Finding Comfort in Shedding Limitations

Now that I have returned to 2nd edition AD&D, I have gotten a much better look at the differences between so-called "Old School" gaming and Modern games. In recent years, there has been a greater push to have the game rules answer every question that could come up in a game. If a player want to have their character swing across a ravine and knock over an enemy, modern gaming theory states that there should be a specific rule mechanic to decide how the action occurs. The side effect of this sort of thinking is the, somewhat illogical, tendency to think that if there is not a rule for a particular action, then that action is not possible within the confines of the game. It is this mindset, I believe, that creates the objection that the current version of D&D is just a boardgame, or worse a tabletop MMORPG.

The opposite of this sort of theory occurs in older games. It was the norm that the DM was expected to adjudicate any situation that didn't fall within the written rules. With this expectation in mind, the designers seemed to feel that rules for specific corner cases were less necessary. The main difficulty is that this puts a much greater responsibility on the DM than they have in the more modern games. In modern games the DM can rely on the extensive rules system to help him decide events, but in older games this support and it corresponding limitations are much less prevelant.

After several years playing these modern games, I had no idea how much I had come to rely on the rules to support my running of the game. But after the first few sessions of my new 2nd edition AD&D game, I saw how much my (and my player's) reliance on those rules had hobbled our imaginations. My players stared at the playmat, spending their time counting squares of movement and concerning themselves with rules minutiae, rather than plunging themselves into the actions and motivations of their characters. The recognition was sobering.

So now I find myself trying to reverse this tendency. The best way that I have been able to do that is simply through example. It is the DM's responsibility to set the tone of the campaign, not only from a story point of view, but especially when it comes to the general feel of game play. If the DM finds himself hyper-focused on the rules, the players will naturally follow suit. However, if the DM can begin to open his imagination and recognize that the rules form a framework that he can lean on, rather than a box that constrains him, the players will begin to exersize their imaginations as well.

Now, I will not condemn anyone for playing the game that they want to play, but I think that this is the biggest issue with modern games. Between the general tendency of modern game design to focus on unifying rules sets, and the existance of internet forums to support a uniformity of application of those rules; the imagination is being forced to a secondary position in the hobby. It is the responsibility of the players and most especially the DM to fight against this tendency and keep the magic alive. It is not a difficult process, but it is one that requires us to look at the manner in which we play games and decide what is more important: the rules or our imaginations.