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
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at 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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6008607" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I think there is a tension here. The more the GM tailors situations to accomodate the particular abilities of the PCs, the more it seems to me that the <em>GM</em> is the one who is deciding (i) what counts as a solution, and (ii) who is going to solve the situation, and how. Which looks to me like the GM, rather than the players, driving the game.</p><p></p><p>I tailor situation to reflect the <em>interests</em> of my players, as expressed via their PCs. But generally leave it up to the players to decide (i) what counts as a solution, and (ii) who is going to solve the situation, and how. This approach works best if the various PCs are at least moderately comparable in mechanical effectiveness - ie in their capacity to make an impact on the situation via the action resolution mechanics.</p><p></p><p>This strikes me as wrong for at least two reasons.</p><p></p><p>First, whatever the problems one might have with a non-tailored sandbox (it's not my preferred approach) it's not a board game.</p><p></p><p>Second, there is no connection between balance by way of mechanical effectivenesss, and board gaming. In the first part of this post, I explained an approach to roleplaying in which comparable mechanical effectiveness can matter.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6008607, member: 42582"] I think there is a tension here. The more the GM tailors situations to accomodate the particular abilities of the PCs, the more it seems to me that the [I]GM[/I] is the one who is deciding (i) what counts as a solution, and (ii) who is going to solve the situation, and how. Which looks to me like the GM, rather than the players, driving the game. I tailor situation to reflect the [I]interests[/I] of my players, as expressed via their PCs. But generally leave it up to the players to decide (i) what counts as a solution, and (ii) who is going to solve the situation, and how. This approach works best if the various PCs are at least moderately comparable in mechanical effectiveness - ie in their capacity to make an impact on the situation via the action resolution mechanics. This strikes me as wrong for at least two reasons. First, whatever the problems one might have with a non-tailored sandbox (it's not my preferred approach) it's not a board game. Second, there is no connection between balance by way of mechanical effectivenesss, and board gaming. In the first part of this post, I explained an approach to roleplaying in which comparable mechanical effectiveness can matter. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
Top