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="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5044207" data-attributes="member: 18280"><p>Yes. But that is what is meant by "double standard"</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then there is something else that is evidenciary which is not presented. It is possible to apply a double standard when describing why you believe what you believe, while your beliefs are still basically correct, because either (1) you didn't examine the evidence well enough, or (2) you didn't communicate it well enough.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. I am claiming that a large number of house rules/varients cannot be used to both demonstrate robustness and a train wreck.</p><p></p><p>In Hussar's last post, he suggests that 3e allowed tinkering, while 1e required tinkering. But the extra rules binders/books cited earlier do not actually tell you which is which. They have no evidenciary value by themselves.</p><p></p><p>Now, I will agree with Hussar that 1e requires tinkering, if tinkering is taken to mean "selecting among options", if for no reason than that one is given a number of options within the system. OTOH, 3e requires tinkering to have a game that I could enjoy. So, I think that this is very much a "different strokes for different folks" thing, and not so much an objective thing. Certainly my houserules under 3e were the most massive houserule volume I've ever created, weighing in at over 600 pages (compared to under 10 for 1e, which also included a campaign gazeteer, and ove 60 for 2e).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>RC</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5044207, member: 18280"] Yes. But that is what is meant by "double standard" Then there is something else that is evidenciary which is not presented. It is possible to apply a double standard when describing why you believe what you believe, while your beliefs are still basically correct, because either (1) you didn't examine the evidence well enough, or (2) you didn't communicate it well enough. No. I am claiming that a large number of house rules/varients cannot be used to both demonstrate robustness and a train wreck. In Hussar's last post, he suggests that 3e allowed tinkering, while 1e required tinkering. But the extra rules binders/books cited earlier do not actually tell you which is which. They have no evidenciary value by themselves. Now, I will agree with Hussar that 1e requires tinkering, if tinkering is taken to mean "selecting among options", if for no reason than that one is given a number of options within the system. OTOH, 3e requires tinkering to have a game that I could enjoy. So, I think that this is very much a "different strokes for different folks" thing, and not so much an objective thing. Certainly my houserules under 3e were the most massive houserule volume I've ever created, weighing in at over 600 pages (compared to under 10 for 1e, which also included a campaign gazeteer, and ove 60 for 2e). RC [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Was AD&D1 designed for game balance?
Top