Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Grendel_Khan" data-source="post: 8591204" data-attributes="member: 7028554">There are some topics where I think this might be true. D&amp;D's larger pool can mean more edge cases to discuss, etc. But I don't think that's what's going on here, because so many other game are harder to quantify, in part because they're more open-ended. Traveller doesn't have anything approaching classes, or assumed weaponry or armor, so one group's approach to an encounter will be almost completely different from another's. A Delta Green adventure writer has no idea whether the agents are going in armed to the teeth, or are even dealing with the situation in a given way--maybe they set fire to the location and never go in, or tail the cultists to some other location that hasn't been mapped out. I think something weird happens when every encounter is assumed to be one where the PCs are going to go into that place right there and they're going to fight to the death, and it better be a &quot;satisfying&quot; fight but not a TPK, because no way are they gonna run, no chance, since...well, they know things are at least supposed to be balanced, so why would they ever consider running?I know I'm just getting into the well-worn balance gripe, but I feel like it's frankly ridiculous that it's such an established problem that someone like Colville thinks it needs addressing with the kind of measures that work for wargames and card games. Regardless of why it might be needed, if you can actually quantify an RPG that way, I'm genuinely not sure it's still an RPG.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Grendel_Khan, post: 8591204, member: 7028554"] There are some topics where I think this might be true. D&D's larger pool can mean more edge cases to discuss, etc. But I don't think that's what's going on here, because so many other game are harder to quantify, in part because they're more open-ended. Traveller doesn't have anything approaching classes, or assumed weaponry or armor, so one group's approach to an encounter will be almost completely different from another's. A Delta Green adventure writer has no idea whether the agents are going in armed to the teeth, or are even dealing with the situation in a given way--maybe they set fire to the location and never go in, or tail the cultists to some other location that hasn't been mapped out. I think something weird happens when every encounter is assumed to be one where the PCs are going to go into that place right there and they're going to fight to the death, and it better be a "satisfying" fight but not a TPK, because no way are they gonna run, no chance, since...well, they know things are at least supposed to be balanced, so why would they ever consider running? I know I'm just getting into the well-worn balance gripe, but I feel like it's frankly ridiculous that it's such an established problem that someone like Colville thinks it needs addressing with the kind of measures that work for wargames and card games. Regardless of why it might be needed, if you can actually quantify an RPG that way, I'm genuinely not sure it's still an RPG. [/QUOTE]

Verification