Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lady Dragon" data-source="post: 5033996" data-attributes="member: 3453"><p>I voted Other. I don't really think That Gary really understood game balance the way we do today. Especially back in 77, 78 when he was writing it. Game balance wasn't really an issue like it is today. Also I think he was inexperienced and naive enough so that he believed that most people would follow the rules as written ( even though there is evidence that he and his group did not always do so themselves). So even though the 4 main classes are somewhat balanced if you take the long veiw of it into account, with magic-users weak early and very powerful late. Obviously the other classes were superior but hard to roll up if you followed the rule of strict 3d6 for each attribute no exceptions.</p><p></p><p>However, the hard restrictions on non-humans to their level advancments show that he did take balance into account he felt that their special abilities made them more powerful so he restricted their levels in most classes and restricted what classes they could become.</p><p></p><p>So while it is obvious that he did take Game balance into account in some ways in other ways he obviously ignored it.</p><p></p><p>I have long had a theory that what made 3rd edition so special was it was the first edition to acheived game balance by addition instead of subtraction. Gary used subtraction. The non human races had special abilities so he had to subtract from them to achieve balance, by resticting there class choices and level advancement. Paladins could do eveything that fighters could do plus cast spells and turn undead so he had to make it hard to be one and put other sometimes unreasonable restrictions on them. In fact a lot of the unreasonable rules and restrictions from first edition were because of game balance.</p><p></p><p>But in 3rd edition they used addition. instead of taking something away from non-human characters to make up for the their special abilities they added abilities to humans extra feats and skills) Fighters were no longer just ordinary they got extra abilities (Feats) that Paladins didn't have.</p><p></p><p>So basically Gary was counting on the roll of the dice to restrict just anyone from playing the premium classes not realizing they most players and DM's would fudge to rolls so that they could play the class that they wanted. It is after all a game and it is about fun so why not.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lady Dragon, post: 5033996, member: 3453"] I voted Other. I don't really think That Gary really understood game balance the way we do today. Especially back in 77, 78 when he was writing it. Game balance wasn't really an issue like it is today. Also I think he was inexperienced and naive enough so that he believed that most people would follow the rules as written ( even though there is evidence that he and his group did not always do so themselves). So even though the 4 main classes are somewhat balanced if you take the long veiw of it into account, with magic-users weak early and very powerful late. Obviously the other classes were superior but hard to roll up if you followed the rule of strict 3d6 for each attribute no exceptions. However, the hard restrictions on non-humans to their level advancments show that he did take balance into account he felt that their special abilities made them more powerful so he restricted their levels in most classes and restricted what classes they could become. So while it is obvious that he did take Game balance into account in some ways in other ways he obviously ignored it. I have long had a theory that what made 3rd edition so special was it was the first edition to acheived game balance by addition instead of subtraction. Gary used subtraction. The non human races had special abilities so he had to subtract from them to achieve balance, by resticting there class choices and level advancement. Paladins could do eveything that fighters could do plus cast spells and turn undead so he had to make it hard to be one and put other sometimes unreasonable restrictions on them. In fact a lot of the unreasonable rules and restrictions from first edition were because of game balance. But in 3rd edition they used addition. instead of taking something away from non-human characters to make up for the their special abilities they added abilities to humans extra feats and skills) Fighters were no longer just ordinary they got extra abilities (Feats) that Paladins didn't have. So basically Gary was counting on the roll of the dice to restrict just anyone from playing the premium classes not realizing they most players and DM's would fudge to rolls so that they could play the class that they wanted. It is after all a game and it is about fun so why not. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?
Top