Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!cepu!ucla-cs!srt
From: srt@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: PLAYER characters killing gods?  Give me a break.
Message-ID: <4131@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 14:56:23 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.4131
Posted: Fri Mar  1 14:56:23 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 4-Mar-85 08:11:13 EST
References: <113@ucbcad.UUCP> <4057@ucla-cs.ARPA> <2398@nsc.UUCP>
Reply-To: srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (Scott Turner)
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 20
Summary: 

In article <2398@nsc.UUCP> chuqui@nsc.UUCP (The Phantom) writes:
>
>Oh, well, enough bickering. Gygax hasn't thought of everything, and AD&D
>could stand improvement, but if you read the rules, you'll find out that
>one thing he DID do was encourage game balance. It may be awkward
>sometimes, but its there-- too bad more people don't use it instead of
>complaining about its lack.
>
>chuq

True enough. AD&D does have some hooks in it for game balance, though it
takes a fair amount of reading to find them, and there is some difference
between how the game is played and how it is written.  I think the reason
many of these sort of rules are ignored is because they are fairly clearly
afterthoughts (like spell components) that were added to control a game
gone awry.  The DM who hasn't seen these problems sees no reason to
incorporate these cumbersome rules, and the DM who has prefers a system
that avoids the problem rather than trying to fix it posthumously.

						-- Scott Turner