Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?

[Hussar]

Oh, and by the way, Raven Crowking, I suggest you peruse a dictionary on Emergent Properties. An emergent propery cannot be predicted before the process is completed, and thus, by definition, an emergent property cannot be designed into a system. If it is emergent, it is, again, by definition, unexpected.

So, if balance, in your opinion, in 1e, is an emergent property, Gygax wasn't designing for it. He achieved it as a completely unexpected result from elements that are unrelated to game balance.

Now, I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean.

Me, I think I'll stand by what I said earlier that I don't believe that 1e was "designed" in the way we generally mean the term. It was a very organic effort which resulted in a game. Elements were bolted on ad hoc and piecemeal until a game was created.

3e was designed. 4e was perhaps overdesigned. 1e evolved.

 

[Ariosto]

The a priori probabilities of success assume PCs with a reasonably good grasp of combat tactics. Bad choices over the table can certainly spell disaster for a group.

I have seen one PC casualty from "friendly fire". I am also sure that, the first time I DMed, after having played 4e only a handful of times, I used less than optimal tactics for the monsters and thereby gave the players an easier time. However, when an encounter is calculated to use only X% of a party's resources in 4e, I think one can give that a high confidence -- and feel free to "take off the gloves".

The best session I had was one tough encounter followed by another that was tougher just basically ... and more so because two guys left ... and they were heavy hitters of just the sort we needed. We chose a reckless course of action (basically setting ourselves up for ambush) in a campaign that might not go past the "redlined" CRs, but doesn't shy away from using the full spectrum. There are several DMs, and the one running that night is maybe a bit tougher than the others.

Anyway, it seemed 4e players don't know reverse. Nobody quite knew what we faced, and we found out the hard way. We needed missile firepower, but got ourselves stuck on tar babies. It looked like a near-TPK, as one character after another made a desperate attempt at rescue instead of running away. The critical turning point came down to someone else succeeding with the same daily power that had failed me. So much hinged on a toss of the dice!

The gamble turned the tide, and 4e characters are nothing if not resilient.

Darned tough baddies + foolishness atop foolishness = one thrilling fight (in a game system that usually loses my interest pretty quickly).

 

[Raven Crowking]

Oh, and by the way, Raven Crowking, I suggest you peruse a dictionary on Emergent Properties. An emergent propery cannot be predicted before the process is completed, and thus, by definition, an emergent property cannot be designed into a system. If it is emergent, it is, again, by definition, unexpected.

So, if balance, in your opinion, in 1e, is an emergent property, Gygax wasn't designing for it. He achieved it as a completely unexpected result from elements that are unrelated to game balance.

So, you are arguing that one cannot plan for a living child?

So, you are arguing that one cannot do design work for computer AI?

So, you are arguing that one cannot develop or change a language?

In philosophy, systems theory and science, emergence is the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions. Emergent properties can obviously be planned for, and are obviously not always unexpected.

What cannot be deteremined ahead of time is the shape that will emerge. Thus, one can plan large-scale architecture knowing that useage will create naturally emergent pathways, and then pave those pathways. The architect knows that pathways will appear. He knows how to react when those pathways appear. In all cases, the plan is to have pathways.

What the plan isn't is to force those pathways into a predetermined box.

And, game balance is an emergent property, no matter how you slice it. "Emergence is the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions." The 4e designers simply decided to try to force the pathways they thought you should use. That those pathways are useable is as clear a demonstration that emergence can be planned for as is any of my children, or the BOIDS program, but ultimately WotC can no more design "balance" than Gygax could. Balance happens at the table.

Again, you need to study a topic before you try to argue from expert opinion.



RC

 

[Plane Sailing]

So to *try* and drag this back somewhere vaguely closer to the original topic, would or could a 4e-style skill challenge system work in a 1e-style game, and would its presence make the game more balanced or less?

I'm not sure it'd fit at all, myself, balanced or not.

The nearest we've ever come to a skill system in our 1e games was to give each character a d10 roll to see how naturally good they are at three very basic skills: swimming, boating, and riding; with minor modification for race. These rolls are mostly used to help flesh out a character, or to gauge how much help/hindrance someone is likely to be when crewing a boat or crossing a deep stream.

Lanefan

All skill challenge discussion in the forked thread please

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/269686-forked-skill-challenges.html

 

[Plane Sailing]

Again, you need to study a topic before you try to argue from expert opinion.

Make your argument without attacking the person, please.

 

[Hussar]

/edit

Bardolph says it better than I do. Well done him.

 

[bardolph]

Darned tough baddies + foolishness atop foolishness = one thrilling fight.

This is a good thing, I hope.

And, game balance is an emergent property, no matter how you slice it. "Emergence is the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions." The 4e designers simply decided to try to force the pathways they thought you should use. That those pathways are useable is as clear a demonstration that emergence can be planned for as is any of my children, or the BOIDS program, but ultimately WotC can no more design "balance" than Gygax could. Balance happens at the table.

Right, and wrong.

The game balance that happens at the table is an emergent property.

The game balance that is designed into the rules is not an emergent property.

Also realize that 4e has orders of magnitude more playtesting behind it than 1e.

 

[Bullgrit]

I bet we could have an argument over whether paper-rock-scissors is a balanced system.

Bullgrit

 

[howandwhy99]

I bet we could have an argument over whether paper-rock-scissors is a balanced system.

Bullgrit

Yeah, rock beats everything in that game. What's the point?

Also, I just found a note on what balance is in one of the old modules. B4 to be exact:

balance. A balance is an instrument used for weighing. It has two
small pans hanging from either end of a balancing crossbar. When
equal weights are placed in both pans, the crossbar will be level.

 

[Hussar]

I've heard a nice quote about balance as it relates to rock-scissors-paper:

Rock: Memo to referees: Nerf paper, scissors is fine.​