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