Quote from: RandallS;514340Perhaps TSR D&D did not have the unified mechanics, the very free mechanical customization of characters, the stress on balance, etc. that WOTC D&D has, but it seemed to actually be less fragile in play -- at least in my experience.

You're not alone.

Quote from: RandallS;514340
Perhaps TSR D&D did not have the unified mechanics, the very free mechanical customization of characters, the stress on balance, etc. that WOTC D&D has, but it seemed to actually be less fragile in play -- at least in my experience.[/QUOTEThats because the TSR D&D games were designed by those wise enough to know that game balance doesn't come from a rulebook.

To paraphrase the mighty Thulsa Doom:

" RAW isn't strong boy. Players are stronger. Look around you.

What are rules compared to the people that use them."

Quote from: Exploderwizard;514344Thats because the TSR D&D games were designed by those wise enough to know that game balance doesn't come from a rulebook.

TSR D&D is balanced.  By the book, even.

Quote from: Rum Cove;514348TSR D&D is balanced.  By the book, even.

No game is perfectly balanced by the book alone. Change one assumption about any game no matter how well written and the balance will need participant adjustment.

Running an AD&D game up to level 6, who wants to play a human?

A game that takes place in the imagination of the participants can only be balanced with the full understanding of the scope and depth of those imaginations which is something no rpg writer has access to.

Which is why Gygax, Arneson, and the old guard know how important a good DM is compared to a rulebook.

How do you even tell if two classes are balanced against each other in 1E or 2E? They're entirely different - different save progressions, different hit dice, different (often unique) skills, armour and weapon proficiencies, whatever. In many cases with complimentary racial or ability score restrictions. Most characters have some some redeeming feature.

Compare to 3E where you might only cherrypick a level or two or something and switch out, or where even many class features could be picked up as feats or even magical items, or for skills just bought cross-class. Everything has its price.

Quote from: Windjammer;514322It's empty noise that doesn't even deserve getting quoted, much less its own thread.

The column, or Ron?  Or is the answer just "yes"?

QuoteWe don't want a new iteration of the game to be only a "best of" of the prior editions. If we did, there would be no reason to play it. It needs to achieve the goal of not only giving you the play experience that you want, but also giving you that play experience in a way that's better than what you've had in the past. Faster, better, smarter.

This is the bit that caught my eye. In my experience most creative people feel that they can do things better than the people who came before them. Let's face it, you're unlikely to become a creative if you think whatever it is you want to create has been done better by somebody else already. However, this conceit can make it very hard for designers to separate the wheat from the chaff, 'leave well enough alone', or even understand that most consumers of their product aren't as obsessed with the nitty-gritty of the game rules as they are. D&D has been plagued with this kind of conceited game design since the earliest days, and it has led to a series of iterations of the game that constantly try to 'fix' the last version of the game.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;514363The column, or Ron?  Or is the answer just "yes"?

The column.

I'll be honest, if they brought gender-based stat modifiers and caps into the game, I would buy a copy just for the trollgasm it would cause.

QuoteImagine a game with Basic D&D's simplicity but with the powers of 4th Edition.

It is working pretty much as the above in the playtest. The playtest has a more or less standard way of writing out abilities in a terse format. Like AD&D had Troll AC6, HD6, HP 36, NA:3, 1d4,1d4,2d6. MV 9".

QuoteImagine a game with Basic D&D's simplicity but with the powers of 4th Edition.

I can because I wrote one.

Quote from: estar;514451It is working pretty much as the above in the playtest. The playtest has a more or less standard way of writing out abilities in a terse format. Like AD&D had Troll AC6, HD6, HP 36, NA:3, 1d4,1d4,2d6. MV 9".

Page 9 in this PDF.

http://greywulf.net/files/Greywulfs_Guide_to_Chargen.pdf

I'm so glad no one in the 5E design or playtest team bothers to read 4E blogs. Imagine that - they might come up with something new instead of re-inventing the wheel.

Quote from: Windjammer;514478I'm so glad no one in the 5E design or playtest team bothers to read 4E blogs. Imagine that - they might come up with something new instead of re-inventing the wheel.

By that logic the chess club and game companies that support chess should come up with something new.

Chess had a 1000 years to make a core player base, as well as earn a reputation of the discipline of a true intellectual around the says of salons. Not to mention that there are various board games. Also, AGAIN, chess is competitive, while RPGs are cooperative. People generally prefer grinding other people's faces in the ground (or as youth these days says, "pwn 'em". There are also many different variations of chess - and while indeed the core rules are the most popular, it's good to appreciate the variation.

RPGs aren't like chess or board games. While going back to the old and tried recipes is not a bad thing, in fact - it's good - it doesn't mean that all change should be abolished. Even chess wasn't chess off the bat, you know.

But then again, 4e blows donkey ass.

Call of Cthulhu is a Classic game.

Vampire the Masquerade is a Classic game.

Now I want AD&D First Ed to be a Classic game.