[gglitch]

There's a community and play-style called OSR or "old school renaissance," that recreates versions of the earliest editions of D&D, and encourage a style of play that's heavily oriented around few rules and the DM making quick decisions/rulings on the spot, rather than lots of rules and lots of time spent mining the rulebooks. In fact, the expression is "rulings over rules." This might appeal to you.

[jghn]

There's a dichotomy here that I have always found amusing. To me, the older style of play felt crunchier, despite there being less of a rule focused. The most common style of play back then was more of a dungeon crawl, closer to "roll playing", low fantasy, usually lower level, murder hobos were very common, and all of that.

Whereas today's game is far more complicated rules-wise by most measures yet it tends to be more storytelling & *role* playing focused: flower-y, superhero-y, high fantasy

[cthalupa]

Today's game can be just as much roll-playing, it highly depends on the group. One of the things that drove me back to B/X and ADD was the sheer number of min-max players and rise(!) of murder hobos in 5e vs. even 3e/3.5/pf1

Most of the early old-school stuff was way too deadly for players to be murder hobos or try to solve everything with combat - if you went into Caverns of Thracia at level 2 as a murder hobo you're just going to die over and over and over again. It'll be endless TPKs. Right now I'm two years into DM'ing an Arden Vuul campaign, running a mix of OSE (Streamlined B/X) and OSRIC (ADD 1e) rules, and it's really only the past 6 months or so that my players have felt comfortable engaging in regular combat - before then they might have spent a whole session or two trying to stack up every advantage they could because they never wanted to be in a fair fight.

And from my experience with a whole lot of OSR play over the past 6-7 years is that this is the sort of feel most OSR players are after. They're not wanting to play late ADD 2e, Dragonlance era, where the shift to the more heroic play started happening - they want to have to think and outsmart things. Faction interaction was also huge in the more sandbox environments, and that was where most of the roleplaying occurred then, and occurs now in the games I run. The players RP a bit with each other, but not as much.

Modern D&D is a kitchen sink approach that tries to solve every possible playstyle, and that makes it popular and reasonably good at most anything people want to do with it. But I don't know that there's any facet of it that it does as well as other systems.

[jghn]

> Today's game can be just as much roll-playing, it highly depends on the group.

Yeah this is kind of my point, that I think a lot of the contemporary play style is cultural and not ruleset driven. And thus I'm skeptical that merely doing something playing 1e AD&D is going to feel exactly the same as it did 40 years ago. That said, I may be overstating how typical this is in the modern game, I haven't played in 30-ish years, my take is driven by observation purely.

And also, even back then some of the more modern improv-y play style existed, it just wasn't the norm. I remember when my main play group had a session with one member's brother & friends and there was a very clear culture mismatch from the start. They were acting, with voices and all of that. We ... did not. To each their own but combining the two didn't work.

[ramses0]

My old thief in high school: "I use my 'Appraisal' skill on the situation..." :-D

DM: "Umm... not very good..." (became a running joke)