New School and Old School D&D

It begins with a consideration from two differing generations regarding a famous module. The Tomb of Horrors. I am sitting back trying to learn the game of today. So, I watched a group on YouTube play this module for 5E and then compare it to my own experiences back in the day.

***

New school: D&D 5E on Video

A player with boots of flying floats over the ground springing pit traps for the other players to follow along behind. They each jump over the revealed pits with an easy athletics check. They advance through the dungeon to a room with an altar. A player decides to experiment with a magical device here and ends up having their character’s gender and alignment changed. Trying to reverse it they end up stepping into the device and being transported naked back to the starting area. They repeat the process several times wanting their magic items back running back to the chapel, repeatedly all to no avail. They sneer at the armor on the altar and proceed naked as it’s cooler than dusty leather.

They wander, rather bored through the dungeon to a room with a crowned lich on a couch. They fight. The lich attempts to hit a barbarian but its fists bounce of his chest. It ends quickly. They find a way down and follow a corridor into a room with a gas trap. They are all knocked unconscious and crushed by a stone golem with a gigantic roller that appears from behind a false wall.

Player commentary at the table: "We got no saves. Nothing we did mattered we just walked into rooms and stuff happened. Gygax sucks. Our level didn’t even matter. This isn’t D&D, it’s just a weird dungeon meant to kill your character. We never felt cool. Who would play this? I would quit D&D if this was my first time playing."

Old School: OD&D Remembered.

A thief character advances and disarms the traps he can find. One pit trap was missed and the character nearly dies from falling onto the stakes below. He is healed by the cleric. Characters are wearing heavy armor and as such are not capable of making the jump across the pit. They have several thick boards in a small cart pulled by a small donkey to bridge the gap. They advance through the dungeon to a room with an altar.

A player decides to experiment with a magical device here and ends up having their character’s gender and alignment changed. Trying to reverse it they end up stepping into the device and being transported naked back to the starting area. They attempt to return, but enough time passed for a wandering monster check and they are killed in the attempt. The adventuring party doesn’t know what happened to them. They are now down one. They are attacked from behind by the group of wandering monsters that killed their friend earlier taking some damage. They pack the armor from the altar away into the cart for later identification.

They wander into a room with a crowned lich. They defeat the creature but one character suffers being drained several levels and they have to pause for the cleric to cure several wounds. They start having one character walk behind them at a distance as a rear guard and advance warning fearing being overwhelmed by wandering monsters. To help with trap detection they pull a metal bowling ball from the small cart and use it to test the floors for traps by rolling it across the stone floors. They spring a gas trap and retreat from what appears to be an empty room. They form a battle line. Pike men toward the front and prepare to open another door...

Player Commentary at the Table: "This is tough. Maybe too tough. Kind of stressing every square inch of map. But we are overcoming the challenges. So glad we prepared and thought of doing this stuff. I just wish we felt valuable some times rather than always on the verge of being dead."

***

The differences are striking and I could go further. I am curious regarding how you think D&D gaming has changed over the years? Is it better now or worse? Is there anything specific you miss or feel glad that it's gone? What do you think drove these changes?

I do have my own simplistic opinion on the changes D&D has undergone, but I feel like I should make the observation that every table is different. There are many types of DMs as there are players, and as an example, you could switch the labels of "Old School" and "New School" and the player commentary could easily apply to either.

I think D&D has changed more to fit with the prevailing interest of the time. It feels like early editions were just, "Explore a map, kill monsters, get treasure." Later, they tried to answer the question of "Why are we exploring maps, killing monsters, and getting treasure?" They tried to add more of an epic layer to the lore and have players feel like they've influenced the world. Recently they seem to be recognizing that each group is a separate entity with widely different play styles and interests, and are attempting to allow for personal stories to develop.

Understand, I am not trying to offend anyone or put down the new school of play. I am simply pointing out how different the play experiences were and how things changed. I was really bothered by the video in that no one was thinking outside of their class ability features and swords to solve problems.

D&D isn’t a deadly wargame anymore. Honestly, characters rarely die and the play focus shifted. It’s really about giving the players the chance to RP a "cool" character doing cool things in an adventure setting that favors them. The monsters are props rather than lethal room fixtures. It leads me to a dangerous question. Has D&D been turned from what amounts to a board wargame into a narrative vehicle to allow some one to feel special?

I am not sure how I feel about it. You want the truth? It might be right to do this. People invest so much wish fulfillment with these fantasy games. As a wargame Avalon Hill was more fun and people could get so hurt over their characters being smurf stomped because it was personal.

Now I am hearing people say D&D 5e characters don't die enough... I am not sure if this topic is cared about. So I won't touch some of the other stuff like the need for a party caller and how we hurt for its lack in playing 5e now. Yet. ;)

Again, play styles vary between groups; I reckon that even extends to the players as they grow and change. You could make D&D 5e as deadly as you want, or as safe as you want. You could run a session with all-combat or all-social encounters.

However, I don't think we're discussing the right question. I don't think it's about whether or not D&D makes someone feel special, but whether people have fun when they get together to enjoy each others' company for a number of hours. And the idea of what's fun for a person or group can differ.

I think this is kind of funny, because from where I'm sitting, it's often the old-school approach that seems to be boring and lacking in imagination. It wasn't so long ago that someone posted about how put off they were that a current crop of players were interested in playing their characters instead of automatically falling into rote roles: the rogue immediately checking a room for traps, the paladin doing blah blah, the bard doing something else, etc. That expectation of ignoring interpersonal RP in favor of following a narrow idea of "what you're supposed to do now" sounded like the most unappealing TTRPG experience I could imagine.

Bottom line for me: Play the way you want to play, just find people who also, explicitly, want to play that same way.

Pushes the Red Button. :)

I am not sure I agree in that saying you can do anything with D&D is similar to saying you can do anything with checkers while ignoring that the rules are all focused on creating a select style of playing experience. It's good for marketing but it even tells you so in the players handbook. To summarize the relevant sections on page 8: A D&D adventure is an interactive story and game with a beginning, middle, and end, where player characters are confronted by a series of challenges to overcome in a fantastic setting. They consist of exploration, social interaction, and combat. Magic is often an integral feature.

Even now, going through the book, the gear, the rules, the spells, at heart it is still a kind of an adventuring dungeon crawler. It is what it was designed to be.

If you are focused on social interaction to the exclusion of other features for example you are better off playing freeform as the rules are all in the way, designed for something else and the published adventures won't support you. Worse the included social interactions are all focused on playing the adventure rather than interpersonal relations which have a limited place within context of the game. Just use the wiki for setting information. Other systems if you need one like perhaps Cortex would be a far better choice to support your playstyle with useful tips and mechanics for it.

We don't have to like the same things. But why abuse D&D by twisting it out of shape like a weird pretzel? Is it just because it's popular and you can't get people to play things better suited to the playstyle you favor? So you ham fist it's limited toolkit features treating it like a hammer rather than a razor to force it into a shape ill suited to it's design... Just because you can do anything you want doesn't mean that you should.

Please remember to be kind to one another. :) I am stirring the pot a little in the interest of learning. Some of you indicate you had some kind of forum fight. Leave it there.

One thing we will all agree on is the importance of attracting players to a game with a similar mindset to what you want to play together. To do otherwise is asking for trouble and you as GM would be partly responsible.

But we are also veering a bit off course:

The differences are striking and I could go further. I am curious regarding how you think D&D gaming has changed over the years? Is it better now or worse? Is there anything specific you miss or feel glad that it's gone? What do you think drove these changes?

I have no idea what you're talking about regarding forum fights or people not being kind. Haven't seen anything like that happen here, unless some posts have been deleted?

Regardless, you're also putting words in my mouth, it seems. I never said anything about focusing solely on social interaction, I simply said that character development is a thing that I like to engage in. Some people don't, and that's fine.

Don't fret. Love ya. I'm just safely kicking the gasoline can around for a thought or three.

D&D has steadily become more user-friendly, more basic and less dangerous. Gone are Level Loss, Polymorphing, Flying, Ability Score Loss and in general a fear of death. The game is more about focusing on the Player rather than DM. Also players who come to D&D now, often have very different ideas on how the game itself should be played.

I did not intend to imply that D&D rules had to be changed in order to suit a certain play style. I just meant that different kinds of games can still be played in the D&D rule framework, no changes necessary. The notion that D&D players should play the game a certain way is a slippery slope and will begin to generate bad faith arguments.
I think D&D is trying to become more inclusive, recognizing that there are a wider variety of players with their own sense of fun, and D&D endeavors to provide an experience that can be enjoyed by those who participate. D&D establishes their rules as a framework for the DM to adjudicate the players' attempts to engage in the game.

I think it's better. If one D&D group wants to maintain the wargaming aspect and explore dungeons and defeat powerful monsters to obtain treasure at the high risk of character death, the rules allow them to do so. Another D&D group can choose to do none of that and instead participate in a Great Goblin Bake-Off or the Bugbear Battle of the Bands, and the rules still allow them to do so. If both groups have fun, then everything is good, and we're all better for it.

I don't miss the days of being told how to play my character, or that a woman's strength attribute cannot go above a certain number. I'm glad that even though we still have a long way to go, we're trying to be more inclusive.

That is why I think the differences between then and now stem not from how D&D has changed, but how we as players and DMs have changed. And I'd like to believe that we're changing for the better.

I'm not sure I understand your argument, Doom. You've watched a video on YouTube, and now you're qualified to encompass all 5e games in a generalisation? Is that it? That can't be it. I've played and DMed a lot of 5e, and I'm certainly not qualified to make that generalisation.

Tomb of Horrors is a very specific example and by no means a typical adventure (either for old school or 5e). I'm not sure it makes sense to draw any trends from an outlier.

Is character death less likely now? That depends on the DM and the game. I'm not saying that the DM has the power of god - they have more than that - the gods are the DM's NPCs. There's no limit to how many damage dice a DM drops on a character or how high they set the DC for a save. So that can't be right.

Are the WotC modules less deadly? I don't know if that's true. Search any module's reddit for "TPK", and you'll find lots of DMs asking how certain sections could ever result in anything less than a TPK. I know I've had multiple characters die both as a player and DM in the regular modules.

Do DMs pull punches? Yes. Sometimes. A confession: I could have easily TPKed you with that manticore in Icespire Peak - but it was the first encounter with new players, so it seemed somehow rude and anti-climatic to fly 100' above you and pepper you with spikes. So I changed the module to say that the manticore has already fired his spikes at the windmill. I kinda wish I'd just gratuitously murdered y'all now.

I enjoy my 5e games, and "enjoy" is good enough for me. If you find other systems more fun, then great! Play those. Honestly, nobody will stop you.

I'm not here to defend 5e vs any other system because I couldn't care less. If someone wants to define "better", then I'll cheerfully admit that other systems are better... but I still wouldn't care.

I play 5e because that's what lots of people play. It's as simple as that. It means I can always find a game, there are loads of resources, and I can share war stories with other gamers who have played the same modules, oh yeah, and I enjoy it. That's good enough for me.

If you prefer a grittier game then look at the DMG - chapter 9: Adventuring Options. Using optional rules is not really twisting anything out of shape like a pretzel, is it?

I'm not trolling, and I hope that I haven't come across as unfriendly or unkind. You want to kick a petrol can around? Sure, there's my kick.

I don't consider, wandering monsters, usage of carts, level drains, and all the other stuff that has been removed "playstyle." It was literally ruled into the game back then vs. now to create what was and is the D&D play experience. A few DMG options do not really change that.

My aims here don’t have as much to do with prodding "playstyle" as some think that's an issue apparently for some forum goers... It has everything to do with me considering 5e and its current designed play format. What things it really supports in spite of what folks try to shape it into and what I could do that would help it and what wouldn't to get more fun. Trying to get a grasp on where it is vs. where it was. I am considering it for options that actually work in play as the game is put together.

My example in the original posts illustrate how the differing rulesets played out on the tabletop. If you actually want to see the video play through, for 5E it was by Arcane Arcade Tomb of Horrors Full VOD from June 18, 200 on YouTube and they clearly claim they are playing it as intended by the current designers. It plays nothing like the original and it simply doesn't translate well to the modern game table.

One was fun. One wasn't. It isn't playstyle as much as what the game is designed to do well.

I kicked the petrol can about over "playstyle" since it was brought up in regards to those who think 5e is about interpersonal interaction on a regular basis but are playing a game designed around fighting monsters and running through encounters in the end rather than using better options. I made the argument literally to see what they thought to form better ideas of my own. Really.

If you want to take that further, I would contend that at face value the core game "no longer mechanically supports" a hardcore dungeon crawling experience and focuses more on the sense of adventure and that it is weighted heavily toward the players winning rather than letting the chips fall as they may.

Instead, to mechanically recreate such an experience as OD&D and to support the "playstyle" you really have to remake the game system into something like "Five Torches Deep." A few DMG options do not really change that.

But I do want to thank you for your passion because at least I know you really believe what you are writing rather than simply repeating what some one else said was gospel. Usually, from some one's marketing division. ;)

Edit: And Adam, as noted elsewhere. My posts here have utterly nothing to do with you and your game. Doing that, wouldn't be good 5e would it. Wishing us all gratuitously dead... Isn't good form. This was never personal with anyone and that's outta the blue. It was me learning from old to new.

Your discussion has made me realize I think of dnd as more of a concept than a set of firm rules. Capturing the imagination and immediately transporting one into a medieval fantasy setting. That ability to be fluid is not dnd's weakness but it's glory. Yes, one may find other systems that could accomplish different aspects of the game better but there is a cost to being everything to everyone. Besides, pretzels are tasty and have so many dipping options!

Tomb of Horrors is a classic old school dungeon. It's not surprising that it works best with classic old school rules. It stands apart from regular D&D. It's like asking how Waterdeep Dragon Heist would work with old school rules.

But your central question - What's changed? What's different?

When I played D&D in the 80s, it was because we didn't have video games. Dungeon crawls were video-gamey but with graph paper instead of pixels. It's not surprising that modern RPGs don't compete with that experience. If people wanted video games, they'd play video games. The mechanical dungeon crawl is best done by computers.

I think most RPGs aim for a cooperatively written story that's shaped by dice rolls. The dungeon crawl is just a plot device to carry character development.

What's the most common reason players ask to change their character (or kill them off)? It's usually not because they're ineffective in combat - it's often because the player feels their character is one dimensional, not gelling socially with the party, lacks depth and humanity (or dwarvanity or orcanity?). How effective the character is at dungeon crawling is secondary to how interesting we find the character.

And the stories we take away aren't about our DPR or XP received. They're: "Do you remember when Gretch discovered her lost daughter was still alive?", "That time Kermodei walked alone in the tundra after watching her love burnt to ash.", "When Eira banished the ghost of mothers' sorrow with that impassioned speech." and "When we all linked arms, knowing we would die, as we sailed our ship to ram the Kraken.".

Gods! I'm tearing up remembering some of the epic and tragic moments from my games.

I'm not saying those moments don't exist in other systems. I can't imagine why anybody would play any RPG if they didn't. I'm certainly not saying that only 5e does this, or even 5e is the best at it. But I think that's the change in emphasis in modern vs old school RPG.

How has this changed the game for players and the DM? Players add more weaknesses to their characters now, knowing that the more ammunition they give the DM, the better their story will be. And it used to be that DM's aimed to hit the characters - now we aim for the players' hearts.

Sounds like you'd enjoy Professor DM's rant from Dungeon Craft on Youtube.

This is slowly becoming my default attitude.
...

Oh. You were referring to in-game.

Ahem. Carry on.

Yeah, moonbeam. You’re all progressive and kumbaya until the subject turns to RPGs - then the jackboots come out.

Most people learn that eventually.

Some of them learn... too late.

I think some of the older players might feel the differences are too much to feel like the same game. I get that. I also have a gut feeling that most of the older players have a copy of 5e, but have never really bothered to deep dive into what's there. They will probably have a set of 6E books sometime in 2025, if there is one. I don't really play D&D anymore. Once in about 2 years I'll run an old school game of D&D, once every summer I run a Star Frontiers game. One-shots.

Looking seriously at 5E, it's way more modular and robust than any of the previous versions. You don't like 3 saving throws and then your character dies, change it to none or one or whatever you like, it won't break the system. The designer even states you should change the rules to suit your game - not many beginners are going to do that. I see it as a flexible game you can manipulate to suit your needs. I use a very stripped down version of 5E when I write adventures (admittedly I have not played in a 5E adventure without freaking others out at how bloodthirsty a half-ork barbarian can be.)

Creating adventures that contain elements that highlight each character's strengths is both time-consuming and rewarding all at once. It can be done. I take things from other places and put them in my games - EX: We played keep on the Borderlands when we first learned how to game. I took Gary's advice from the AD&D DM's Guide to heart and made my own world quickly after. So, our second campaign featured dinosaur riding knights (not paladins - knights) and I rewired old Micronaughts stories straight from the comics to my game. I also added elements of romance (very victorian in my approach, Vanity Fair was the inspiration), Horror and some "You are he whom the prophecy spoke of!" stuff. 1E, was awesome!

Now, 5E is out there, lots of new players, and they want to play with the Rules As Written. RAW. I have nothing against that, but I think some of us more experienced gamers could learn from them; and yet, we could always suggest "new ways" (actually old ways) to do stuff. Show them about world building and how to put together a cohesive campaign. Show them how to sandbox a different way (or if they've never done sandbox, run an West Marches sandbox so they get the experience.) A better experience I think. If you show them they don't have to emulate critcal role, it might take some of the pressure off to perform at such a high level of theatrics. I don't play that way and neither does anyone I know.

New School/Old School, that's like comparing New Wave (Psychedelic Furs) to Grunge (Stone Temple Pilots.) They both have their positives and negatives. I can't say I am a fan of Echo and the Bunnymen any less than I am a fan of Nirvana - both awesome for different reasons.

I started playing DnD in the early 80s. I had a blast. I took up PbP over a year ago after decades away from the hobby. I have a blast with 5e.
In all the games, and iterations of games, the ones where I had a blast were invariably the ones with good people.
For me, the game is just the scaffold we hang the fun on.