Quote from: The Butcher;729926Trollman? Is that you?

Trollman holds no monopoly on autism.

Quote from: The Butcher;729926Trollman? Is that you?

No - I actually like games where the GM makes decisions.

Anyway, regardless of your actual point of contention, it is my humble experience that people seeking to establish primacy in gaming debates by claiming that A is "objectively better" than B are (a) full of shit or (b) completely missing the point.

Quote from: The Butcher;729926Ascending AC may be Objectively Better than descending AC, but descending AC has never stopped anyone in my gaming group from playing TSR-era D&D. If your players are actually complaining about having to do subtraction (or God help them, about looking up a number in a chart, in an age in which you can store image files and documents in you cell phone or tablet), well, I hate to break it to you, but you may be playing with idiots. Don't play with idiots. Problem solved.

Nor should it.

The superiority of one single rule is all that I am arguing, not the superiority of an entire game. If you would rather play TSR D&D then do so. I never said that people shouldn't be playing what they want.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729929No - I actually like games where the GM makes decisions.

Anyway, regardless of your actual point of contention, it is my humble experience that people seeking to establish primacy in gaming debates by claiming that A is "objectively better" than B are (a) full of shit or (b) completely missing the point.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729912That's because it's not a matter of preference. These are two rules designed that have the exact same input and output, and they have objective values. One of these rules does the job faster and easier.

Maybe you like descending AC better than ascending AC for whatever reason, ascending AC is still an objectively better designed rule.

Do you flip a coin before posting?

Quote from: Rincewind1;729931Do you flip a coin before posting?

Where are you seeing a conflict?

I believe that ascending AC is an objectively better designed rule than descending AC. Personal preference does not negate the fact that descending AC is slower and less intuitive.

However, that is just one single rule and not an indictment of the game as whole. AD&D might still be an all around better game than 3E, despite having one shitty rule. I never made a claim as to which game people should be playing.

Case in point: If I'm going to run something with Dungeons & Dragons on the cover, it's most likely going to be BECMI/RC D&D, even though I've spent this entire thread shitting on the attack resolution.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729935Case in point: If I'm going to run something with Dungeons & Dragons on the cover, it's most likely going to be BECMI/RC D&D, even though I've spent this entire thread shitting on the attack resolution.

As a fellow BECMI/RC fan I'm glad to hear it.

But you do realize that's fairly close to admitting that the ascending AC thing is a spherical cow, right?

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729917I'm sorry - but "I just like it better, so shut up!" isn't a valid rebuttal. Personal preference doesn't have any bearing on the quality of design, when such things can be objectively weighed and judged against one another, like ascending vs. descending AC can.

That wasn't my rebuttal. I responded, you responded back, we basically made the same arguments again and again, and I saw not point in continuing with someone who didn't seem terribly interested in an actual exchange of ideas.

Again, you think you have objectively weighed it. Others have demonstrated that all you have shown, if you have even done that, is one method is more efficient. More Efficient does not equal objectively better. I would agree with you that you can measure mechanics, just not in isolation. If you take 3E for example, given its audience and its design goals, I'd agree with you, BAB is simply a better mechanic for that edition. All I am opposed to is the notion that a mechanic is objectively better in isolation, without any consideration for its audience, its application, its feel, etc.

You can't just sweep preferences and taste aside like they don't matter. They do. They are incredibly important when it comes to RPGs. You can have a mechanic that looks great on paper but people just don't like "because". Delivering things your audience likes is part of good design.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729935Personal preference does not negate the fact that descending AC is slower and less intuitive.
.

How much slower?  If it's objective, then it is measurable.

So data please?

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729824And the belief that everything I say is invalid because I bought a something awful account.

Being a goon doesn't make you wrong. It makes you a horse's ass.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729917Also, if people here weren't regularly posting stupid shit, grognards.txt wouldn't have so much ammo. So whose fault is it really?

No one forces you to post things on SA. What you choose to post there is your own fault, not anyone else's. Nothing stupid or silly anyone says on the net compels you to regurgitate it at SA.

But the purpose of my post wasn't to cast blame on either side. I was just pointing out that because you are member there, and because grognard.txt spends a considerable amount of time reposting material from this site in order to mock our posters, it is entirely fair for us to take that into account when judging and responding to your posts. It speaks to your motivations and intentions.

However, I give you points for using the same username at both sites.

Gizmoduck seems like one of the more sober SA posters.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;729948Gizmoduck seems like one of the more sober SA posters.

See also, 'damning with faint praise.'

Quote from: Sacrosanct;729942How much slower?  If it's objective, then it is measurable.

So data please?

Slower by one operation - deriving target number.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;729941Again, you think you have objectively weighed it. Others have demonstrated that all you have shown, if you have even done that, is one method is more efficient. More Efficient does not equal objectively better. I would agree with you that you can measure mechanics, just not in isolation. If you take 3E for example, given its audience and its design goals, I'd agree with you, BAB is simply a better mechanic for that edition. All I am opposed to is the notion that a mechanic is objectively better in isolation, without any consideration for its audience, its application, its feel, etc.

Sorry but the rule is a mechanical process. It can be judged by how well it achieves the task for which it was designed. The basic inputs and outputs of both systems are the exact same, then they can only be judged by how efficient the resolution is. If ascending AC does the job easier and more efficiently than descending AC, then it is objectively better.

You said it yourself - I've shown that ascending AC is more efficient, yet you prefer descending AC. If relative efficiency has no bearing on your sense of enjoyment, then the added step of deriving the target number adds no value. Therefore, the more efficient system is better since efficiency is the only relevant comparison.

Quote from: Gizmoduck5000;729954Sorry but the rule is a mechanical process. It can be judged by how well it achieves the task for which it was designed. The basic inputs and outputs of both systems are the exact same, then they can only be judged by how efficient the resolution is. If ascending AC does the job easier and more efficiently than descending AC, then it is objectively better.

You said it yourself - I've shown that ascending AC is more efficient, yet you prefer descending AC. If relative efficiency has no bearing on your sense of enjoyment, then the added step of deriving the target number adds no value. Therefore, the more efficient system is better since efficiency is the only relevant comparison.

This is just a repeat of what you have already said.

What i said about descending is i personally find it easier than BAB and i prefer the feel. That has a huge impact on the value and use of the mechanic. If you are designing a game with folks like me as your target audience, it is a good choice. Like i said, you cant weigh something in isolation. You have to consider its audience.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;729942How much slower?  If it's objective, then it is measurable.

So data please?

And note it totally ignores the question of "chart lookup," which is a fish riding a different unicycle completely.