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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5565141" data-attributes="member: 82106">Meh, I'm going to have to say I disagree, at least in the context of this particular topic about Mearls' reflections on the thief.Lets illustrate with an example of 3 systems, core OD&D (pre greyhawk, so no thief at all), 1e AD&D, and 4e D&D. The rules in question (stuff rogues can do) is roughly as follows:OD&D - there are no rules for these things except possibly ability checks.1e AD&D - there are crappy rules for these things which actually make it hard to run them and make rogues pretty worthless in most situations.4e AD&D - there are generalized rules for these things, plus page 42.In OD&D the situation was perfectly acceptable. You could climb, hide, sneak, etc. It was up to the DM to decide exactly how it worked, but these activities WERE "thinking beyond the rules" inherently. In 1e AD&D things got worse. Climbing, hiding, and sneaking were no longer outside the rules, they were just lame rules that made it so you were totally discouraged from doing these things. Mike's "enjoyment of thinking outside the box" is thus essentially no different than it would have been in OD&D, except the things he'd have been doing in that game actually made the most sense and he only didn't do them in 1e because the rules took them away.In 4e AD&D you have a sort of in-between situation. Sneaking, climbing, or hiding is no longer "outside the box" as it is covered by the rules. However it is covered in a reasonable way that lets any character try it and makes it a viable option. You can still think outside the box, just as Mike did in 1e with his thief, but again it makes more sense because you're doing it when the situation warrants, not when your sad chance of success forces you to even if logically just sneaking would be more intelligent.Which is the better set of rules? Depending on your taste and theory of gaming it could be OD&D or it could be 4e D&D, but it will NEVER be the way 1e AD&D did it. That was the WORST OF ALL WORLDS, and illustrates why it really was a fairly poor game design in many respects (and the thief was actually one of the real butt-ends of AD&D). 2e made a bit of progress in this area, but not much. So, I basically respond to your comment with "If a more minimalist design can be better, then go all the way. Half measures are the worst of all worlds."</blockquote>

Verification