Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tyrlaan" data-source="post: 4885115" data-attributes="member: 20998">Ah, but now you're glomming this into the simulationist vs. narrativist aspects of a game. The catch is people like experiencing a sense of accomplishment when playing a game. The longer a person has to wait for that accomplishment to come to fruition, the bigger it must feel so the person believes the time was worth the effort. Of course there are a lot of fuzzy terms and inidivdual tastes balled up in there, but that's the crux of the debate you're introducing.Which by the way, is very off-topic to this thread <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Very interesting, but off-topic. I'd recommend forking it to a new one.On topic, I'll throw my hat in the ring as someone who feels balance is about spotlight balance. And doing it right for a game requires the designer of the game to understand what aspect of their game will have the spotlight. Interestingly enough, while 4e is decidedly built to balance combat, I'd argue it does a better job of balancing non-combat than previous editions. The skill disparity between the classes is very minimal. Along with the concept of ever improving skill bonuses for everyone, the playing field is more level than before.</blockquote>