Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Decline Where my Bubbles Gone?

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
I know it's a relatively (not extremely) rare defence. That doesn't answer why you have to have two rolls. It's an example of a completely arbitrary rule somebody slapped on "just because."
Already told you why, they are two completely different mechanics. The first one is to test the characters skill, experience, resourcefulnes and physical prowess, the second one merely tests the monster degree of immunity to magical forces, without the monster actually having to do anything.
Saving throws function against different effects, like poison clouds, diseases, assasination, different creatures special abilities, environmental hazards, etc. MR only functions against magic. In most campaigns MR will absolutely never come up.
Also, its an extremely rare thing that takes years of playing to ever experience. Getting to level 9 is an achievement in AD&D.

Exactly, and that's a really shallow form of variety. It's entirely cosmetic -- in terms of results, there is no difference between a d20 and a d100 with 5% increments. There is no reason at all to use both, just pick one and stick with it.
Flavor text is just as shallow in terms of rules, entirely cometic as well, but it adds something to the game. Its like arguing to an autistic children that doesnt understand the difference that presentation makes.

Yes, but why shouldn't NWPs be allowed to grow like class skills? How does making them rigid, static on/off things contribute to better gameplay?
Because in this way level doesnt make you better at everything you fucking twat, it just makes you better at your given class. This means that you are not automatically better than the blacksmith at making weapons just because you spend your days murdering lizards in the sewers and get to level while he spends his time making weapons, and why he doesnt get extra hp every time he learns a new method of smelting or whatever the fuck.
Holy fucking shit, how is this hard to understand?

So taking an NWP in Religion makes you go from complete ignoramus to expert, just like that. Also clerics who don't take the Religion NWP don't know jack shit about religion. And that makes plenty of sense. Right.
Taking a wizard level makes you from just a dude into someone capable of bending reality to his will, it is often agreed upon that you spent the days prior to your advancement getting familiar with the knowledge at hand. This is something thats common to every pnp system ever, you suddenly get better. Theres an understanding that you have spent some time studying whatever you now know.
Clerics get religion NWP for free you fucking twat.

I have, ive done it hundreds of times.

And that doesn't strike you as simultaneously complex, counterintuitive, and fuzzy?
No. Couldnt be simpler.

Exactly: the rules don't say. There is no guidance from the rules for resolving this kind of simple variant of a situation specifically addressed in the situation.
Because they are simple enough that the DM can sort them out.

The rules are only unambiguous for your set of "standard soft iron bars." If the bars are in any way different -- bronze, steel, rusty, thin, thick, set in crumbly mortar, greasy, etc. -- the rules don't say.
Why would the rules say? im a human being, i can think, they help me plenty by giving me the base chance. Also the situation of bending bars is incredibly rare, very few warriors are that strong, im sure i can manage it if it comes up.

They leave it completely up to DM arbitration, with no guidance on how the DM is expected to arbitrate it.
Common sense.

How is this not worse -- nay, abysmally bad -- compared to a system which (1) gives clear guidelines on how the GM should set a tasks difficulty
For starters? because then the DM becomes merely a tool, and an intermediate between the player and the rules, instead of the other way around.

and (2) gives clear rules on how to resolve tasks with these difficulties?
Dude, they are not needed. Theres a thinking breathing smart guy at the helm, let him sort it out.

Then why bother having rules at all?
This is precisely my beef with AD&D -- outside core combat, the rules are so bad you're falling back on DM asspulls all the fucking time.
Wat? WoD falls into rougly the same "asspulls", its called DMing you stupid cuck. Narrative is more important than rules, and mechanics only work to give a rough idea about what the character can do.

Exactly: again, the rules don't say. You have to make something up. (I would've taken the Lift Gates probability as the baseline and compared the heft of the boulder to, um, a standard liftable gate, whatever that is, and added a bonus or penalty accordingly. DM asspull again: nothing in the rules to actually recommend, support, or suggest that solution, only because they chose to have a specific rule for "lifting gates" instead of a general rule for "feats of strength," or an even more general one for "resolving tasks with a binary outcome where success is chiefly determined by ability scores rather than skills.")
There is a specific rule about how much weight a character can carry given their str score if they are doing nothing more than carrying that thing, and it goes far above max carry weight.

AD&D simply cannot resolve any gameplay situation not specifically addressed in the rules. It's all left to DM
Sure it is. thats how roleplaying works.

You call it asspull, i call it DMing.

Conversely, if applied as they're written, the rules lead to all kinds of completely boneheaded results: the NWPs in particular are hyper-specific and hyper-narrow, so you get stuff like, say, farm boys who know how to milk a cow (Animal Husbandry) but don't have a clue about how to plough a field (Agriculture).
They have those NWP for free you fucking twat.

Outside core combat and thief skills (which are merely clunky), the system is as good as useless.
The system is good enough to provide for any situation provided a DM is there doing his job. A system that makes the DM superfluous is not a good system, not even in the context of a cRPG.
 

Prime Junta

Guest
The system is good enough to provide for any situation provided a DM is there doing his job. A system that makes the DM superfluous is not a good system, not even in the context of a cRPG.

Rules do not make a DM superfluous. With the example I gave, the DM is doing what the DM is supposed to be doing: defining the world and setting challenges. Consider a door. Let's say it's a heavy oaken door with iron reinforcements, but the lock is a simple mechanical one. AD&D doesn't tell you how to represent that mechanically. It just lets you specify "a door" and "a lock," with the added note that the DM can fudge the numbers any way he likes. This is just objectively worse -- for the DM and the players -- than a system that lets the DM specify the door as level 8 (almost impossible to break with brute strength) and the lock as level 3 (pretty simple for anyone with any lockpicking skill).

Again: if the rules end up with "whatever the DM decides on the spur of the moment" -- as we appear to agree AD&D does a LOT of the time -- then why even bother having rules? Why not just have completely free-form improv gaming? I know lots of people do that. I don't. I think that if you're playing a game, the game should have rules, and you should play it by the rules. That's the difference between a game and improv theatre right there.

Moreover, you're contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you're singing the praises of AD&D's locked-in, on-rails character development and "expert or nothing" NWP system, and on the other hand you're saying that it's AWSUM!!!1one that non-combat situations require DM asspulls. Which is it, rigidity or DM freedom?

And finally: you're not answering any of my questions. When I ask you why something is the way it is, you answer "because it is the way it is." Or, for example, when I ask you why two mechanics are different, you answer "because they're two different mechanics." Hurr durr.

(I could go on dismantling your arguments -- f.ex. you say that the bending bars thing is insignificant because bending bars is an extremely rare situation. If that's so, then why the fuck is bending bars a number you have to write in your damn character sheet? See, that's the idiocy of AD&D again -- you have any number of specific, autistic rules related to specific, "incredibly rare" gameplay situations, but no general rules on how to resolve general gameplay situations. You've got a rule for bending bars, but no general rule for feats of strength of various kinds, such as bending bars, lifting gates, rolling boulders, turning a mill, fighting with a ship tiller in a storm, etc. etc. etc.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

King Crispy

Too bad I have no queen.
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
1,876,563
Location
Future Wasteland
Strap Yourselves In
7f7c4-meltdown.jpg
 

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,344
Hi, is your Internet message board full of nerds using math to discuss games? Are conversations about non-game topics turned into existential evaluations of archaic computer game systems?

If so, your software may have been infected with Autism. Autism is a serious virus. Highly infectious on the internet, Autism can spread quickly from topic to topic. Before you know it, out of control Autism can spread through your forum causing distress and mayhem for your readers.

But don't worry! There is an easy fix! For just 12 easy payments of $19.95 per month, our specialists in Autism removal can clean your forums leaving then sparkling fresh - and free of anal retentive math discussions about computer games.

Sign up for a plan today and we'll even give you 10% off!
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Complete character customization creates too many undesired side effects. Its something that needs to die.
It has.
Customizing every aspect of your character leads to formulaic character building, it is as simple as that.
For example: When you present the choice between improved basket weaving and more damage, the player character will pick damage every fucking time. This cannot be fixed by exhausting balance, it can only be fixed by killing it with fire.
There are two ways to do this, either you offer a pack of circumstancial skills and abilities consistent with a class or an ethos and let the player sort out what they will use, bombing the shit out of the very idea of planning builds, or you simply remove caps, allowing players that spend enough time playing the game to have all the skills, which detracts nothing from the experience because the game can and will be finished by most players long before that even is a thing.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,386
Location
Copenhagen
formulaic character building

True! In contrast, AD&D is where I'm always looking forward to starting a new Fighter and just putting down my stats without the burden of annoying choices, and then eagerly awaiting the excitement of rolling 1d10 as my sole leveling action for the next 9 levels. After that I am mercifully spared even this interaction as I, from this point on, simply note minor static hit point increases. Really gives you that hardcore, old school challenge boys
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
True. Unlike in AD&D where I'm always looking forward to starting a new Fighter and just putting down my stats without the burden of annoying choices, and then eagerly awaiting the excitement of rolling 1d10 as my sole leveling action for the next 19 levels. Really gives you that hardcore, old school challenge boys
Good thing that the leveling part is the only part that really doesnt matter in AD&D. you dont play to level, you play to survive and experience a new adventure another day, for loot, whores and booze.
The whole point behind this system is that you shouldnt be reading the manual and waiting to level X to have fun (unless you are a wizard i guess).

This is wholly different from other RPG nowadays where the main thrust is getting to the next level.
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Hi, is your Internet message board full of nerds using math to discuss games? Are conversations about non-game topics turned into existential evaluations of archaic computer game systems?

If so, your software may have been infected with Autism. Autism is a serious virus. Highly infectious on the internet, Autism can spread quickly from topic to topic. Before you know it, out of control Autism can spread through your forum causing distress and mayhem for your readers.

But don't worry! There is an easy fix! For just 12 easy payments of $19.95 per month, our specialists in Autism removal can clean your forums leaving then sparkling fresh - and free of anal retentive math discussions about computer games.

Sign up for a plan today and we'll even give you 10% off!
At this point im more replying to trigger Infinitron than argue with cunta, i know every post he cant move to a thread in the corresponding forum causes him physical pain.
 

Grunker

RPG Codex Ghost
Patron
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
27,386
Location
Copenhagen
The whole point behind this system is that you shouldnt be reading the manual

No I know man, I'm on your side. That's exactly why the game is called Advanced and by its own admition is the most COMPLEX version of D&D yet with a bunch of tables (filled with arbitrary number goodness) and a complex spell system - to save you from looking things up <3
 

King Crispy

Too bad I have no queen.
Patron
Staff Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
1,876,563
Location
Future Wasteland
Strap Yourselves In
It was called Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it contained at least five times as much rules content as its predecessor did. Kids at the time were what-the-fucking all over the place and often needed adults to help them understand the new rules (I didn't, of course).

You wouldn't understand unless you were there when TSR first published them. Shit's all different these days.
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
Everyone seems to be forgetting that saving throws increase every level as well, so using your looted gear you can diversify your fighters between different status effecting situations, but meh.

The main thing AD&D has going for it is a decade of cRPGs made at the time when people made enjoyably creative cRPGs, by the time 3rd ed came around no-one knew D&D was about to vanish, we got 2 or 3 quality games out of it and never saw it again. If the whole of the 2000s was a litany of 3rd ed D&D choice then people likely wouldn't hold it in such high regard as everyone would have got bored of it and not hold it in such a cherished position, its own flaws more readily accepted and noted.

It was always exciting starting a character in 3rd ed, because you imagine all the level-up options available and dream of bizzare new builds, but as soon as the game's been going a bit you realise that the rogue/thief still needs to spend all their skill points on traps, locks, stealth anyway, so it might as well be auto-level-up stats anyway. Same for most classes. So fighters can get 'fun fighter spells' like knockdown or massive strike or whatever bollox, what of it, it just helps make them less reliant on other classes, great for solo-play, but diminishing for party play. Why does a fighter need a mage when he can just stun his enemy with a level-up spell of his own. Also devalues loot as such things used to be cool item traits, now who needs a sword of stun? I already have a sword of stun, from my own fighter-spells list. Quite silly really. Fighters are boring? Of course they are, they should be, they're supposed to be grunts who just like swinging swords, if they want to hit harder they use a bigger weapon, if they want to be graceful they can dual wield, if they want to sponge they can board/sword.

3rd ed is better for games where you just play 1 character, maybe up to two or three, but the whole system makes bigger parties and loot more redundant, mainly by providing too much spell-power to everyone, the stats themselves aren't really the issue as they're both fairly auto-level-up stat-wise.
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Rules do not make a DM superfluous.
Cram enough of them into a system and it plays itself.

With the example I gave, the DM is doing what the DM is supposed to be doing: defining the world and setting challenges.
No you twat, the DM is there to weave the narrative, give context to the players actions,

Consider a door. Let's say it's a heavy oaken door with iron reinforcements, but the lock is a simple mechanical one. AD&D doesn't tell you how to represent that mechanically. It just lets you specify "a door" and "a lock," with the added note that the DM can fudge the numbers any way he likes.
Holy fucking shit, how much of an autists are you? Simple mechanical lock, just have the thief roll his lockpick or someone in the party roll his open doors str check. If you dont want the players to open it make it hard, if you want them to make it easy, if you are undecided make it average. What the fuck does it matter what the asigned difficulty for heavy oaken doors is. If they fuck it up and cant open them let them sort it out on their own, maybe burning the door or breaking it, if the open a door you didnt want them to have them face and see whatever the fuck you didnt want them to see and roll with it.

This is just objectively worse
No it isnt you fucking sperg, the DM controls every aspect of the game, and he is gracious enough to let them players defend themselves with their only ally, lady luck.
1830.jpg



-- for the DM and the players -- than a system that lets the DM specify the door as level 8

Doors have levels now :lol:
and the lock as level 3
:lol::lol::lol:


Again: if the rules end up with "whatever the DM decides on the spur of the moment" -- as we appear to agree AD&D does a LOT of the time -- then why even bother having rules?
Because they are needed to codify whatever the fuck is happening in front of you, because they allow you to interact with the world and because they literally define your character. Also what the fuck are you asking? if a system cant cover all the bases it should cover none? :lol:


Why not just have completely free-form improv gaming? I know lots of people do that.
Because then itd be something entirely different.

I don't. I think that if you're playing a game, the game should have rules, and you should play it by the rules. That's the difference between a game and improv theatre right there.
Theres a whole lot of gray between black and white.

Moreover, you're contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you're singing the praises of AD&D's locked-in, on-rails character development and "expert or nothing" NWP system
Eh, lot of unnecesary information, either you are trained at something or you arent is a good enough aproach. Make it too granular in a level based system and people will just invest on it or fail the checks at later levels, because systems like these tend to make all skill checks scale to the stage of the game you are playing on.

and on the other hand you're saying that it's AWSUM!!!1one that non-combat situations require DM asspulls. Which is it, rigidity or DM freedom?
Why cant it be both?

And finally: you're not answering any of my questions. When I ask you why something is the way it is, you answer "because it is the way it is." Or, for example, when I ask you why two mechanics are different, you answer "because they're two different mechanics." Hurr durr.
I told you why it is the way it is, some creatures are highly resistant or outright immune to magic. But thats completely independent of how a creature reacts to magical attacks.

(I could go on dismantling your arguments -- f.ex. you say that the bending bars thing is insignificant because bending bars is an extremely rare situation. If that's so, then why the fuck is bending bars a number you have to write in your damn character sheet?
Because it does come up, you dont need to make it extremely granular, you just need it to be there in case it does come up. Jesus fucking christ, next thing you are going to ask why there are no rules for sucking cocks.

See, that's the idiocy of AD&D again -- you have any number of specific, autistic rules related to specific, "incredibly rare" gameplay situations, but no general rules on how to resolve general gameplay situations.
Thats like saying why you have rules for antimagic beholder ray when its just a creature you may never met, but have no rules for how much you can eat. Stop being a fucking twat, one matters, the other doesnt. Make a con roll or something.

You've got a rule for bending bars, but no general rule for feats of strength of various kinds, such as bending bars, lifting gates, rolling boulders, turning a mill, fighting with a ship tiller in a storm, etc. etc. etc.)
See the part about the DM controlling the entire gameworld and everything that happens in it. If he wants you to have a hard time fighting he will tell you how much of a hard time you are having. Thats where your own abilities come into play to modify said situations.
The DM does not need these rules to DM effectively and the player does not need them to interpret his own character correctly, they are superfluous, so why even specify them?
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,825
Quite silly really. Fighters are boring? Of course they are, they should be, they're supposed to be grunts who just like swinging swords, if they want to hit harder they use a bigger weapon, if they want to be graceful they can dual wield, if they want to sponge they can board/sword.
Actually because of the lack of speshul abilities fighters could trip people just fine, they could choke someone, they could run and jump and then attack or kick or etc.
Fighters gameplay wasnt constrained by the rules, it was set free because there were no rules telling him he couldnt knock people down because he didnt have the feat from page 35 of the players handbook.
DMs where encouraged to give circumstancial bonuses to fighters for these actions, it allowed a greater tactical depth and a deeper interaction between player and DM.
I didnt need the feat "aimed strike" to hit someone in the face, i just rolled with a penalty.
 

Turjan

Arcane
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
5,047
It was called Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it contained at least five times as much rules content as its predecessor did.
Not quite. It was called "Advanced" because it was released at the same time as the "Basic" line (both in 1977). The latter ran in parallel to AD&D with its last release in 1991, with several different editions over the years (somewhat simplified called Basic, B/X, BECMI, and Rules Cyclopedia). There are still small groups of grognards who fight over which of the editions of the "Basic" line was the best ever.

"Basic" doesn't mean just the first levels, like starter sets during the 3e times. The "Rules Cyclopedia" had everything from the Basic Rules, Expert Rules, Companion Rules and Master Rules boxed sets and led you from level 1-36.
 
Last edited:

tuluse

Arcane
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
11,400
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Shadorwun: Hong Kong
It was called Advanced Dungeons & Dragons because it contained at least five times as much rules content as its predecessor did. Kids at the time were what-the-fucking all over the place and often needed adults to help them understand the new rules (I didn't, of course).

You wouldn't understand unless you were there when TSR first published them. Shit's all different these days.
kevin_spacey_wrong.mp3
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom