Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?

[Garthanos]

I think AD&D had very few choices in combat so there is and was a habit of emphasizing that one significant choice (whether to join the fight or not). When it becomes the defining feature of "superior play" I think it has become over blown .. why isnt presenting your characters actions in a unique and interesting fashion so that the other players can really visualize what you are doing "superior" play.

 

[Garthanos]

Oh, dear. "The game remains the same." But it's a new, improved Fiat, isn't it? Bigger tail fins, more chrome?

Actually yes... it does still have the benefits of the old way... did you want them removed? It also has far more guidelines and presents the concepts of multistage tasks in a mechanical way.

 

[Garthanos]

What's wrong with just getting a charisma bonus the same as you get a strength or dexterity bonus for attacking with a weapon?

So how much influence do i get per attempt at persuasion and do I get bonuses depending on the gambit I use? And while im chosing my parley methods can I choose things about which I am inspired and get bonuses on those? How much discipline do I have to overcome so the guard will let us pass? Do I get something like the armor type versus weapon type tables based on my verbal strategies?

 

[Garthanos]

DM fiat is, in my experience, a tool. It can be used well or badly. If I have crunched the numbers and set up my abilites such to execute a plan well and it is fiat-failed, then this is probably a bad use of it. If I am setting a situation up to deliberately fail (maybe its a appropriate to my characterisation) and it fiat-succeds, this is also a probably a bad use of it.

DM fiat is an awesome tool in the hands of an awesome DM (doing something he knows fairly well) and the worst possible one in the hands of many many more DM's. DM Fiat can manage normal melee combat better than just about every game mechanic I have seen so far.

 

[Garthanos]

I think you're making too much of the Candyland quote... and yet not enough.

Candyland is a game with absolutely no challenge.

How many adult games are challenge free? and aside from exercising ones arrogance why does one compare your game to a childs game?

I have known way too many folk whose desire to roleplay has so little to do with the types of challenges that float the gygaxian boat and some of them exceed expectations and contribute to the game to a degree I cant even measure... lets just say his ideas of "superior" players I find primitive narrow and condescendingly presented.

 

[Ariosto]

DM fiat is exactly the recommended procedure in 4e! "Set the complexity based on how significant you want the challenge to be."

The only distinction Gimby drew was that in AD&D the odds are based on the DM's judgment of the players' plans. That is indeed the advice given. It is also true that the instructions for a skill challenge in 4e start a priori with the DM specifying the overwhelmingly decisive factors: The DCs and numbers of rolls.

By definition, "when an obstacle takes only one roll to resolve, it's not a challenge." Ergo, neither is resort to no rolls at all. It requires a minimum of two rolls to fail a challenge, at least four to pass.

The DM also determines which skills apply. Given the standard, that is relatively trivial in terms of probability variation. "Give some thought to which skills you select here, keeping in mind the goal of involving all the players in the action." Note that it is DM selection of factors -- not awaiting a player plan -- that takes priority, and that "the action" is defined as making those dice-rolls.

There are several pages of advice, quite excellently suited to the stated goal -- and to the mathematically evident goal of making outcomes conform to an expected distribution. The challenge procedure meshes with the character construction rules in the PHB and with the other encounter, experience and "page 42" material in the DMG.

Might a DM allow a player plan to "spoil" a challenge? Perhaps, but if there is any mention of the possibility of aborting the procedure then it is well buried. What is suggested is that, "if a player wants to use a skill you didn't identify as a primary skill in the challenge, however, then the DC for using that secondary skill is hard. ... In addition, a secondary skill can never be used by a single character more than once in a challenge."

Love it or not, the character of the undertaking is very hard to mistake. The clear methodology is not surprisingly in keeping with the explicitly stated ends. The 4e DMG is no anthology of abstruse High Gygaxian!

 

[Garthanos]

Garthanos, you are obviously talking about a different game, with a different idea.

Amnesia Ariosto...(conflating an earlier version that lacked even the handwaving to allow other sources of xp) combined with actual play where no DM i knew used that bit you quoted to allow experience points for accomplishing things.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

At the back of the 1e DMG, Gary Gygax admonished the DM to consider what is best for the game first, best for an individual campaign second, and best for any given player(s) third. As time has gone on, I am more and more of the mind that Gygax knew what he was talking about.

More rules over rulings may be good for individual players, or individual campaigns (those with mediocre or poor GMs), but I don't think that it is what is best for the game.

Again, this is heavy YMMV and IMHO country I am walking in here!


RC

While, on the other hand, I think this is absolutely backwards. IMO (and only my opinion) the Gm should be focused on the players first, the campaign second and what happens to be "good for the game" third. If attention to what is good for the game is primary in the minds of the GM, then the Gm must constantly be tweaking, adjusting and making sure that the game runs smoothly.

In my mind, putting that responsibility on the heads of the GM is just lazy design. "We can't be bothered coming up with something that works most of the time, so, here's something that works, kinda/sorta, it's now up to you to keep it running."

Personally, I'd much prefer a system that works the majority of the time, so it can run in the background and not need constant patching and adjustment, necessitating a very long learning curve to find out what works and what doesn't.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I think AD&D had very few choices in combat so there is and was a habit of emphasizing that one significant choice (whether to join the fight or not). When it becomes the defining feature of "superior play" I think it has become over blown .. why isnt presenting your characters actions in a unique and interesting fashion so that the other players can really visualize what you are doing "superior" play.

It is curious that would say that AD&D had few choices. Does everything need to be a pre-defined mapped hotkey in order to qualify as a choice.

Every choice does not need to be of equal power or value to remain a choice. AD&D being a roleplaying game featured several different roles. Combat was not the forte of every role so why would it be suprising that characters of lesser combative ability don't have the same options open to them as the more militant members of the party.

Damnit Jim I'm a doctor!!

So how much influence do i get per attempt at persuasion and do I get bonuses depending on the gambit I use? And while im chosing my parley methods can I choose things about which I am inspired and get bonuses on those? How much discipline do I have to overcome so the guard will let us pass? Do I get something like the armor type versus weapon type tables based on my verbal strategies?

Typical mechanical obsessive gimmieitis.
Everything is me me me. What do I get? How much do I get? When do I get what? When does X apply?

I hate to get all Yoda on this hyper-obsessiveness but it has to be said of players like this:

Never his mind on where he was! What he was doing!!

If players spent half the time thinking about the situation and approaches as they did doing mental mechanical gymnastics then the game would probably be a lot more engaging.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Personally, I'd much prefer a system that works the majority of the time, so it can run in the background and not need constant patching and adjustment, necessitating a very long learning curve to find out what works and what doesn't.

Hey, it's straight up edition warring! Folks, please use this post as an object lesson in what not to write here - and please don't respond to it. Thanks. ~ Piratecat

Really? I don't think 4E would be for you.

Welcome to 4th Edition (build 4.013222)

Patch notes:
Fixed persistent bug occasionally leading to play without die rolls

Replaced the only 2 interesting magic items with appropriate drek

Fixed bug which allowed class X to produce 4.5 more dpr than class Y when activating [up,down,shift,shift,alt]

Watch for build 4.013223 next week.