That’s an interesting point. maybe I should have used the word “unfashionable” rather than “outdated”. The reason I encourage students to keep away from things like Roll and Move is that games built on that kind of mechanic tend to be very light on choice (or even negate choice entirely), which tends to put players off these days.
There’s also the idea that when roll and moves as we know them today were at their most popular, they were being used as instructional tools (there was a ton of moral instruction games for children in the 19th century, and snakes and ladders began as a way of teaching hindu philosophies). The essential experience was to have a little fun while learning something, and most educational games these days weigh the game more heavily on choice and consequence than on mastery of the topic.
As I read that back to myself,I realize that there’s probably an interesting thesis to be written on how our love of individual choice and agency in modern game is a reflection of our own “everyone is free to do stuff” social values. though even games like The Royal Game of Ur introduces some pretty interesting choice and tactics in a roll and move game.
But yes, you should work on the game you want to play. On the other hand, if you’re looking for retro there’s probably ways to recreate that without cutting out player choice. As it is traditionally used, roll and move mechanics tend to create games that have no interesting choices and thus aren’t played by adolescents or adults.
Naturally, all of this is entirely my opinion - there’s not Right Way to decide what should and shouldn’t be in a game. If someone has a burning desire to design a roll and move game, they should do so. If they have a strong reason for using roll and move (they’ve got an essential experience that will come alive if they do, for example), and they’re not just using it because it’s easy, the game may well work. Xia, Legends of a Drifts System is a roll and move game, for example.