Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?

[Votan]

Or...

...they could have let Goliaths keep Powerful Build as part of their racial makeup- only they and Half-Giants in the previous incarnation had this ability- and it could have been kept rare in 4Ed (instead of it simply being excised). This would have reflected beings who were very strong, but not much stronger than Dragonborn or Half Orcs (more lean, slow-twitch muscle as opposed to bulky, fast-twitch muscle), but who, by dint of sheer size had sufficient leverage to wield weapons the next size up.

...Minotaurs could have had racial utility or encounter powers that reflected great strength that was only occasionally available (instead of the Gore ability which could have been a racial feat).

...one or more of these races could have received +4 Str and nothing else for stat mods, similar to how humans got a +2 to any one stat.

IOW, there were ways within 4Ed's regime to keep these races balanced without weakening them, both mechanically and in terms of flavor/history.

I agree that reflecting the strength of these races through (baalnced) feats and powers would work well. I'm less sure of the +4 approach; only because of how useful stat boosts can be for some powers. But that might work also with active DM monitoring or a tolerant group.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Here's my problem, Dannyalcatraz.

You keep talking as if "lifting, dragging, and pushing" as well as all the other "strength based" skills are actually tightly related.

They are not, not even within one individual, much less across species. And they have a tangential relationship to combat effectiveness at best.

There is a rough correlation between someone's skeletomuscular mass and how much they can lift. Its not linear, but its common enough that you can make reasonable predictions. One need only look at powerlifting stats by weight class to see the relation.

But its not perfect. In HS, I could do a single time leg-press almost 600lbs and couldn't bench over 180, but over time, I got my bench up to 300lbs. By that time, though, I could do multiple sets of leg-press reps at 700lbs fairly easily. So I know lifting is affected by build- my legs have always been inordinately stronger than my arms. I somewhat resemble a fire-plug.

However, I didn't say word one about the relationship to combat effectiveness- others bring that up as a consequence of having greater strength.

My core complaint in this area- for both Str and Dex- is that to which several respondents to the OP alluded to. To whit, the sacrifice of flavor and evocative or iconic features in favor of balance.

You're saying that a desire to balance one aspect of the strength score resulted in bad flavor effects.

I'm saying that those flavor effects were always an unmitigated disaster. That being the case... at least races are balanced now, and the flavor effects are no more or less silly than they have ever been.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

My opinion obviously differs greatly from yours. Those flavor effects you call a disaster were, to me, charming...and largely didn't matter at all until they became PC races.

Now, I see 4Ed Minotaurs as "minitaurs" (thanks, whomever suggested that months ago), Goliaths as diminished from former flavor, Dragonborn as inexplicably equal in strength to creatures 2/3rds their mass and Githzerai as far clumsier than their predecessors in previous editions. And so forth.

They've lost some of their "magic" in becoming balanced in the same fashion as other 4Ed races, and the tragedy is that it didn't have to be this way.

Several posters in this thread (besides myself) have come up with alternatives to the method the designers used, most of which seem to bring the fluff, game history & mechanics of each of these formerly outlying races into greater harmony than the actual 4Ed method...and would seem to be, at least at first blush, to be no less balanced than 4Ed's actual methodology.

 

[AllisterH]

Actually, they DID try alternate methods...

Before the PHB3, the MM minotuar (and bugbear) had the "Powerful Build" writeup.

The problem was that at 1st level, it isn't THAT big a difference but ironically, the higher the level you go up and the more powerful the effects become for the melee classes, the more the powerful build aspect started to overwhelm the other classes.

It is quite easy to design a monster/encounter that is scaled for such a creature but the problem of course was that any such creature designed to be a fair challenge for a minotaur/bugbear was liable to be a very hard challenge for a normal race to say nothing for the small races.

Indeed...I'm glad that WOTC went for balance as players aren't punished severely for wanting to play a race in a melee class that isn't a bugbear or minotaur.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Actually, they DID try alternate methods...

Before the PHB3, the MM minotuar (and bugbear) had the "Powerful Build" writeup.

Just looked at the MM Minotaur and didn't see such language.

I'm not saying it isn't there, just that I didn't see it- could you point it out for me, please?

 

[FireLance]

Just looked at the MM Minotaur and didn't see such language.

I'm not saying it isn't there, just that I didn't see it- could you point it out for me, please?

It's in the section for making NPCs near the back of the MM. It might not show up in DDI, so you will probably need a physical copy of the book. The DDI bugbear race might still have it, though, since it has not yet been given the PC race makeover.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Thanks!

(I don't have DDI, just the books, BTW.)

The problem was that at 1st level, it isn't THAT big a difference but ironically, the higher the level you go up and the more powerful the effects become for the melee classes, the more the powerful build aspect started to overwhelm the other classes.

I find this interesting since its completely at odds with my experience with the 3.X version of the ability. The base damage of big weapons just kind of melts away into the noise of other modifiers.

What is it about 4Ed that makes Powerful Build so disruptive? (Especially within the context of all of those complaints about 4Ed "grind" that have been floating around?)

 

[Nifft]

I find this interesting since its completely at odds with my experience with the 3.X version of the ability. The base damage of big weapons just kind of melts away into the noise of other modifiers.

What is it about 4Ed that makes Powerful Build so disruptive? (Especially within the context of all of those complaints about 4Ed "grind" that have been floating around?)

[w] multiplication.

4e is very much unlike 3e in this regard. In 3e, your weapon's base damage was often irrelevant compared to bonus damage. In 4e, a weapon's base damage matters more at higher level.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That was my guess...but is that really a problem in a game that has generated so many "grind" complaint threads?

(Besides, they could always make a 4Ed Monkey Grip feat...)

 

[Nifft]

but is that really a problem in a game that has generated so many "grind" complaint threads?

IMHO "grind" is irrelevant. The issues that caused grind were somewhat addressed by MM2, and not every group faced "grind" in the first place. It was a widespread complaint, but not even close to a universal one.

Increasing imbalance isn't the way to help groups who faced grind -- unless you're going to require that someone in every group play one of those imbalanced races!

(Besides, they could always make a 4Ed Monkey Grip feat...)

Nah, crappy "trap" feats like Toughness and Monkey Grip are no longer part of D&D's design strategy.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you're redrafting things, "trap feats" don't have to be traps. Monkey Grip could simply have been the Feat version of the Powerful Build racial ability- ditch the bathwater but keep the baby, baby.