Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5135829" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>Which class is "starkly limited"? Classes have things they do well and things they do less well. But it's possible to heal with any class (although leaders will always be better), to tank with most classes (Invokers have it tough), to do damage with any class, and to force bad choices on the enemy with any class. The role indicates what they can do best, not their absolute limits.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Because this is <em>Dungeons and Dragons</em>. If it were Courtiers and Merchants it would be a different game. And not everyone has to be a combatant. You can play The Load if you like - it just takes dumping your primary stat. And sit there like a lemon while the game is in combat (a significant proportion of the time) and your character is hiding under the table. Or you can simply refuse to use your powers.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>We aren't slavishly following it. If we were then the rogue would be hard coded into his own mini-game.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Because the alternative is to make everything vanilla out of the box (so you aren't reskinning so much as skinning). Or you need a literally infinite number of feats. As you seem to be requesting.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Because none of those deal with the character's overall approach. Which is what Class indicates. Which is to open up design space without warping the game into a pretzel and make it easy to build competently with minimal skill. (Seriously, a 4e Shaman would be near-impossible in a pointbuy system.)</p><p> </p><p>You can play classless. I'm a fan of both GURPS and Spirit Of The Century. But having classes brings its own advantage - I'm also a fan of 4e and Feng Shui. Classed is easier to get into and set up. And if done well it doesn't rule out a lot of design space.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>OK. A greatweapon fighter with the Paladin multiclass feat. He's a Paladin and does a hell of a lot of damage. And then he's God's Vengeance wielding a martial weapon. And that's only if you need heavy armour as part of your core concept (Thaneborn Barbarian MC Paladin fits what you want even better if you don't mind Hide Armour, and then there's the Avenger).</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>What point? That you want infinite flexibility in character generation. And a pony?</p><p> </p><p>The point is that a good class-based system (and 4e is one) is a hell of a lot more flexible than you seem to think.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Pre-4e an average first level wizard who had no combat spells available could be beaten up by the average housecat by the RAW.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>You want to play a non-combatant in a game of <em>Dungeons and Dragons</em>. Are you also complaining that <em>Librarian: The Return</em> makes it hard for you to play an illiterate PC?</p><p> </p><p>OK. Non-combatant recipie: Put your sword down and only use weapons you aren't proficient in.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>So not only do you want a classless system, you want a specific system to each gameworld. And the homebrewers need to come up with their own? Fortunately 4e is a bit more flexible than that.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Then you want to be incredibly knowledgeable about everything at 1st level. (Although starting with six out of seven trained skills from that list should be possible for any bard - and Streetwise isn't necessarily part of the core concept). What if I want to be tough enough to beat up a dragon single-handed at 1st level?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>... is playing the wrong game.</p><p> </p><p>Seriously, it sounds as if your objection to 4e is that it is Not GURPS. And that it doesn't have rules for everything you can come up with.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5135829, member: 87792"] Which class is "starkly limited"? Classes have things they do well and things they do less well. But it's possible to heal with any class (although leaders will always be better), to tank with most classes (Invokers have it tough), to do damage with any class, and to force bad choices on the enemy with any class. The role indicates what they can do best, not their absolute limits. Because this is [I]Dungeons and Dragons[/I]. If it were Courtiers and Merchants it would be a different game. And not everyone has to be a combatant. You can play The Load if you like - it just takes dumping your primary stat. And sit there like a lemon while the game is in combat (a significant proportion of the time) and your character is hiding under the table. Or you can simply refuse to use your powers. We aren't slavishly following it. If we were then the rogue would be hard coded into his own mini-game. Because the alternative is to make everything vanilla out of the box (so you aren't reskinning so much as skinning). Or you need a literally infinite number of feats. As you seem to be requesting. Because none of those deal with the character's overall approach. Which is what Class indicates. Which is to open up design space without warping the game into a pretzel and make it easy to build competently with minimal skill. (Seriously, a 4e Shaman would be near-impossible in a pointbuy system.) You can play classless. I'm a fan of both GURPS and Spirit Of The Century. But having classes brings its own advantage - I'm also a fan of 4e and Feng Shui. Classed is easier to get into and set up. And if done well it doesn't rule out a lot of design space. OK. A greatweapon fighter with the Paladin multiclass feat. He's a Paladin and does a hell of a lot of damage. And then he's God's Vengeance wielding a martial weapon. And that's only if you need heavy armour as part of your core concept (Thaneborn Barbarian MC Paladin fits what you want even better if you don't mind Hide Armour, and then there's the Avenger). What point? That you want infinite flexibility in character generation. And a pony? The point is that a good class-based system (and 4e is one) is a hell of a lot more flexible than you seem to think. Pre-4e an average first level wizard who had no combat spells available could be beaten up by the average housecat by the RAW. You want to play a non-combatant in a game of [I]Dungeons and Dragons[/I]. Are you also complaining that [I]Librarian: The Return[/I] makes it hard for you to play an illiterate PC? OK. Non-combatant recipie: Put your sword down and only use weapons you aren't proficient in. So not only do you want a classless system, you want a specific system to each gameworld. And the homebrewers need to come up with their own? Fortunately 4e is a bit more flexible than that. Then you want to be incredibly knowledgeable about everything at 1st level. (Although starting with six out of seven trained skills from that list should be possible for any bard - and Streetwise isn't necessarily part of the core concept). What if I want to be tough enough to beat up a dragon single-handed at 1st level? ... is playing the wrong game. Seriously, it sounds as if your objection to 4e is that it is Not GURPS. And that it doesn't have rules for everything you can come up with. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?
Top