I suspect that different systems work well for different groups too, depending on their particular vision and definition of Old School. My group, for example, found that 3.5e D&D didn’t give that old school vibe particularly well, whereas 4e D&D does. I’m pretty sure that goes counter to many other groups’ experiences.
Every rule system has a flavour. It imparts a certain mood or tone to the game. For example, play a swashbuckling high adventure using 3e D&D, and exactly the same adventure using GURPS, and they’re feel very different. That’s the rules affecting the gamestyle, right there.
The key is in finding a system that’s a flavour you like :D
– greywulf 2009-05-24 20:28 UTC
Finding a system indeed. My main motivation has always been to use a rules-light system that still allowed for the D&D experience. That was what attracted me to M20.
The question of “D&D experience” leads to the other big topic of “what is D&D to you” – endless! One example of the wide variety out there:
3d6 chargen. Wandering monsters. Save or die. Rust monsters eating my sword. Level draining. Random treasure (possibly no treasure). Dave the Game may be right and what I’m talking about is a ‘playstyle’ issue, but the playstyle that I learned from D&D is no longer one supported by D&D. That’s why it looks generational to me. – Jeff Rients 
I find this interesting because it is, for the most part, a list of those things that I found most senseless and annoying as both a player and a GM in past editions. – Scott Schimmel 
– AlexSchroeder 2009-05-25 06:39 UTC
Thank you. This post and the link to the definition of affordance neatly explains something I’ve been groping at since I tried 4e.
– Jeff Rients 2009-05-26 13:15 UTC