[Jo wakes up again]
It seems like I only get to read the TML every 2 months. I uploaded
the issues and, lo and behold, the first was from March! Anyway...
It looks like I am pretty much the only person who has spoken that
can say they almost unreservedly agree with Metlay (4109). It did, however,
touch on one particular well rehersed argument of mine...
Proposal: GAME BALANCE IS A MYTH
Substantiantion: Any system of rules has a balance point
Discursion:
I see the term "game balance" being bandied about a
lot. Usually w.r.t. "I don't allow xxx to maintain the game balance."
People change the rules to change the course of the game and make it
adhere to the setting in a way the referee desires more. To me, this is
backwards.
If you look at a game setting as a point in space. The rules
govern how this point moves (i.e. by player action within the rules)
and the course it traces out can be described as the campaign. I maintain
that given any set of rules there are regions within that space that are
stable. I.e. under the normal course of application of game rules the
campaign will not greatly deviate from that region. These are balance
points.
The perceived "imbalance" that is observed when people bring up the
myth of game balance is when the referee, out of ignorance or misunderstanding
of the game rules, sets their campaign at a point in the space that is
not within a balance point. When set there the normal course of gaming
action (within the rules) will draw that point, away from the original
setting, toward a region of balance. Thus, over time (sometimes a very
short amount of time) the campaign will move away from the original
region chosen by the referee.
A referee sees this as undesirable, and unwilling to admit
to ignorance or just unable to perceive it, changes the rules in the
name of game balance. Usually the change in the rule system is not too
drastic which means the new regions of balance are "near" the old ones.
One might suppose that they are nearer the current point of game play.
However, given the campaign is currently accelerating in one direction
it is unlikely to be suddenly in a stable region, despite the fact that
this is the desire of the referee. It will, most likely, start careening
in a different direction under the new rules.
Thus, as time goes on, the referee continues to change rules and
the campaign zooms from here to there chasing a moving target that it is
unlikely ever to reach.
The mistake is in the placement of the game. One should consider
rules carefully and try to understand their full implications. Consulting
people who have played for some time is probably a good idea. I wouldn't
think one can ever fully understand a gaming system and one's target will
almost always be wrong. However you are better off watching the flow of
your campaign to see where it is going. As it deviates from its starting
position its further course will become clearer as more of the rule
implications filter through.
If you change the rules you will never understand where the
campaign is going. I maintain that you should, instead, accept that there
will be some dynamicism in your campaign. Watch where it goes and be
prepared to flow with it. If you don't change the rules it won't change
direction and you have a better chance of understanding it fully.
If you are familiar with mathematical modeling the above will
probably make ready sense to you (the more so if you grok topolocical
spaces :-). On the other hand it may make no sense whatsoever. Think
about it for a minute then either apply it or toss it...
Different subject: Although quiet I've not been sitting on my hands.
SYSGEN level 5 is nearly ready to hit the streets. It uses the same integrated
environment as LIBRARY which means, unfortunately, it only works on PCs.
In addition to nearly full WBH detail on each of 100 trillion planets
it now supports editing of all details at the expense of about 24K of disk
space per system. Right down to the local customs!
What I want to finish is the adding and subtracting of entire
planets (i.e. you can only modify existing ones now) and graphical printing
of surfaces (I plan to support FX, HPLJET and PostScript printers). As I
don't have a PostScript printer I would appreciate any volunteer to test
that particular bit...
The hard disk with the manual on it crashed so that will be delayed
(again!) bt there is now an on-line help feature. The .EXE has hit 250K! :-)
Does GDW really read the TML now? The gods really are watching!
If the gods really are listening perhaps they might be willing to humour
a supplicant and have a look at LIBRARY or SYSGEN. It was designed to be
everything they promised us with the WBH software. I'm quite sure they
get tons of half-arsed programmers sending them disks upon disks of planetary
generators but I think these are a fair cut above the rest and would beg
their indulgence just this once :-).
Jo Grant
[email removed]