Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?

[Hussar]

Just a further point that occured to me.

How is it realistic that the giants in G1 would actually flee to G2? I mean, one, IIRC, only the Hill Giant leader knows about the secret room with the magic gate, so, if he dies in the opening encounter, could they actually retreat. But, also, there is the issue of would the hill giants actually go there? I mean, how likely is it that the fire giants, upon seeing hill giants laden with their treasure suddenly popping up through the gate that they're NOT supposed to use, will welcome them with open arms and not kill them on sight?

Plus, how realistic is it that the hill giants, not the brightest of creatures in the first place, will not panic after being hurt enough to consider retreating, but rather will remain calm and tactical and gather up all their treasure most carefully, leaving little or nothing behind, then proceed through the gate that they're not supposed to use in the first place?

Since when do hill giants suddenly turn into special forces members, keeping a cool head at all times and make the perfect tactical decision?

How is that remotely more realistic or believable than the PC's mow down the giants who might scatter to the four winds carrying only what they could grab on the way through? (Of course, that ignores the fact that the PC's could pretty easily TRACK the hill giants down if they wanted to.)

I suppose if the DM is taking the position that the players MUST NOT get the treasure at any cost, this is a good idea, but, I gotta admit, not a DM I want to play with.

 

[billd91]

Just a further point that occured to me.

How is it realistic that the giants in G1 would actually flee to G2? I mean, one, IIRC, only the Hill Giant leader knows about the secret room with the magic gate, so, if he dies in the opening encounter, could they actually retreat. But, also, there is the issue of would the hill giants actually go there? I mean, how likely is it that the fire giants, upon seeing hill giants laden with their treasure suddenly popping up through the gate that they're NOT supposed to use, will welcome them with open arms and not kill them on sight?

The module assumes that most of them won't flee to G2 (or to G3 in the case of the frost giants). But the leadership may if it gets the chance and is the one most likely to take as much loot as possible (giant leaders being what they are). The hill giants are expected to go down in a disorganized fashion. They're partying after all...
But would the fire giants welcome fleeing giants arriving? Why not? They're supposed to be working together and the fire giants are both the most organized and disciplined as well as with advisers closest at hand.

The real risk of retreat is when the PCs have to make multiple forays to clear out the giants. In G2 and G3, the likelihood of that is considerable.

 

[billd91]

Hang on, I thought good role playing meant you had to train for only one week. It wasn't until you started screwing up that you got punished. Are you saying that you were forcing your players to spend that much cash for superior play?

That's the rule. Superior = 2 weeks. Exceptional at 1 week is a step above superior. The rules are designed to bleed a lot of cash out of the PCs for leveling up.

But, one question though. Why would you not get full value for selling your magic weapons? Or is this another rule I am unfamiliar with? I didn't know that there were any rules for magic weapons getting cheaper to sell.

Check out the section in the DMG under Duties, Excises, Fees, Tariffs, Taxes, Tithes, and Tolls. You could typically expect to lose 5-10% of the value of any treasure used in an economic transaction. More in particularly troublesome places you may find yourself in like Suderham.

 

[MerricB]

That's the rule. Superior = 2 weeks. Exceptional at 1 week is a step above superior. The rules are designed to bleed a lot of cash out of the PCs for leveling up.

One of the biggest problems I have with the training rules is that Gary Gygax admitted that he usually didn't use them. Indeed, for many AD&D modules, there will be no opportunity to use them!

Can you imagine taking 2-3 weeks out of the middle of Cult of the Reptile God to train whilst the cultists advance their plans? Even in the Temple of Elemental Evil it seems a long time to be gone.

Every time I've tried using training rules, I've quickly abandoned them because they just don't work once you move into games that have events reacting to the heroes. They work fine in the dungeon-based campaign where the heroes go into the dungeon many times and there isn't a sinister force plotting to overtake the world, but drop a hint of story into the game and watch training become completely inconvenient.

It should be noted that once money is gained in AD&D is somewhat irrelevant. Yes, you want it to gain and pay henchmen and later to build your stronghold, but it's not like 3E where you'd be spending it on magic items.

Cheers!

 

[Raven Crowking]

But, isn't it funny how the song has now changed from "The players will never find a majority of the treasure" to "The players will never get that treasure back to civilization". These goalposts just keep moving further and further back.

Nah, the goalposts haven't changed. If you go back to the Q thread, the problem with the assumptions Q made was that the PCs would recover the majority of treasure.

Recovery of treasure consists of two parts: 1. Locating said treasure (further subdivided into dealing with guarding creatures, dealing with traps, recognizing treasure for what it is, and, very often, determining whether it is worth carrying out based on its value vs. bulk, as well as some things I am undoubtably forgetting) and 2. Getting said treasure home (which, according to the DMG, includes dealing with any taxes, bribes, etc., as well as encumberance and monsters/characters who want a slice of the pie).

Because I was willing, for the sake of argument, to grant the first part does not imply that the goalposts have changed. It is merely to demonstrate that, even were it granted, you would still have a job ahead of you.

I am pointing out that your dismissal of one roadblock doesn't come close to fully eliminating the problem. I am not saying that your dismissal of that roadblock is in any way correct. Indeed, as I pointed out, the winners of the Origins tournament - the people who did best playing the game as it was intended to be played - found it a significant roadblock indeed!

BTW, if the DM says "You find a bag of holding" every time you do (or any time you do), that DM is incompetent. What a portable hole and multiple bags of holding really imply is a good chance that a bag will eventually be put into the hole, and your 10 cubic feet of treasure will be lost.

Again, if the DM doesn't use the rules, it is not the fault of the rules that he encounters problems. Your Monty Haulism was not due to the modules.

This is rather like saying that 4e sucks because the combat encounters aren't balanced, because I am not using the tools provided. It is a non-starter of an argument.



RC


EDIT: And because Mr. Gygax was experienced enough to ignore certain rules doesn't mean that you should if you are not getting the same results. This is no different than learning to write effectively -- stick to the rules of grammar until you know them well enough to break them effectively. Jumping to "breaking the rules" because you can't be bothered to learn them first, or because James Joyce can get away with stream-of-consciousness, is not the sign of a competent writer.....or DM.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Since when do hill giants suddenly turn into special forces members, keeping a cool head at all times and make the perfect tactical decision?

Do you have a copy of this module available to you, or are you in need of the relevant parts?

 

[Raven Crowking]

One of the biggest problems I have with the training rules is that Gary Gygax admitted that he usually didn't use them. Indeed, for many AD&D modules, there will be no opportunity to use them!

As was pointed out in Q's thread, as another example of why all XP would not be likely to be recovered.

"Do we stop to train, or do we stop these guys now?" is one of those things that AD&D 1e players have to decide. The game wasn't designed to be a rocket to 20th level.


RC

 

[Keefe the Thief]

And because Mr. Gygax was experienced enough to ignore certain rules doesn't mean that you should if you are not getting the same results. This is no different than learning to write effectively -- stick to the rules of grammar until you know them well enough to break them effectively. Jumping to "breaking the rules" because you can't be bothered to learn them first, or because James Joyce can get away with stream-of-consciousness, is not the sign of a competent writer.....or DM.

I don´t know. That would mean whe have to condense what we learned from this thread by saying "AD&D wasn´t designed with game balance in mind, but with elitism"

 

[Raven Crowking]

I don´t know. That would mean whe have to condense what we learned from this thread by saying "AD&D wasn´t designed with game balance in mind, but with elitism"

Well, insofar as knowing how to speak or write well enough to get paid%2

 

[Hussar]

Do you have a copy of this module available to you, or are you in need of the relevant parts?

Well, considering that Bill91 agrees with me, that the giants actually won't flee, perhaps some rereading wouldn't hurt. Just saying.

BTW, if the DM says "You find a bag of holding" every time you do (or any time you do), that DM is incompetent. What a portable hole and multiple bags of holding really imply is a good chance that a bag will eventually be put into the hole, and your 10 cubic feet of treasure will be lost.

Umm, how hard is it to figure out that this hankerchief I've got is a 10x10x10 space? Or that the bag I just picked up is bigger on the inside than the outside?

I'll buy you might not know that the sword is a +1 sword (unless it glows), but a Bag of Holding? How incompetent are your players?

Besides that, we just piled everything in one big pile and hit it with detect magic. When a bag glows, well, you've really only got two choices by and large - bag of holding or devouring. A quick bit of testing generally reveals it.

So, no, not once in any D&D game I've ever played has a bag of holding been unintentionally placed inside another extra-dimensional space. Intentionally? Well, that's a whole 'nother story.

But, at the end of the day, I think you're arguing in a circle. A good player, with good player skills, will get the treasure. That's what defines, according to you, a good player. A good DM will prevent the player from getting the treasure, again, according to you.

So, if you have good players, you automatically must have a bad DM - because a good DM would never let the players get the treasure back to town. If you have bad players, you automatically have a good DM. Funny how that definition becomes a trifle self serving no?