Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6534674" data-attributes="member: 92511">It's a perspective and definition issue. What is, to your fellow players/debaters &quot;balanced&quot;?If &quot;balanced&quot; is supposed to be: &quot;Every race should get a resistance, vision or other sense, 3 weapon profs, +2 things they can do.&quot; That is the expectation that &quot;balanced&quot; = &quot;the same&quot;.Having all races be &quot;the same&quot; is boring. It leads to boring characters. It leads to cookie-cutter PCs and makes race little more than differently colored &quot;dressing&quot; to differentiate PCs. In this case, no, the races are not &quot;balanced.&quot;And thank the gods for that, says I.If &quot;balanced&quot; means &quot;a general comparison a power that falls within a given spectrum&quot;, then yes, then race are balanced just fine. That requires acknowledging that a group of things within a spectrum can be &quot;balanced&quot; by various factors. That spectrum is not as cut/dry as &quot;+X to Y, a resistance and 3 skills&quot;. The spectrum includes, but is not limited to, &quot;How different from a human is this race?&quot;, &quot;How specialized is the race and/or [default] culture in this/that area&quot;, &quot;How situational vs. constant are various traits?&quot;, and &quot;What is the [default] flavor/backstory of this race?&quot; Does this mean your PCs will encounter creatures that will be OFF that spectrum, in one direction or the other, i.e. very wimpy or extraordinarily &quot;better&quot; in various ways than PC races can be? Yes! That is the game. That, also, is not &quot;unbalanced&quot;. There are creatures [races] that are better than you in XYZ ways. That's life...even in the fantasy worlds of D&amp;D...and, again imnsho, as it should.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6534674, member: 92511"] It's a perspective and definition issue. What is, to your fellow players/debaters "balanced"? If "balanced" is supposed to be: "Every race should get a resistance, vision or other sense, 3 weapon profs, +2 things they can do." That is the expectation that "balanced" = "the same". Having all races be "the same" is boring. It leads to boring characters. It leads to cookie-cutter PCs and makes race little more than differently colored "dressing" to differentiate PCs. In this case, no, the races are not "balanced." And thank the gods for that, says I. If "balanced" means "a general comparison a power that falls within a given spectrum", then yes, then race are balanced just fine. That requires acknowledging that a group of things within a spectrum can be "balanced" by various factors. That spectrum is not as cut/dry as "+X to Y, a resistance and 3 skills". The spectrum includes, but is not limited to, "How different from a human is this race?", "How specialized is the race and/or [default] culture in this/that area", "How situational vs. constant are various traits?", and "What is the [default] flavor/backstory of this race?" Does this mean your PCs will encounter creatures that will be OFF that spectrum, in one direction or the other, i.e. very wimpy or extraordinarily "better" in various ways than PC races can be? Yes! That is the game. That, also, is not "unbalanced". There are creatures [races] that are better than you in XYZ ways. That's life...even in the fantasy worlds of D&D...and, again imnsho, as it should. [/QUOTE]

Verification