Aesthetic vrs Stat Build Possible?

[Scribble]

So the armor thing that people are talking about brings up something I've been thinking about...

Is it really possible to build a game that suits both people who want design choices made based on Aesthetics AND those who want design choices made based on balance and stats?

It seems like a choice needs to be made almost always- so it occurs me the playtest may largely be just WoTC figuring out what balance is most acceptable?

 

[Stormonu]

So the armor thing that people are talking about brings up something I've been thinking about...

Is it really possible to build a game that suits both people who want design choices made based on Aesthetics AND those who want design choices made based on balance and stats?

It seems like a choice needs to be made almost always- so it occurs me the playtest may largely be just WoTC figuring out what balance is most acceptable?

Sure, Wotc could have gone with just listing Light, Medum and Heavy armor and letting players fluff the type - and go with named armor as a module, but they went sort of halfway in a manner I don't think is going to please either side. Right now, because of pricing and AC overlaps, the named armors aren't well fleshed out.

Right now, it looks like either we're getting the most basic ruleset or a ruleset with some baked-in modules turned on. Right now, I think where they've set the dial on armor is raising hackles, and they'll just have to tweak it.

 

[Scribble]

Sure, Wotc could have gone with just listing Light, Medum and Heavy armor and letting players fluff the type - and go with named armor as a module, but they went sort of halfway in a manner I don't think is going to please either side. Right now, because of pricing and AC overlaps, the named armors aren't well fleshed out.

Right now, it looks like either we're getting the most basic ruleset or a ruleset with some baked-in modules turned on. Right now, I think where they've set the dial on armor is raising hackles, and they'll just have to tweak it.

Well I'm not really just specifically talking abou this armor incident. Just overall it seems like you either design for Aesthetics and upset people wanting you to build for stats/builds or you design for Stats/Builds and upset people wanting you to design with Aesthetics in mind.

The armor thing- ok so we cut it down to the three types and say the rest is flavor... You don't think that would upset people who now don't have prices/stats to indicate the difference in the various armor types?

 

[Pickles JG]

It's hard enough to sensibly balance 3 types of armour let alone 12. So no I can't see why being allowed to fluff you armour how you want it could be seen as being in any way limiting.

Oh & all weapons should do 1d6 damage.

 

[Stormonu]

Well I'm not really just specifically talking abou this armor incident. Just overall it seems like you either design for Aesthetics and upset people wanting you to build for stats/builds or you design for Stats/Builds and upset people wanting you to design with Aesthetics in mind.

Personally, I think they should design for Aesthetics, then include modules for stat/builds. I was trying to use the armors for an example of this, but guess I didn't get my point across.

I could have gone with the Light/Medium/Heavy and 1d6 damage for weapons IF they'd also included one module of specificity with each ("Here's three different armors for each grade"; "Here's a module you can add to give weapons different damage values").

Now, in a way, they did do this, but they didn't make those modules visibly optional - thus we are led to believe that, for example, this is the only way Chain Mail will be modeled. Same with the Club vs. Mace - the base says there's a difference between the two, but its only in price and weight, not function.

 

[Scribble]

Now, in a way, they did do this, but they didn't make those modules visibly optional - thus we are led to believe that, for example, this is the only way Chain Mail will be modeled. Same with the Club vs. Mace - the base says there's a difference between the two, but its only in price and weight, not function.

But there again... Aesthetically speaking, they're both things used for thumping people so the damage shouldn't be different, but obviously the mace is made of metal, so it should be more expensive.

So if you're designing for stats now you say oh wait, but now there's no reason I should buy that mace... I'm just spending more gold for no good reason.


So Now I guess to add value you have to add complexity and more effects for the mace right?

Now you have to also start compairing it not just to the club, but to all other weapons...


And I think it only gets worse when you have stuff like armor where Aesthetically it makes sense to penalize people in one way for wearing something heavy (more cumbersome!) but you also don't want those penalties to be a drain statwise... so now how do you balance that out?

It just seems like you can't really have both... Ultimately one or the other has to give?

 

[Stormonu]

It just seems like you can't really have both... Ultimately one or the other has to give?

"In all things seek balance (or is it moderation?)"

I fear we may be thinking along totally different lines and I'm missing the point you're trying to make. So, I'll take one last stab at this.

I think you have to seek a middle ground. If you want to gloss over a detail, it should be in a way that promotes gameplay (say, HP vs. Hit Locations). The same goes with specificity. If you highlight a difference between something in the game, be ready to have that difference come up at least occassionally - enough for it to be worth the effort. It doesn't have to be stated in the stat block, just so long as the difference comes up somewhere in the game, and is significant enough.

We can go along with a cost/weight difference for Club vs. Mace if, for example, the DM decides to rule your club bursts into flame when the dragon breathes on it or some orc cuts it in half with an iron axe. If something like that can't occur, we may be better off with "simple bludgeoning weapon (ex., mace, club) - 1d6 damage. Lightweight"

 

[Scribble]

"In all things seek balance (or is it moderation?)"

I fear we may be thinking along totally different lines and I'm missing the point you're trying to make. So, I'll take one last stab at this.

I think you have to seek a middle ground. If you want to gloss over a detail, it should be in a way that promotes gameplay (say, HP vs. Hit Locations). The same goes with specificity. If you highlight a difference between something in the game, be ready to have that difference come up at least occassionally - enough for it to be worth the effort. It doesn't have to be stated in the stat block, just so long as the difference comes up somewhere in the game, and is significant enough.

We can go along with a cost/weight difference for Club vs. Mace if, for example, the DM decides to rule your club bursts into flame when the dragon breathes on it or some orc cuts it in half with an iron axe. If something like that can't occur, we may be better off with "simple bludgeoning weapon (ex., mace, club) - 1d6 damage. Lightweight"

I think we're kind of along the same grounds... Trouble is I think you're thinking with the mindset of a stats guy.

So you the Aesthetic guy wants the price of the Mace higher... It's a mace it SHOULD be more expensive then a lump of wood.

But now the stats guy says wait, what reason do I have to buy a stupid mace? I could save my money by buying a club and save that extra money for soemthing else...


So to compensate for this you start adding benefits to the mace... but WAIT... Now there are 10 other weapons, each having their own Aesthetic design element needs... And you now have to balance them ALL stats wise right? And you have to make sure the benefits you give them to counter their Aesthetic penalties also match the Aesthetics of the weapon...

It seems like it would grow exponentially?

What's worse is when it's two sides of your own mind... Ok I want a weapon because Aesthetically my guy should fight with a mace... but why would I want to buy that mace instead of the club? There isn't a benefit to the mace I should just buy the club... But now I;m pissed because the game is stats wise forcing me to buy the stupid club???

It's kind of basically the feat trap thing people talk about.

And even if you cut it down to light bludgeoning weapon, you're still annoying people who want some type of rules change based on what weapon you choose...

I guess what my post boils down to is..

Is it at all possible to balance rules vrs Aesthetics in a way that makes people happy? Or will there alwyas just be either Aethetic elements that create "feat traps" or Stat elements that hinder aesthetics?

I think in the end you have to kind of live with one or the other... I don't really think you can have a balance.