Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 4872978" data-attributes="member: 307">No, there probably isn't. I think that this, like the incredibly opaque 1e initiative system, the unarmed combat system, and several other things, is an artifact of the haphazard development of the original AD&D game. Game elements seem to have often been introduced that were cumbersome and didn't account for other game elements either because the person designing them didn't think about the impact of the thing they added, or because the person desinging them didn't know about the other game elements.There are multiple rules that Gygax has stated that he was convinced to include something in the books and regretted it. Often times, this admission was accompanied by a simpler system to replace the one that conflicts with other rules and is overly complicated, or simply a recommendation to drop the rule altogether. Gygax has stated explicitly that he never played with the training rules. I interpret the design of the modules he wrote (and which were approved under his tenure at the helm of TSR, and which thuerefore set the tone for all subsequent 1e modules) to have been made with this understanding.I think the answer to these questions is: yes and yes.Which is why I think RCs objections to Q's module analysis on the grounds that training is not accounted for are simply not particularly convincing. Gygax didn't use the training rules. Almost nobody appears to have used them, and many of those that did appear to have seriously modified them to make the onerous requirements much less onerous.</blockquote>

Verification