Yesterday @Genesisoflegend started this thread about some of questions about some of the ideas we've been been bouncing back and forth in relation to playstyle/mechanical/community and other differences between classic (aka 'OSR') games and indie (or 'story') games.

1/ https://twitter.com/Genesisoflegend/status/1259246451441500160

I think we're mostly in agreement about a lot of the similarities and differences, though of course we're just two folks, and I certainly can't speak with any absolute authority about older game design. Some interesting distinctions and variations have come up though.

2/

https://twitter.com/Genesisoflegend/status/1259248702113427458?s=20

Here we're getting to some core distinctions that I think are meaningful for people trying to cross between playstyles or compare games. The purpose of rules in classic and indie games is fundamentally different.

3/

Many rules in older systems are extrinsic to player goals, they represent limits on the possible rather then the ways to act. Saving Throws are the purest example of this. If this thing happens you must check for catastrophic failure and the chance to fail is high!
4/

We've already gone over how the best way to play classic D&D is not to roll - to avoid combat through trickery, unpuzzle traps and navigate the setting while avoiding its risks. There's a lot of room to debate home much of this style is original or recent but...
5/

Assuming limiting interaction with the rules is a big part of successful play what does this say about rules? They exist for crisis resolution where the GM can no longer judge a plan will succeed - making play a series of crisis hemmed in by mechanics.
6/

When you have to roll the dice in classic play there's a ludic joy to it, but it's usually a gambler's rush of facing risk and tempting luck.
7/

contrast this with more contemporary versions of D&D where the mechanical character abilities are themselves the preferred tools to overcome obstacles: longer skill lists, passive perception, feats, rolls for most social interactions.
8/

I'm not sure where story game mechanics generally fit on this continuum, though I suspect they are more towards the mechanics as character tool rather then mechanics as limit on character tools.
9/

A bland but fundamental difference. Where this gets interesting though is how it effects playstyle and design.
A classic GM has to say "No" or "Yes, but" a lot -- "No you can't evade the guards by standing very still" or "you can try but failure is 5 in 6".
10/

From a playstyle perspective this means the GM is the messenger for bad news (that it's usually delivered via die roll is important to how one can play without conflict I think) but also worldbuilder its author.
11/

The more bad news in the game -- and more bad news generally means more puzzles, more crisis, more gambler's thrills, more fun -- the more the GM has to be seen as impartial and fair.
12/

Hence the loud debates about the sanctity of player choice and fudging dice. Even when used to help players, interference there creates an appearance of unfairness - throwing the inevitable bad news into question as well.
13/

So as the grim reaper of the TTRPG table (a cheerful sympathetic Discworld style one ideally) the classic GM presents their actions as duty to the fidelity of the setting and impartial interpretation of the characters decisions.
14/

Meaning it's best if you've prepped your adventure material beforehand. It's best if you aren't improvising (also since player choice is so sacrosanct - you'll have to improvise a lot anyway - best save it for when it's needed).
15/

This seems contrary to the story approach, where improvisation (often by the players as well as GM) is the primary mode of design. Adventures are usually themselves separate games/settings and adventures tend to be situations rather then keyed locations.
16/

All this is interesting to me because location based adventure design and 'crawl' mechanics (dungeon, point or hex) are my current interest. At the same time a lot of the newer work in the classic or 'OSR' space is ultralight systems designed for improvisation.
17/

Besides the conclusion that my interests are untimely and that 'OSR' is a fairly meaningless label at this point (I try not to use it) I think this speaks of a greater merging between classic and indie play. Even as it means my kind of classic play is breaking down.
18/

Again I want to caution readers that everything I'm saying here is my personal take and I'm neither an important or respected figure in either of these spaces -- I just write a blog about dungeon crawl mechanics and why 5E makes them near impossible.
19/