Older Editions and "Balance" when compared to 3.5

[fanboy2000]

Your definition bears no relation to the word 'balance'. Balanced against what?

I don't know what Hussar's definition of balance is. But for me, a game is balanced when every player and the DM, over the course of a single game session, have the same amount of fun.

Thus a game balances each player's role against the other players and the DM.

So if we could quantify fun, a game is balanced if, given equally skilled players,
each player has a fun quotient within one of each other.

For example, on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being watching Star Wars for the first time back in 1977, 0 being a root canal, and 5 being a normal night of hanging out with people you can stand, a game would be balanced if everyone had a fun quotient of 5, 6, or 7 in a single game session.

(Is there some other kind of incorrect, btw? Does this mean anything other than "wrong"?)

Yes there is "artistically incorrect." For an example, watch The Producers.

There is also the closely related "opinionated incorrect." For example, anyone who says "in my opinion, vi rules and emacs drools" is opinionated incorrect.

 

[S'mon]

I don't know what Hussar's definition of balance is. But for me, a game is balanced when every player and the DM, over the course of a single game session, have the same amount of fun.

Thus a game balances each player's role against the other players and the DM.

Is this why modern editions of D&D make DMing less fun? So the DM won't have more fun than the players?

 

[AllisterH]

I don't know what Hussar's definition of balance is. But for me, a game is balanced when every player and the DM, over the course of a single game session, have the same amount of fun.

.

Um, wouldn't this mean that pre 3e was NOT balanced in your opinion. Pre 3e D&D was always balaned over the length of a campaign...

P.S. Since when did Sleep NOT become an auto-winner? It sure as hell was always recommended as the BEST spell for a 1st level mage to take (after Charm Person of course)

 

[green slime]

Actually, it is possible to deal with traps as skill challenges in any edition of the game, just because it wasn't done so by many, does not mean the earlier editions of the game cannot do the same.

 

[Raven Crowking]

P.S. Since when did Sleep NOT become an auto-winner? It sure as hell was always recommended as the BEST spell for a 1st level mage to take (after Charm Person of course)

Not really sure to make of your post. The longsword was a great weapon of choice for most fighters, yet nary a play of said fighter I ever met therefore concluded that they were going to autowin encounters because their character was so equiped!

Again, we have the encounters in the Moathouse as stark evidence that sleep is not an autowin, and why this is so.

Sleep became NOT an auto-winner when the you read the spell descriptions and follow the rules. Ergo, it follows that sleep is an autowin only when the spell descriptions are not read, and the rules not followed.

Useful =/= autowin.

BEST =/= best (after X, of course).

Of course, we can have a "We don't read the rules, and we are finding 4e unbalanced, but it is the fault of the rules, and not our fault, and we refuse to learn from our mistakes when you point them out, therefore CaGI is an autowin" discussion, if you really like, but I seriously doubt it would be any more productive!



RC

 

[AllisterH]

From Memory:

Sleep is ineffective versus elves, creatures of 4 HD and higher and undead.

That's a LOT of creatures that you encounter in lvls 1-3 which Sleep WAS an auto-win. At the least, it would significantly change the outcome of a battle unlike say magic missile

The only times when sleep was "useless" in my experience was versus undead (Sleep becomes an auto-fail in Ravenloft to use the "auto"-meme) and "boss fights - the ogre is the endboss of a level for example

The elves ability to NOT be subject to sleep was rarely used against opponents since elves frankly were rarely the bad guys AND most DMs weren't as "fair/mean" (- take your pick) to use sleep versus the party.

Sleep IMO definitely fits the category of BEST/Upper-Tier spells in pre 3e.
Hell, it became so annoying that once my DM even offered a player the choice of gaining double the number of 1st levels spells if they were randomly picked versus picking the 1d4 number of spells you got to choose by the rules IIRC.

The player STILL took the latter option.

 

[ExploderWizard]

A magic user that loses initiative and ends up with 1d4 kobold javelins in his corpse doesn't feel much like an autowinner. I have played a few of these. Because of sleep and other powerful magic, monsters learn to kill the guy wearing the dress first.

Remember that before 3E, actually getting to cast that "autowinner" was in no way a certainty. A combination of being the softest target AND the most heavily targeted made the odds 50/50 at best.

 

[AllisterH]

A magic user that loses initiative and ends up with 1d4 kobold javelins in his corpse doesn't feel much like an autowinner. I have played a few of these. Because of sleep and other powerful magic, monsters learn to kill the guy wearing the dress first.

Remember that before 3E, actually getting to cast that "autowinner" was in no way a certainty. A combination of being the softest target AND the most heavily targeted made the odds 50/50 at best.

This I agree with, but the same could be said for ANY of the 1st level combat spells (which is why Charm Person rocked so hard..). Sleep was the best of the combat spells for ye old 1st level newbie magic. Sure, by 5th level, I would've loved to have either Magic missile or Chromatic Orb instead of Sleep, but Sleep is probably the reason which allowed you to BECOME a 5th level mage.

As an aside, the above initiative rules and others is why I personally don't consider 3e easy to convert and tend not to see 3e as simply AD&D codified.

The basic underlying "rules" for magic were changed and frankly, that SHOULD have a much bigger effect on the game and the participants than say the introduction of encounter/daily powers for martial characters.

We went from a world from magic was quite frankly HARD (hard to find spells, hard to create magic items, hard to USE magic) to one where magic was relatively easy in comparison.

From the fact that in 3e, as a DM, I found that you HAD to consider not just the use of spells being all types of more common but the fact that they would actually be used more often?

I always come back to it, but take a look at say the KNOCK spell. It is a ritual in 4E now while it was basically the same way written as before in 3e, yet the 4e version affect on the world is about the same as the 1e/2e IMO since the "rules" underlying magic made the Knock spell much more of a headache in 3e for a typical DM.

What I mean is, a 1e/2e/4e world is not really going to need to assume anti-KNOCK precautions since there are limitations on said spell (1e/2e - rarity, 4e- time), in 3.x, I do think a DM needs to take into account the fact that Knock is only a few gp away...

 

[Raven Crowking]

From Memory:

I didn't go by memory; I looked up the rules.

"Able to effect XdY" isn't an auto-win. Period.

Do I need to cut & paste the Moathouse encounters again? Esp. for those monsters where the XdY range includes a potential result of 0, or where the number of creatures encountered falls outside the maximum of XdY.

Even where the number of creatures falls within the range of XdY, it is only an autowin if the number is the minimum of XdY.

And, since sleep affects creatures in a 30-ft diameter, the creatures must be bunched up. Sleep is not an autowin against even two giant rats, if they are more than 30 ft. away from each other.

Again, "useful" =/= Autowin.

Not autowin =/= not useful.

I can cut & paste the Moathouse encounters for you again, if you need me to.

Or we could have that discussion about how 4e is unbalanced because a player doesn't know the rules, refuses to accept the rules when they are pointed out, and nonetheless blames the rules rather than himself. I'm sure it'll be a hoot.


RC

 

[green slime]

A magic user that loses initiative and ends up with 1d4 kobold javelins in his corpse doesn't feel much like an autowinner. I have played a few of these. Because of sleep and other powerful magic, monsters learn to kill the guy wearing the dress first.

Remember that before 3E, actually getting to cast that "autowinner" was in no way a certainty. A combination of being the softest target AND the most heavily targeted made the odds 50/50 at best.

True, within reason...

Once a DM had a skeleton rush past two fighters, (provoking AoO from each) to attack my wizard, which had been hanging back in the background. Sunless Citadel apparently had skeletons that were vicious members of the anti-spellcaster league.

IOW, if the DM sucks, the DM sucks, and there isn't much you can do about it in game. Basically, it comes down to "fun".

The question is, is it reasonable for a kobold to feel threatened by pale, wheezing Jimmy wearing pyjamas, or Tornado, the ½-orc wielding an axe bigger than the kobold, especially when the latters is starting to froth at the mouth and screams bloody murder? How often have the kobolds experienced magic vs how often have they been bullied by bigger creatures? How often have they plundered treasure from non-magical foes, vs magical foes? How often have they traded and bartered with the humans? How about taking prisoners and getting ransom? Must be far better than just stabbing everything to death... However, YMMV.

At lower levels, IMC, intelligent opponents are much more likely to capture for ransom, than kill outright. You really need a reason to kill, because it messes up the whole neighbourhood. And in the end, Fresh meat just tastes better: Keep them alive until it is time to put them in the pot.

PS: above sentiment applies to ALL versions of the game... even Basic D&D.