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="Krensky" data-source="post: 5135898" data-attributes="member: 30936"><p>Pretty much all of them, because they're all combatants. You find enough flexibility in them for you. That doesn't make those of us who don't wrongbad people.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, tautology. Because this is D&D you must go into dungeons and fight dragons. If you want to do otherwise, you're playing the game wrong and a bad person who ruins everyone else's fun. Why exactly is a non-combatant a drag on the other characters if he's valuable and contributes in other ways? There's more to a game then combat. Why vilify or belittle those who think balance should extend beyond the combat encounter and be done in a different way then 4e did so?</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, the good old days. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, I dislike this aspect of 4e because, to me, the classes are too homogenius. Everyone's a full up combatant. I've seen class and level based </p><p> systems who hit the balance I want here, and I play them and not 4e for that reason. The issue is not what I want 4e to be, or what it is or isn't, but why, according to the OP, I'm a bad person for disagreeing with it's design philosophy.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>And yet 4e has. The whole non-combatant thing.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I want a system that balances based on the team and adventure using spotlight sharing, not on the individual and combat round using homogenization. And a Donkeyhorse.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said it was a bad game. Just that I don't like it partially because it's balance philosophy puts me off. I own and play several class-level systems with more flexibility and with balance philosophies that better fit my preferences.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Shenanigans. Pre 3e. Cats do less then 1 point of damage in 3e.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I want said characters to be possible. I want a game that doesn't consider combat to be the central element of the game that everything must be balanced around. And, as I said, I have one. The issue is why does the OP and others consider me a bad person for this desire.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Cute.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I already have the game I want. It's not classless. I have no idea where you get the gameworld thing. What I want to know is why I'm a bad person for disliking 4e's definition of balance. Why my views on balance render me into a muchkin or slacker. Oh, and you may find 4e flexible, I do not. Again, that doesn't make me a bad person, or a fool.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>How large a dragon, and to what narrative end?</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>My objection to 4e is that I find it boring, fiddly, miniature and combat centric,too expensive, and because of it's design descisions regarding balance and class structure that it doesn't handle the sort of games I and my friends want to play. Purely subjective, I know. Don't try and convert me, that's not the topic. The topic I haven't seen answered is why do the OP and his supporters feel I'm a bad person for not liking the design philosophy of 4e?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Krensky, post: 5135898, member: 30936"] Pretty much all of them, because they're all combatants. You find enough flexibility in them for you. That doesn't make those of us who don't wrongbad people. Ah, tautology. Because this is D&D you must go into dungeons and fight dragons. If you want to do otherwise, you're playing the game wrong and a bad person who ruins everyone else's fun. Why exactly is a non-combatant a drag on the other characters if he's valuable and contributes in other ways? There's more to a game then combat. Why vilify or belittle those who think balance should extend beyond the combat encounter and be done in a different way then 4e did so? Ah, the good old days. :) Actually, I dislike this aspect of 4e because, to me, the classes are too homogenius. Everyone's a full up combatant. I've seen class and level based systems who hit the balance I want here, and I play them and not 4e for that reason. The issue is not what I want 4e to be, or what it is or isn't, but why, according to the OP, I'm a bad person for disagreeing with it's design philosophy. And yet 4e has. The whole non-combatant thing. I want a system that balances based on the team and adventure using spotlight sharing, not on the individual and combat round using homogenization. And a Donkeyhorse. I never said it was a bad game. Just that I don't like it partially because it's balance philosophy puts me off. I own and play several class-level systems with more flexibility and with balance philosophies that better fit my preferences. Shenanigans. Pre 3e. Cats do less then 1 point of damage in 3e. I want said characters to be possible. I want a game that doesn't consider combat to be the central element of the game that everything must be balanced around. And, as I said, I have one. The issue is why does the OP and others consider me a bad person for this desire. Cute. I already have the game I want. It's not classless. I have no idea where you get the gameworld thing. What I want to know is why I'm a bad person for disliking 4e's definition of balance. Why my views on balance render me into a muchkin or slacker. Oh, and you may find 4e flexible, I do not. Again, that doesn't make me a bad person, or a fool. How large a dragon, and to what narrative end? My objection to 4e is that I find it boring, fiddly, miniature and combat centric,too expensive, and because of it's design descisions regarding balance and class structure that it doesn't handle the sort of games I and my friends want to play. Purely subjective, I know. Don't try and convert me, that's not the topic. The topic I haven't seen answered is why do the OP and his supporters feel I'm a bad person for not liking the design philosophy of 4e? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?
Top