Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 2779148" data-attributes="member: 3586">Indeed. And, believe it or not, I do that all the time in my 3e games!However, there is a fundamental problem with making things up, and it is at the heart of the difference between original D&amp;D and AD&amp;D.That problem is this: lack of portability. I'm going to give an extreme example. In your game, I come across an Ogre and Mind Blast it. You assume that the Ogre has an average Wisdom (10) and calculate the effects as such. So, let's say my Mind Blast is effective 8 times out 10.Then I move to my friend's game. In their game, they assume the Ogre's are surprisingly wise (19!) and calculate the effects as such. In this game, my Mind Blast is effective 2 times out of 10.Two distinctly different outcomes in what is the same situation? This isn't good. It doesn't promote good play - which I define here as using the abilities of your character to best effectiveness.There's a problem here - and when you multiply it by the number of games and the number of such judgement calls being made, there's a vast difference in what people are calling &quot;D&amp;D&quot;. With AD&amp;D, Gary Gygax standardised the rules much more than was the case in oD&amp;D. With that, it become much easier to move from one game to another, and especially for tournament play.Being creative and being able to make rulings on the fly is essential to being a good DM, but the fundamentals must be covered for players to be able to know what to expect when they move from one game to another.How many of the fundamentals must be covered is up for debate, of course!Cheers!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MerricB, post: 2779148, member: 3586"] Indeed. And, believe it or not, I do that all the time in my 3e games! However, there is a fundamental problem with making things up, and it is at the heart of the difference between original D&D and AD&D. That problem is this: lack of portability. I'm going to give an extreme example. In your game, I come across an Ogre and Mind Blast it. You assume that the Ogre has an average Wisdom (10) and calculate the effects as such. So, let's say my Mind Blast is effective 8 times out 10. Then I move to my friend's game. In their game, they assume the Ogre's are surprisingly wise (19!) and calculate the effects as such. In this game, my Mind Blast is effective 2 times out of 10. Two distinctly different outcomes in what is the same situation? This isn't good. It doesn't promote good play - which I define here as using the abilities of your character to best effectiveness. There's a problem here - and when you multiply it by the number of games and the number of such judgement calls being made, there's a vast difference in what people are calling "D&D". With AD&D, Gary Gygax standardised the rules much more than was the case in oD&D. With that, it become much easier to move from one game to another, and especially for tournament play. Being creative and being able to make rulings on the fly is essential to being a good DM, but the fundamentals must be covered for players to be able to know what to expect when they move from one game to another. How many of the fundamentals must be covered is up for debate, of course! Cheers! [/QUOTE]

Verification