Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5824994" data-attributes="member: 54877">Some of the time you could be easily balanced. Do so. At other times, it might not be so easy, but hey, this particular class will get played a lot and we should at least make the effort. To deliberately unbalance upfront because of flavor is something I see for the more niche classes. (I probably shouldn't have used the BECMI ratios as an example of the math. I seems to have created the wrong impression.) Say you have core classes of fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue, bard, druid, ranger, paladin. Make those as balanced as you can. But then if you have this idea for a warlock that trails behind or a monk that is a bit overpowered, and you just can't make it work otherwise, meter it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> Ideally, of course, that would never come up. You'd find away to make each new class reasonably balanced. So that leaves all the other reasons for imbalance--mistakes, change in play environment, particular players, etc. Primarily, such a mechanic is a modest one that says, "We can't get this perfect, all the time, for everyone. So even though we'll do the best we can, we'll provide a built in method to handle those issues."</blockquote>