3E and the Culture of Balance

[Aust Diamondew]

No.

If player A wanted to jump in front of an arrow for player B he'd have to take a ready action on his turn do so (an I'd proably have a reflex save involved or something). If people just acted out of turn for cool cinematic effect the game would go down the toilet real fast.

As stated when players start pulling PRC X and feat Y and race Z from different supplements you need to think about balance. Maybe when PRC X was made feat Y hadn't come out yet and race Z is from some 3rd party source that wasn't to carful when assigning racial ECLs.

 

[Sammael]

The sort of situation is why I award Fate Points (similar, but not identical to Action Points... and not rewarded automatically per level). A player IMC could certainly spend 1 Fate Point to save his character's friend by jumping in front of him.

 

[kuje31]

Me and another poster are having the same discussion over on the WOTC FR boards at the moment with a few others. Yes, those boards are probably not the best place to be having such a discussion but.

Anyhow, we are being told that even if we have house rules that we should send them to OTHER DM's to be play tested to make sure that our house rules are "balanced" for our campaigns. One of those posters has since clarified this statement by explaining what he actually meant.

Or that making up new rules for different spell systems or mechanics is wrong as well. We are being told, "You must use WOTC sanctioned epic magic mechanics or if you don't it's not "balanced"."

I think, personally, that to many people lately believe in "balance" as a universal thing that must be used every where and if used it must be by thier standards of what "balance" means.

 

[Alan Shutko]

If people just acted out of turn for cool cinematic effect the game would go down the toilet real fast.

THis is all really about what kind of game a group wants to have. I personally think cool cinematic things are fun, and I'd be inclined to allow it in a game. Of course, acting before your turn like this would involve some consequences... probably a penalty to AC and the PC is flatfooted next round or something as a result of completely redirecting himself on the spur of the moment. But I'd just come up with something that sounded fairly reasonable in the game, with the understanding that this was a one-off ruling.

If this kind of thing came up a bunch, I'd sit down and only then would I really consider balance in depth. I probably wouldn't go the feat route... I'd want to encourage everyone to do cinematic things, not just people with the feat. So instead of balancing it by requiring it be a feat, I'd try to balance it with penalties at time of use.

But in a group that doesn't want to game in an action movie, it'd be perfectly reasonable to disallow it.

 

[Psion]

I think balance has a role to play, but think that some people's estimation of balance
1) depart from the reality that exist at the game table
2) can never anticipate the many variations of environment that evolve at the table and
3) tend to dampen down some of the excitement inherent in the system.

So, in short, I think balance, while important when it plays a role in giving everyone a chance to shine, can be as much of a detriment if you micro-anlyze it and turn it into a tyranny in excess of what it needs be.

 

[2WS-Steve]

The sort of situation is why I award Fate Points (similar, but not identical to Action Points... and not rewarded automatically per level). A player IMC could certainly spend 1 Fate Point to save his character's friend by jumping in front of him.

Sammael's solution sounds good. This allows characters to do these sorts of cinematic things without having them become to commonplace or start to dominate the game. It also allows you to playtest a potential houserule before coming to a final decision on how such situations should be handled. And if you're already using Action points, it's very easy to implment.

 

[Mallus]

If people just acted out of turn for cool cinematic effect the game would go down the toilet real fast.

Why?

How does the game suffer from a little derring-do? Aren't RPG's heroic-action simulators? Give the jumper a Reflex save to see if they can act out of turn --I'd allow it if they hadn't gone yet. Apply some kind of additional penalty --say like losing there next turns action. Then award some bonus EXP for bravado.

I really dislike the idea of pen&paper RPG's becoming like CRPG's... where you're limited to a small, pull-down list of moves per character per turn, and that's it. If you have a human moderator capable of making adjustments to the game mechanics on the fly, take advatage of it...

The idea that the game falls apart by deviating slightly from the standard mechanics is just silly [and it presupposes those mechanics are far better at doing what they set out to do in the first place].

3.0/3.5 provides a DM with a great set of tools... but you can use them in ways they weren't neccessarily intended and things work out fine.

 

[dead]

Sammael's solution sounds good. This allows characters to do these sorts of cinematic things without having them become to commonplace or start to dominate the game. It also allows you to playtest a potential houserule before coming to a final decision on how such situations should be handled. And if you're already using Action points, it's very easy to implment.

Yes, maybe I should try Action Points! These first appeared in d20 Modern, right?

Thanks for you help folks.

P.S. Do the villains get Action Points?

 

[Napftor]

P.S. Do the villains get Action Points?

I would say yes. To introduce a mechanic like that, you should provide it to all to keep everything "balanced."

 

[Umbran]

I think Psion has the right of it. "Balance", as far as I am concerned, is simply the concept that all PCs should, over the long haul and in a broad sense, be equally effective. Everybody should be able to feel useful, and get their shot in the spotlight. If you keep in mind that balance is a long-term, broad issue, rather than a moment to moment focused one, it ceases to be tyrranical.