Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sanguinemetaldawn" data-source="post: 3916552" data-attributes="member: 23390">This is something I have been thinking about for quite a while, and what I have concluded is this:Generally, the rules used in AD&D were created individually as situations arose, and the  ruleset is essentially just a compilation of a bunch of different rules.  I don't think complicated is really the right word for the 1st Ed ruleset (not that some of them weren't).  They really felt to me more like a disorganized jumble of quirky rules, each of which was different.I think this had several effects.  Each sub-rule-system has a different feel, and many times the feel has a lot of "flavor".  Also, the unexpressed (an unconsious) design philosophy of 1 Ed. AD&D ends up being: Imagine something, then create the rules to make it work in the game.That last is especially important.  Its a lot easier to shut a new game design element down, when it is related to another part of the core rules, and then the argument is about how it messes up the core rules.  Not having rules for everything basically requires and encourages creativity; having rules for everything discourages making new rules because it has to fit with the pre-existing rules or it causes problems.Thus the real foundation of AD&D: describe what you do and use common sense to adjudicate it.  Yes, because the action must be adjudicated by the DM, a bad DM will kill the game, but that is pretty much true regardless of edition.The major innovation of d20 was: always roll a d20, always roll high.  And despite having the advantage of this clear straighforward starting point, it still has plenty of complicated rules.  Really they should have kept the philosophy of AD&D and changed the minimum necessary to make the d20 the unified mechanic.  I suspect that is the fundamental design paradigm of C&C, True20, etc....Another interesting point is the use of different die for various AD&D sub-systems means variable granularity.  Using a d6 vs a d20 to detect sliding walls basically says modifiers are are unimportant, while using a d100 instead of a d20 for Pummelling says, there are a ton of different modifiers that can affect this action, so lets account for them.Not having a unified d20 mechanic basically sets a range of types of tasks: from simple fast you-succeed-or-you-don't, to long, drawn out complicated tasks.  This is one of my fundamental conclusions about d20: d20 is frequently simpler, but simpler isn't automatically better. And, at worst, d20 is sometimes more complicated, more rigid, and flavorless, which is just plain worse.</blockquote>

Verification