Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pickaxe" data-source="post: 8645899" data-attributes="member: 10812">No, I did not read all 1824 posts, so apologies if this is ground already covered. I wanted to note that I think the earliest editions of D&D are the most simulationist, as are the war games that spawned them. Miniature historical war gamers typically have two goals when they play: reenact a battle in a historically plausible way and see if they can do better than Napoleon, or Hannibal, or whatever military leader was at the battle. It is more important to these gamers that the rules accurately simulate real battle tactics than that they are better than their opponents in using the rules to defeat them.This mindset is evident and dominant in early editions, including the early years of AD&D. The 3d6 ability score model was chosen because it generated a normal (bell curve) distribution, which meant that a population generated through this method would have a random but normally distributed set of ability scores. “Balance” in 1e is (initially) about how common different classes are in the game; fighters, thieves, magic-users, and clerics are ubiquitous, because they only need a minimum of 9 in their primary stat, but rangers and paladins are rare, because the former needs two 13s and two 14s, and the latter needs two 9s, a 12, a 13, and a 17. (All of these need to be in specific abilities, which matters if you are using a method that rolls abilities in order.) Rangers and paladins basically add extra abilities to the fighter, so they are clearly more powerful; they are just harder to come by through random rolls.The examples of play in these early editions also illustrate the emphasis on simulation. Most of the play is not rolling dice but players describing how their characters interact with the world, literally poking and prodding it to see what happens. The same is true for descriptions of Gygax’s early a games, and Tomb of Horrors would illustrate this as well. In fact, if I were to characterize simulationism, I would say it prioritizes interaction with the world over interaction with your character sheet (or with the game engine) and interaction with other players and NPCs.Even before 2e, there is a sea change in the game. In Unearthed Arcana, there is an ability score generation method based on the player choosing what class they want to play. If you want to play a paladin, for example, you roll 9 dice for your Charisma and choose the best three, or just give yourself a 17 if the rolls are too low. This, IMO, is definitely a shift into gamism, where the priority is on players interacting with the game rules and building engines with them. This particular example has the intention of making all aspects of the game engine available to all players, rather than filtering them through the random ability score generator. 2e takes this further: in 1e most of the rules are in the DMG, but in 2e almost all of the rules move to the PHB, making them accessible to players and facilitating engine-building. 2e also leans heavily into expanding player options through splat books and kits, but not necessarily with balance in mind. Later editions are more concerned with balance and, importantly, PC durability, so we see things like standard arrays, max starting HP, and average HP per level, not to mention classes where there is an increasing expectation that they will be “equal” in some way, be that power or how enjoyable they are to play.—Axe</blockquote>

Verification