• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?

Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?


Plane Sailing

Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
earlier editions had situations where high rolls were good for somethings and bad for others.

I'm struggling to think of examples of this?

Every time you rolled a d20, you wanted high (rolling to hit, rolling saving throws).

I suppose in situations where you rolled %age dice (e.g. thieves skills) you were rolling low, but there was never a disconnect because you were trying to get under a percentage - and this continued into 3e unchanged anyway!.

Can you give some examples where a high d20 roll would be bad in an earlier edition?

Thanks!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Raven Crowking

First Post
Can you give some examples where a high d20 roll would be bad in an earlier edition?

You wanted to roll under an ability score in some cases. This appeared mainly in modules -- it wasn't an "official rule" per se, but it might have been incorporated into proficiencies (I would have to check to be certain).
 

Plane Sailing

Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
You wanted to roll under an ability score in some cases. This appeared mainly in modules -- it wasn't an "official rule" per se, but it might have been incorporated into proficiencies (I would have to check to be certain).

Such as?

I've normally got quite a good memory for rules, but I'm struggling to think of things from the 1e PHB (or DMG) (or OD&D) where this is the case, and I'm worried that my memory is failing me!
 

diaglo

Adventurer
I'm struggling to think of examples of this?

Every time you rolled a d20, you wanted high (rolling to hit, rolling saving throws).

I suppose in situations where you rolled %age dice (e.g. thieves skills) you were rolling low, but there was never a disconnect because you were trying to get under a percentage - and this continued into 3e unchanged anyway!.

Can you give some examples where a high d20 roll would be bad in an earlier edition?

Thanks!

well i think he was meaning the variety of dice. d20 you rolled high.

but say a d6 for surprise or not being surprised. or hear noise check for nonthief

or search for secret doors.

or open doors

edit: whereas you rolled high for init or damage
 

Raven Crowking

First Post
Such as?

I've normally got quite a good memory for rules, but I'm struggling to think of things from the 1e PHB (or DMG) (or OD&D) where this is the case, and I'm worried that my memory is failing me!

As I said, mainly modules....and the NWP rules didn't appear until OA, so they wouldn't be in the 1e PHB or DMG.

There were many 1e modules that suggested that a check be made by rolling under Strength in particular......One or two for Dexterity as well. I haven't read it in quite some time, but I believe one Dex example might occur in White Plume Mountain, when the PCs are crossing the hanging wooden discs over spuming lava to get to the vampire's lair.


RC
 

FireLance

Legend
Such as?

I've normally got quite a good memory for rules, but I'm struggling to think of things from the 1e PHB (or DMG) (or OD&D) where this is the case, and I'm worried that my memory is failing me!
Like RC mentioned above, non-weapon proficiency checks (and less officially, ability score checks) were the main instances where you would roll a d20 and hope to get a low score. NWPs got incorporated into the core rules in 2E.
 

ggroy

First Post
Can you give some examples where a high d20 roll would be bad in an earlier edition?

Not an official rule, but in many of my 1E games we used a house ruled skill check system where one rolled a d20 less than or equal a particular ability stat for a pass.

Another case of a houserule we used was for low level wizards being allowed to use a particular combat spell unlimited. For example, a common choice was magic missile. To prevent this unlimited magic missile from being too powerful, we required a d20 roll of less than or equal to the magic user's INT stat for the magic missile to hit. So even with an INT of 18, there was still a 10% chance of failure.
 

diaglo

Adventurer
Like RC mentioned above, non-weapon proficiency checks (and less officially, ability score checks) were the main instances where you would roll a d20 and hope to get a low score. NWPs got incorporated into the core rules in 2E.

they added NWP from the beginning.

but for 1edADnD they got a boost with the Dungeoneers and Wilderness Survival Guides circa 1985.
 

Jack7

First Post
I'm sure I'm not saying anything that already hasn't been said before, since I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

But I'd say no, absoltueltely not. Not in the modern sense of "balance" anyway.

Balance is a contemporaneous preoccupation of modern, technologically-obsessed Geeks, but it was not of the Nerds who originally designed and played the game.

The earlier editions of the game were not concurred with "technical matters" nearly as intently as with the game being interesting and heroic. (It's sort of analogous to the difference between the type of science necessary to send a man to the moon for the very first time, versus the type of science necessary to safely complete the 300th Shuttle mission in LEO.)

Ask yourself this question, go back and look at those character "classes" in earlier editions and ask yourself objectively if they seem balanced to you at all, say, compared to 3E, 4E or other modern, commonly accepted ideas and ideals of RPG balance?

Of course they weren't, and neither was the game itself, as a whole.

That's because earlier editions of the game were not the work-result of a committee of Geeks, but of a small group of Nerds. And often of individual Nerds.

The Geek's first preoccupations in design (in practically any kind of design) are process and outcome (and how do you rigidly and purposely control these aspects of function in design, or put another way, how do you discourage the unforeseen and unplanned during operations?), the Nerd's first priorities are flexibility and innovation (and how do you encourage, rather than discourage, these functional aspects of design during actual operations, or put another way, how do you encourage innovation during ordinary operations?).

And that's a totally different set of priorities and outlook upon the world.
It's the difference between Corporate Strategy (which I have nothing against, as it is often a valuable exercise and method of operation) and Individual Genius (which is far les concerned with refinement and process, and far more interested in creativity and originality).

Of course to be absolutely accurate in discussing these emitters one would have to develop exact an exact definition for the term Balance, and that definition would have to both define Balance generally speaking, and allow for any variation or alteration in actual meaning over the passage of time, and due to modifications in use..

Something that could be precisely developed in say, an academic or theoretical paper, but I doubt you're gonna see much agreement on over the public internet.
 

Raven Crowking

First Post
For the design goals of 1e, 1e is balanced. It is woefully unbalanced for the design goals of 3e or 4e.

For the design goals of 3e or 4e, those games are balanced. They are woefully unbalanced for the design goals of 1e.


RC
 

Remove ads

Top