are bland as can be. Don't forget your tasteless vanilla soft-serve with watered down chocolate syrup and sprinkles for dessert! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2020 14:24:11 GMT -6
The modern era is literally the era of choices. You find what you look for. It's not a big umbrella but a series of niches. I'm here on this forum because I looked for this type of discussion. It's here because someone else looked for it, decided the choices were suboptimal, and created it. That's the nature of the modern era. "If you build it, they will come."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2020 15:02:15 GMT -6
Perhaps herein such choices must indeed be made. For given first (or worse, wretched) impressions, the day’s submissions may arraign the modern as per neglected subject(s) via some, truly ancient decadence. “As when individual parts flourish at the expense of the whole,” for example, such wicked depravity serves as dogma in the urban vampire film, The Hunger. Here, old terror preludes the city debauchery.  |
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Dec 19, 2020 19:45:08 GMT -6
... Opposite of the coin: I find that "Fantasy" has changed so much, I no longer get along with the majority of fantasy games, settings, and "setting" material. This is particularly true with D&D proper. It's just been studied and codified to death, regurgitated over and over for nearly 50 years. ... To put it another way, D&D has become a thing unto itself. I think it's an issue that comes with everything that gets popular over time. To use Star Wars as an example, as I have Mandalorian on the brain, Lucas was heavily influenced by things like the Lensmen series and Flash Gordon serials. The prequel and sequel trilogy were heavily influenced by the original trilogy. People ape things from A New Hope or Empire with no understanding of why it was done that way to begin with. It's a giant game of telephone -- the further you get the more the message changes. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Dec 20, 2020 9:09:36 GMT -6
... Opposite of the coin: I find that "Fantasy" has changed so much, I no longer get along with the majority of fantasy games, settings, and "setting" material. This is particularly true with D&D proper. It's just been studied and codified to death, regurgitated over and over for nearly 50 years. ... To put it another way, D&D has become a thing unto itself. I think it's an issue that comes with everything that gets popular over time. To use Star Wars as an example, as I have Mandalorian on the brain, Lucas was heavily influenced by things like the Lensmen series and Flash Gordon serials. The prequel and sequel trilogy were heavily influenced by the original trilogy. People ape things from A New Hope or Empire with no understanding of why it was done that way to begin with. It's a giant game of telephone -- the further you get the more the message changes. Perfectly stated. Kudos. |
|
|
|
Post by soundchaser on Dec 20, 2020 9:42:48 GMT -6
To put it another way, D&D has become a thing unto itself. I think it's an issue that comes with everything that gets popular over time. To use Star Wars as an example, as I have Mandalorian on the brain, Lucas was heavily influenced by things like the Lensmen series and Flash Gordon serials. The prequel and sequel trilogy were heavily influenced by the original trilogy. People ape things from A New Hope or Empire with no understanding of why it was done that way to begin with. It's a giant game of telephone -- the further you get the more the message changes. Perfectly stated. Kudos. And Lucas seems to generally have read lots of pulp plus foreign stuff, Valerian comes to mind. The Map: software source? Or hand drawn? Love it. Want to yoink its style. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Dec 20, 2020 9:46:37 GMT -6
The map was done with Hex Kit. Since the question came up, I used the Fantasyland and Traveling Through Dangerous Scenery tilesets.
|
|
|
|
Post by soundchaser on Dec 20, 2020 16:51:12 GMT -6
The map was done with Hex Kit. Since the question came up, I used the Fantasyland and Traveling Through Dangerous Scenery tilesets. Thanks for the reference. I'll be checking that out. |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on Dec 21, 2020 4:14:20 GMT -6
Hamurai's map is absolutely marvellous! It prompted me to try Hex Kit (so far I used AKS and Hexographer).
As for the "old days", I really love your stories! What do you think make the real difference? I wasn't there, but I'd say that the old games were set towards world exploration and interactions (including combat). I don't think it's about Enterprise Resource Planning, as it's often portrayed today.
And the "new days"? A lot has changed, and I mostly don't like it. I appreciate technical development though: thanks to Roll20 and Discord I participated in ca 50 game sessions.
|
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Dec 21, 2020 4:28:36 GMT -6
The modern era is literally the era of choices. You find what you look for. It's not a big umbrella but a series of niches. I'm here on this forum because I looked for this type of discussion. It's here because someone else looked for it, decided the choices were suboptimal, and created it. That's the nature of the modern era. "If you build it, they will come." That is my ideal of perfection. Every table should be playing a different game that suits their individuals need and choices. Joining a new table to invite a completely new experience. I see standardization as the death of creativity and the worse form of cliche. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 21, 2020 6:19:43 GMT -6
As for the "old days", I really love your stories! What do you think make the real difference? I wasn't there, but I'd say that the old games were set towards world exploration and interactions (including combat). For me, I think part of it is a mindset. (1) We had played wargames and miniatures games. D&D was an extension of miniatures games in its presentation, but since we didn't have all those monster minis we mostly did the "theater of the mind" thing or used counters (dice or RISK pieces) where we needed to "see" the action. I think that Arneson's FFC looks a lot like my early OD&D games, with a blend of character adventure and army combat. (2) It's hard to "unsee" something. We hadn't seen the other stuff and so it didn't clutter our game. Today, a 5E player in an OD&D game might ask, "why don't I get cantrips?" but back then they weren't a thing at all so no one thought about them. It's almost like trying to explain to a sports junky what it was like before ESPN and phone apps: we had these basic channels and didn't know we were "missing" anything. (3) So many rulebooks today are written to be viewed and not played; slick paper and awesome artwork. Even looking at the newer hardback modules with those awesome maps that the players can't see... it's all different. Hey, it's an OD&D board and I have to assume that we've all seen the OD&D rulebooks so the difference is pretty obvious. (4) A 5E player can pick backgrounds and customize characters and much of the "game" is character development, but back then it was roll and play in 5 minutes. Players today can pick from more classes and races, and each has sub-options, so that a person really can play whatever character they want. back in the day we only had 3 main options, plus race choice provided another couple options, but we didn't miss the rest because we would just "wing it" and I could let a player run Aragorn by being a fighter and just letting him track and use healing herbs instead of having to use a special Ranger class. And you can't miss what you don't know about, so we didn't know better. I have a friend who loves to play Rangers and if I offer a "boxed set only" OD&D he would probably feel cheated. I don't know with certainty that the "old days" is better. I think that players used a lot more imagination because things weren't as visual or detailed as today. (Not to say that one can't be imaginative in today's games, but it's a different kind.) It was just different and really hard to achieve. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Dec 21, 2020 8:48:30 GMT -6
I think one of the biggest differences between "old days" and "modern" day is that in old school play, your character is your vehicle to explore the World (by having adventures) For many modern gamers it seems that the game is about exploring your character against the backdrop of the world (by having adventures).
Of course there were always those few players who for them the whole thing was about their character (and they were the ones who talked non stop about their frikking frakking characters, no matter where you were or what you were doing). I'm guessing that eventually this became a majority of players, or companies saw it as the their vehicle to dollar signs, and things started to shift.
One thing I find weird is that many modern day RPG (WOTC/PAIZO, etc) surveys and studies show that player specific material sells much better than DM specific material , but those same surveys say that DMs by far purchase more material than players who often don't even own a PHB :shrug: Under those circumstances, it's no wonder so many companies either tank, or design around a character driven, heavy crunch game (where most DMs will simply have to "cave" to the players)
Certainly the early days, and the OSR are focused on providing DM facing materials to improve adventures and worlds, not really characters (Has anyone published an OSR splatbook for PC's yet?)
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Dec 21, 2020 9:19:33 GMT -6
I don't know with certainty that the "old days" is better. I think that players used a lot more imagination because things weren't as visual or detailed as today. (Not to say that one can't be imaginative in today's games, but it's a different kind.) It was just different and really hard to achieve. This is key. I tried to be clear about this in my OP, but in case I wasn't, my statement that I miss the old days is IN NO WAY an indictment of gaming now. We are truly living in a golden era for tabletop gaming. The hobby has evolved and has changed. That doesn't mean it's worse. I just miss a certain attitude towards play and design that I don't often see these days. I call it "punk rock" but that's not an entirely accurate phrase. I don't have one, but it's like comparing the original Mirage TMNT comics of the 80s to the X-Men comics of today. There's a lot about current comics that's demonstrably superior to the old days, but there's an approach, a mentality, and a feeling to those old indie comics that just isn't there anymore--even indie comics these days are trying to live up to a certain aesthetic exemplified by the most popular ones on the shelves. The renegade, rogue mindset is no longer embraced; it's looked down upon by the broad majority, and even those that attempt to embrace it can't help but be subtly influenced by current attitudes. I don't miss the way games PLAYED in the old days as much as I miss the look and feel of the hobby at that point in time. And that's not to say it was better then. It's just something I, personally, miss. Does that make any sense at all? |
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 21, 2020 12:33:43 GMT -6
(3) So many rulebooks today are written to be viewed and not played; slick paper and awesome artwork. Even looking at the newer hardback modules with those awesome maps that the players can't see... it's all different. Hey, it's an OD&D board and I have to assume that we've all seen the OD&D rulebooks so the difference is pretty obvious. Even though my field is art, I agree. I'm tired of RPG books that are coffee table art books rather than useful play aids. One of my favorite RPG's is Old School Essentials which is optimized for play. (not to say it doesn't have some great art, I mean I've got a few pieces in there, but the focus is on being a useful rulebook) |
|
|
|
Post by greentongue on Dec 21, 2020 12:37:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by clownboss on Dec 27, 2020 12:22:27 GMT -6
I mean, back in the "old days", there was no such thing as Dungeons & Dragons here in Serbia, where I live. My country was never a market and was cut off from all of the hype that was built in Western countries. The way D&D made itself known and popularised came straight through the Internet, and that's the D&D that I know and that I'm grateful for. I do like leading OD&D games though!
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Dec 27, 2020 14:22:44 GMT -6
Upon further considering what thegreyelf is saying, I think a near perfect analogy is when a book is adapted into a movie. Before the movie your mind's eye imagines the book, and it is far greater than any movie portrayal could ever be. However, once you've seen the movie it forever colors your interpretation of the book. Rarely for the better. Lord of the Rings being the best example, but also when I read Dune I can't help but picture David Lynch's version with Kyle MacLachlan as Paul. Which is probably why I now enjoy the Dune sequels more than the original. I'm speaking of course of Frank Herbert's sequels. Those books by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson are not Dune, they are fan fiction (and not very good fan fiction at that). |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jan 18, 2021 8:29:59 GMT -6
I remember when all I had was some dice, paper, the Moldvay rules, some choose your own adventure books, Robert E. Howard Conan paperback with a Frazetta cover,
|
|
|
|
Post by Paladin on Jan 23, 2021 9:13:56 GMT -6
Imagination is the key for me. As a child with my red box, I wasn't given slick glossy pictures of every creature and location and my mind was forced to conjure up something to fill in the gaps.
Much like the OP says, when a game is published now and asks players to rely on their creativity to fill in the gaps, it's often called lazy and incomplete.
I don't like having it spelled out. I want it rough because it inspires the tinkerer in me to tailor the game to my tastes. I can do that with a modern game, sure, but the more layers of rules I have to unwind, the more chances I'll miss something and there will be unintended consequences.
The pleasure in gaming, for me, is taking a rough stone and polishing into my own diamond. Not admiring someone else's diamond polished in their particular fashion. It's all fun for someone, and different strokes are great. That's just my personal preference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2021 11:05:27 GMT -6
You altered the forbidden Carrion Crawler? Good for you.  |
|
It would be a chinese buffet in a strip mall- easy to find, pretty affordable. More items than you can count and the majority of them are bland as can be. Don't forget your tasteless vanilla soft-serve with watered down chocolate syrup and sprinkles for dessert! 
