Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Eben" data-source="post: 836817" data-attributes="member: 1379">I agree when Petrosian says balance is important for helping the casual gamer/concept gamer/whatever and for reining in the system-tinkerers. But one of my initial points, that has been picked up by some other posters, was that there will always be some unbalancing elements in the game. A few months from now we will start seeing the first &quot;Who got the shaft in 3.5?&quot; polls. All these &quot;technical&quot; discussions are interesting, but sometimes the give me the feeling that I'm playing the game the wrong way. For me,and the group I game with each friday nigth, playing is it's own reward. And following the discussions as to why we need 3.5, I get the feeling we're supposed to make a mathematical analysis of our characters so they fit in defined performance parameters.I'm exagerating of course. But I had been reading a lot of positve reactions to a new edition and I wanted to give a bit of a counter-voice. And I'm glad to have noticed other people agree with me or at least can understand this point of view. Cheers!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Eben, post: 836817, member: 1379"] I agree when Petrosian says balance is important for helping the casual gamer/concept gamer/whatever and for reining in the system-tinkerers. But one of my initial points, that has been picked up by some other posters, was that there will always be some unbalancing elements in the game. A few months from now we will start seeing the first "Who got the shaft in 3.5?" polls. All these "technical" discussions are interesting, but sometimes the give me the feeling that I'm playing the game the wrong way. For me,and the group I game with each friday nigth, playing is it's own reward. And following the discussions as to why we need 3.5, I get the feeling we're supposed to make a mathematical analysis of our characters so they fit in defined performance parameters. I'm exagerating of course. But I had been reading a lot of positve reactions to a new edition and I wanted to give a bit of a counter-voice. And I'm glad to have noticed other people agree with me or at least can understand this point of view. Cheers! [/QUOTE]

Verification