Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Duvanok 02-18-06, 04:02 PM	Okay, let's try this again, no hijackers this time please. And if you can't be civil (or at least passive-aggressive) don't post here. (You know who you are). 1. Takes the term "old school" way too seriously. 2. Tends to be more of a DM vs. player type attitude 3. All rogues are theives 4. Sneak attack is "backstab" 5. Face lights up like a christmas tree when his BBEG rolls a natural twenty. 6. Npcs exist purely to kill or be killed by players. 7. Loves ridiculously powerful and complicated traps, loves them even more when the party has no rogue. 8. Has a list of "House rules" a mile long that consists of stuff from previous editions that "just make a lot more sense."
Kresalak 02-18-06, 04:04 PM	I think that when a thread gets locked you shouldn't restart the thread, except in the case of threads that are locked for being too long.
Asciiman 02-18-06, 04:58 PM	Okay, let's try this again, no hijackers this time please. And if you can't be civil (or at least passive-aggressive) don't post here. (You know who you are). 1. Takes the term "old school" way too seriously. 2. Tends to be more of a DM vs. player type attitude 3. All rogues are theives 4. Sneak attack is "backstab" 5. Face lights up like a christmas tree when his BBEG rolls a natural twenty. 6. Npcs exist purely to kill or be killed by players. 7. Loves ridiculously powerful and complicated traps, loves them even more when the party has no rogue. 8. Has a list of "House rules" a mile long that consists of stuff from previous editions that "just make a lot more sense." You still don't get it do you? It was you the entire time that made this thread inflammatory. Your first post was what prompted everyone to flame. So to you I say cut it out and leave well enough alone.
Daergal_the_Black 02-18-06, 06:25 PM	Okay, let's try this again, no hijackers this time please. And if you can't be civil (or at least passive-aggressive) don't post here. (You know who you are). 1. Takes the term "old school" way too seriously. 2. Tends to be more of a DM vs. player type attitude 3. All rogues are theives 4. Sneak attack is "backstab" 5. Face lights up like a christmas tree when his BBEG rolls a natural twenty. 6. Npcs exist purely to kill or be killed by players. 7. Loves ridiculously powerful and complicated traps, loves them even more when the party has no rogue. 8. Has a list of "House rules" a mile long that consists of stuff from previous editions that "just make a lot more sense." I agree with Asciiman, you have not stumbled upon an objective list of reasons why people who've played for a long time are bad DMs, you're just venting and ascribing certain aspects that some poor DMs may have and saying its "unevolved" and "old school dm thinking," thus needlessly insulting many players who have known the game both longer, and likely know it better, than you. In reality, plenty of "new school" DMs share several of the traits you've mentioned (and in greater proportion than the old school ones, in my experience). In fact 3, 4 and to some extent 8 are the only ones that I think apply disproportionately to old school DMs, rather than new school ones. 1) I've never seen 1, not in any DM anywhere. In fact, outside of internet message boards, I've never seen the term "old school DM" at all. 2) I've seen this more in DMs who are new to role playing than I've seen it in truly long term DMs. Some DMs go in the other direction too, of course, saving the party from their own dumb mistakes and bad rolls...both are signs of bad DMs, but neither is prevalent (let alone ubiquitous) amongst the ranks of long term DMs 3)-4) As noted, these do happen. 5) Never seen this really, but in any event this seems to be just a particular example of (2), hence not really worthy of its own number (and refuted for the reasons set forth above). 6) Again, this seems bound up in (2) rather than its own special category, that said, I've never really seen this either. Every world is populated with many "background" NPCs that never come to the fore, let lone have them all be working against the party. In any event, I agree that it would be poor DMing for every NPC to be adverse in interest to the players...but where do you get the notion that such a system was one common amongst "old school" players. Greyhawk was filled with non-threatening NPCs, so it's not a very "Gygaxian" notion. 7) The second clause is again a species of 2). As for the first clause, why do you think a love of complex traps is either old school or "unevolved." Where in the 3.5 DMG does it state "traps should be simple and not-at-all-complex"? A love of complex traps may just be the way your DM shows of his creativity...so long as they and their complexity make sense in the context of the story, then good for him for being clever. If they don't fit the story (like complex traps being set by Gully Dwarves) or if he only uses them because you have no rogue, then that is bad DMing, but bad DMing is not "old school". 8) This one I'll grant you. While hardly universal, older DMs with more experience in D&D and other game systems do frequently like to port rules from those other systems. I can see why it might be annoying to n00blet players who can't get their heads around the variant rules. Most old school DMs I know keep their list of house rules under check, so as to avoid totally confusing the players, but to the extent your DM went hog-wild, you may have a valid reason to decide to not play in that DMs game.
allencon 02-18-06, 07:57 PM	in no particular or correct order 1. is bafled by the alignment choices which go beyond good neutral or evil. 2. strange and often explosive things happen when people chug too many potions in rapid succession 3. all time is measured in segments 4. furnishings have randomly determined patterns and colors 5. gnomish particles are more than just a twist on physics terminology
Duvanok 02-18-06, 08:33 PM	in no particular or correct order 1. is bafled by the alignment choices which go beyond good neutral or evil. 2. strange and often explosive things happen when people chug too many potions in rapid succession 3. all time is measured in segments 4. furnishings have randomly determined patterns and colors 5. gnomish particles are more than just a twist on physics terminology Everyone please note, this is what this thread is supposed to be about. Not ridiculing me for my opinion. And certainly not lowering yourself by calling me a moron. As stated before, if you don't like or agree with the thread don't post here. Thanks.
TLomon 02-18-06, 08:58 PM	I have to say Duvanok, the only one who offended me in this thread has been you so far.1. Takes the term "old school" way too seriously.I don't take the title that seriously, but I have been playing for 25 years and change.2. Tends to be more of a DM vs. player type attitudeBad DM type. Happens just as often with new DMs as with old school.3. All rogues are theivesBad DM type. Happens just as often with new DMs as with old school. Also, most people spell "thieves" correctly.4. Sneak attack is "backstab"I'm guilty of this one. I often refer to sneak attack as backstab, but I still use the rules for 3.5.5. Face lights up like a christmas tree when his BBEG rolls a natural twenty.Happens just as often with new DMs as with old school.6. Npcs exist purely to kill or be killed by players.Bad DM type. Happens just as often with new DMs as with old school.7. Loves ridiculously powerful and complicated traps, loves them even more when the party has no rogue.Bad DM type. Happens just as often with new DMs as with old school.8. Has a list of "House rules" a mile long that consists of stuff from previous editions that "just make a lot more sense."This can happen with any edition and is irrelevent to old school. I know you asked for no trolls, but so far the biggest one I see is yourself.
bholdr_mage 02-18-06, 09:00 PM	Ok, everyone calm down. 1) I've never seen 1, not in any DM anywhere. In fact, outside of internet message boards, I've never seen the term "old school DM" at all. This is JUST a question, but why did you even click on the thread and read about it if you have never come accross an "old school DM?" Maybe you were bored or something, and it's a free country, but why participate in something that will irritate you? That's just silly. :P To the lot of you, this thread, (and the one before it) was meant to be a humorous "poke" at DMs. I personally don't think it was meant to be a wooden stake through the heart instead. And as for the OP, while I understand where you are coming from, you'd think that with the outcome of the original thread being closed, you would approach the "title" a bit differently to avoid this problem yet again. I see what you are trying to do, but when you touch personal issues like BELIEFS and whether those beliefs exist or not, you tend to peeve a lot of people off. It is my opinion that the belief issue was the main reason why the first thread was locked. Here's how to deal with the problem: For those of you that dislikes the thread, ignore the ordeal and let the OP have his fun with what he has started. Since there is more of you posting AGAINST the thread more than for it, the thread will eventually dissappear due to no one posting on it. The OP will get tired of bumping the thread up and it will go away.
DaMullet 02-18-06, 09:03 PM	He's got a point, you know. And all of you know what happens when you argue with an idiot. In case you don't, click on this. First, they drag you down to their level, then they beat you with experience.
TLomon 02-18-06, 09:18 PM	Now, to put this into context for what the original poster intended, despite his trolling statements, here is my list. 1. Understands where the weapon reach charts originated from in 1st edition. 2. Has a collection of books pre-dating 1st edition by 2 editions. 3. Knows the difference between a 1st printing and 2nd printing Dieties & Demigods. 4. Knows what TSR originally stood for before it was formally changed. 5. Mourns the loss of RoleAids. 6. Remembers the original Judge's Guild with amusing glee. 7. Knows Dwarven paladins were legal before 1st edition! 8. Remembers when Bard was the only prestige class in game. Other Games: 1. Owns the game Gamma World was based on. 2. Has conversion tables for Boot Hill to D&D. 3. Spent more time rolling characters for Traveller then ever playing the game. 4. Can always explain a dungeon crawl as part of an IG simulation in Cyberpunk. 5. Only recently owned a computer powerful to roll characters for Powers & Perils. 6. Remembers Antares and why there was a revolt.
BeyondFated 02-18-06, 09:35 PM	The only problem I ahve with this thread is it's improporly named. All the examples Duvanok posted were more like examples of bad DMs and semantic errors, not old DMs. Now if this thread were titled "How to tell if your DM is bad or prone to semantic errors" then it'd be fine and dandy.
TLomon 02-18-06, 09:41 PM	I think that is just it, Beyond Fated. The subject line does not match the material of the opening post.
Daergal_the_Black 02-19-06, 02:16 AM	This is JUST a question, but why did you even click on the thread and read about it if you have never come accross an "old school DM?" Maybe you were bored or something, and it's a free country, but why participate in something that will irritate you? That's just silly. :P Perhaps you didn'ty read my *whole* sentence. I wrote: I've never seen 1, not in any DM anywhere. In fact, outside of internet message boards, I've never seen the term "old school DM" at all. The operative clause that you should focus on and ponder is "outside of internet message boards". This being an internet message board (coupled with the fact that I am here reading it) means that I have seen the phrase "old school DM", but only in the context of message boards. Thus endeth the reading comprehension lesson. In other words, I have never seen a game held up because some DM was screaming passionately about being an "old school DM" or what that term mean to him. As such, even if DMs do hold passionate opinions on the meaning of "old school DM" (and I doubt many do) it is not something that effects their games, and therefore not an issue that should in any way, shape, or form effects the actual players, as opposed to message board readers. He might as well have posted : 1) Voted for Dukakis in the 1988 presidential election. Perhaps there are old school DMs who voted for Dukakis in the 1988 presidential election, but since that doesn't effect the player, so what? In the same way, if they have opinions on what "old school" might mean (which I don't think they do), or if they prefer "THACO" to "THAC0", or any other semantic matter that never comes up during play, so what? Far from being "here's some funny things about old school DMs" (which would be an amusing thread) the point of the poster was that long term DMs are "unevolved" (his characterization from the prior post) and (judging from items 2,5,6, and 7) not very good at at being DMs.