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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What makes us care about combat balance in D&D?
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6660546" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Nonsense. Off the top of my head, here are three great RPGs with no rule zero: Marvel Heroic RP, Burning Wheel, and 4e D&D.</p><p></p><p>The concern with rule zero isn't its affect on the <em>characters</em> (who don't actually exist, and are not affected by anything that happens in the real world - including use of rule zero). </p><p></p><p>The concern is its affect on the <em>players</em> - namely, it subordinates their agency to the GM's agency, which - as [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] posted above - can undermine the whole point of playing the game.</p><p></p><p>This is very confusing to me. If "good" is subjective, then how is anyone supposed to assign positive or negative terms except by reference to what s/he likes? If "good" is subjective, then when you assert that various non-4e RPGs are good, aren't you just reiterating that they meet your personal preferences? In which case, why are you rebuking another poster for doing the same?</p><p></p><p>If the aim of the game is for casters to be dominant (eg Ars Magica), then casters becoming dominant looks like a display of good design.</p><p></p><p>If the aim of the game is for both spell-using and non-spell-using build options to be viable strategies for play, then casters becoming dominant is a design flaw.</p><p></p><p>In the case of AD&D, complications arise because the game was <em>designed</em> for more-or-less competitive play by players running stables of PCs. MUs were harder to keep alive at low levels, but were a long-term winning strategy because they tended to become dominant at high levels.</p><p></p><p>This perfectly workable framework for play is obviously broken as soon as the actual goal of play departs from that which the system was designed for - skilled-play dungeon-crawling - and turns towards single-PC-per-player, character-and-story-focused play. Unfortunately, rather than try and adapt to the system to support this quite different sort of RPGing, 2nd ed AD&D just reproduced the old mechanics but added a whole lot of broken GMing advice, including to ignore the action resolution rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6660546, member: 42582"] Nonsense. Off the top of my head, here are three great RPGs with no rule zero: Marvel Heroic RP, Burning Wheel, and 4e D&D. The concern with rule zero isn't its affect on the [I]characters[/I] (who don't actually exist, and are not affected by anything that happens in the real world - including use of rule zero). The concern is its affect on the [I]players[/I] - namely, it subordinates their agency to the GM's agency, which - as [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] posted above - can undermine the whole point of playing the game. This is very confusing to me. If "good" is subjective, then how is anyone supposed to assign positive or negative terms except by reference to what s/he likes? If "good" is subjective, then when you assert that various non-4e RPGs are good, aren't you just reiterating that they meet your personal preferences? In which case, why are you rebuking another poster for doing the same? If the aim of the game is for casters to be dominant (eg Ars Magica), then casters becoming dominant looks like a display of good design. If the aim of the game is for both spell-using and non-spell-using build options to be viable strategies for play, then casters becoming dominant is a design flaw. In the case of AD&D, complications arise because the game was [I]designed[/I] for more-or-less competitive play by players running stables of PCs. MUs were harder to keep alive at low levels, but were a long-term winning strategy because they tended to become dominant at high levels. This perfectly workable framework for play is obviously broken as soon as the actual goal of play departs from that which the system was designed for - skilled-play dungeon-crawling - and turns towards single-PC-per-player, character-and-story-focused play. Unfortunately, rather than try and adapt to the system to support this quite different sort of RPGing, 2nd ed AD&D just reproduced the old mechanics but added a whole lot of broken GMing advice, including to ignore the action resolution rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What makes us care about combat balance in D&D?
Top