Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Trickstergod" data-source="post: 2177076" data-attributes="member: 10825">Balance is important between the PC's. Each needs to be useful and able to contribute. For concepts that aren't necessarily similar, then the PC's should shine in their respective area's. If the cleric is wading into melee combat more effectively than the melee-focused fighter, there's a problem. Of course, sometimes the PC to PC balance doesn't apply right away. If I think a particular prestige class or feat is too strong ahead of time, then it needs to be fixed, even if the PC is currently the only one filling whatever niche the strong feature grants - after all, someone might want to play a character that would later be overshadowed by that prestige class or feat or whatever. I also don't want prestige classes to be required, which it often seems is the case - many prestige classes greatly outshine core classes, which is a bad thing. Not all concepts have a prestige class and prestige classes often have wide balance disparities. Balance is also important in the sense of knowing what can or can't be thrown at the PC's. If the power gauge of the PC's can't be figured, than they're bound to run into trouble (that they shouldn't) and it's the GM's fault for that. Either that, or there's going to be some fudging. I hate fudging. So, yeah. Balance is important. It ensures that no PC feels outdone by another, allows for most character concepts to be valid in some way, and allows the GM to know roughly what the party can and can't handle instead of blindly fumbling about, killing characters left and right with poorly planned encounters or cheating left and right to avoid the PC's dying (or, heck, the NPC's - I disdain NPC's living by GM-fiat, usually).</blockquote>

Verification