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
The final word on DPR, feats and class 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="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7447288" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>A few points - too much shuffle to go at in depth..</p><p></p><p>Back on the statement that your definition is bringing flexibility vs restrictive into "balance" and your disagreement...</p><p></p><p>"What we have, here, is a failure to communucate..."</p><p></p><p>Your definition ssys balance is maximizing the options that are both meaningful and viable.</p><p></p><p>So from that ot would seem you see a game with 20 meaningful and viable options as more balanced (a higher maximum of options) than say a game with only 5 such choices.</p><p></p><p>That seems to be including flexibility in the definition of balance to me. </p><p></p><p>Is it not? </p><p></p><p>Second, i would tend to see the viable definition you present here - boils down to "better in some ways" as similar to what my stated goal as far as rpg "target as far as balance" goes... "Balanceable in play" (tho again to me the setting and types od challenges is the big honking 800lb gorilla in this.)</p><p></p><p>As for your encounter a day math, sorry but again the focus on dpr and total output fails to be convincing at all to me.</p><p></p><p>Whether someone wins or loses, succeeds or fails etc in six encounters (even combat encounters) is not determined by or even in my experience sttongly correlated to the estimated dpr of their attacks. </p><p></p><p>Thats because in those challenges the ability to do your white room sack of hit points output is a question with a plethora of trip wires.</p><p></p><p>Heavy armor guy or blurred grapples you, keeps hold, now you are unable to move, have just one guy to swing the axe at and - GWM 5/10 becomes useless. </p><p></p><p>Hold person, haste, slow, a lot of blindness, prone, etc options... Even going prone vs an enemy sharpshooter... All those turn the focus on white room dpr estimates on their head and the more and more one gets to the levels used to do this analysis in the micro - the more that focus in micro becomes more corrupting because it cuts more out.</p><p></p><p>As for balanced does not mean equal - exactly - at leadt until one starts using analysis of the micro to then insist on things like getting dpr outputs across martial to be the same.</p><p></p><p>That is the trap of micro-equality - insisting on getting the very small sub-parts equal - it does lead one towards equality in the form of identical. </p><p></p><p>The focus on "equilibrium" of the macro, the whole, allows stronger here but weaker there and puts "balanceability" at the front.</p><p></p><p>To me, the focus of rpg balance should center on showing and explaining when a is better than b, when c is better than a, etc.</p><p></p><p>As i have said, to me balance would be achieved if at the "big level option" each had uncommon circumstances where each option was "best", uncommons where they were "worst" and common cases where they were "average" - measured by contribution to success. That objective does not require micro-tuning outputs to within a few percentage points and can be directly tied in with "scenes in play" more than ever more excluding abstractions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7447288, member: 6919838"] A few points - too much shuffle to go at in depth.. Back on the statement that your definition is bringing flexibility vs restrictive into "balance" and your disagreement... "What we have, here, is a failure to communucate..." Your definition ssys balance is maximizing the options that are both meaningful and viable. So from that ot would seem you see a game with 20 meaningful and viable options as more balanced (a higher maximum of options) than say a game with only 5 such choices. That seems to be including flexibility in the definition of balance to me. Is it not? Second, i would tend to see the viable definition you present here - boils down to "better in some ways" as similar to what my stated goal as far as rpg "target as far as balance" goes... "Balanceable in play" (tho again to me the setting and types od challenges is the big honking 800lb gorilla in this.) As for your encounter a day math, sorry but again the focus on dpr and total output fails to be convincing at all to me. Whether someone wins or loses, succeeds or fails etc in six encounters (even combat encounters) is not determined by or even in my experience sttongly correlated to the estimated dpr of their attacks. Thats because in those challenges the ability to do your white room sack of hit points output is a question with a plethora of trip wires. Heavy armor guy or blurred grapples you, keeps hold, now you are unable to move, have just one guy to swing the axe at and - GWM 5/10 becomes useless. Hold person, haste, slow, a lot of blindness, prone, etc options... Even going prone vs an enemy sharpshooter... All those turn the focus on white room dpr estimates on their head and the more and more one gets to the levels used to do this analysis in the micro - the more that focus in micro becomes more corrupting because it cuts more out. As for balanced does not mean equal - exactly - at leadt until one starts using analysis of the micro to then insist on things like getting dpr outputs across martial to be the same. That is the trap of micro-equality - insisting on getting the very small sub-parts equal - it does lead one towards equality in the form of identical. The focus on "equilibrium" of the macro, the whole, allows stronger here but weaker there and puts "balanceability" at the front. To me, the focus of rpg balance should center on showing and explaining when a is better than b, when c is better than a, etc. As i have said, to me balance would be achieved if at the "big level option" each had uncommon circumstances where each option was "best", uncommons where they were "worst" and common cases where they were "average" - measured by contribution to success. That objective does not require micro-tuning outputs to within a few percentage points and can be directly tied in with "scenes in play" more than ever more excluding abstractions. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The final word on DPR, feats and class balance
Top