Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7032655" data-attributes="member: 996">Sorry, improper use of irony on my part.&nbsp;When any effort is required at all, yes.&nbsp; The less balanced the game, the more likely it is to break without any intent to do so (or even inadequate attempts to avoid breaking it).&nbsp; Of course, that's still 'self inflicted,' in the sense, above (that is, to put a fine point on it, in the sense that you can never ever blame a system for anything, it's always all your fault), that you didn't put in enough effort to preserve/fix the game.&nbsp;In D&amp;D generally, yes.&nbsp; Most so in 3e, where the mismatching was to some degree intentional to reward system mastery; least so (but still not entirely absent) in 4e where balance was an unprecedentedly high design priority.&nbsp; &nbsp;That can certainly bring it into bold relief.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp; &nbsp;Might even say gaining experience /requires/ folks to learn to adjust for imbalance - if they don't figure that out, eventually the game won't feel much like it's worth playing. &nbsp;Intentionally trying to fix or further break an imbalanced game requires some understanding of it.&nbsp; Breaking a balanced game, OTOH, just requires fiddling with it unadvisedly - breaking it to order, say, wanting to make this or that class OP, but only to a certain degree, might require some thought.&nbsp; &nbsp;Classes, Feats, Races, combinations of the same in a single character or a party, and, pacing (a tension among DM and player choices), monsters, numbers and mixes of same, item placement, pillar emphasis, etc...An extreme example, of course.&nbsp; I ran a thieve's campaign once, it didn't last long, because, well, 1e thieves (kinda the opposite problem), everyone very quickly wanted to play something else. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp; &nbsp;That'd be another factor that could reduce the importance of balance (and perception of imbalance even when it manifests) for you.&nbsp;I got that, yes. &nbsp;Balance is a system quality, so, logically, 'blame' the creators of the system if it lacks that quality to an excessive degree.&nbsp; TL;DR:&nbsp; You're blame'n the victim, dude.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7032655, member: 996"] Sorry, improper use of irony on my part. When any effort is required at all, yes. The less balanced the game, the more likely it is to break without any intent to do so (or even inadequate attempts to avoid breaking it). Of course, that's still 'self inflicted,' in the sense, above (that is, to put a fine point on it, in the sense that you can never ever blame a system for anything, it's always all your fault), that you didn't put in enough effort to preserve/fix the game. In D&D generally, yes. Most so in 3e, where the mismatching was to some degree intentional to reward system mastery; least so (but still not entirely absent) in 4e where balance was an unprecedentedly high design priority. That can certainly bring it into bold relief. ;) Might even say gaining experience /requires/ folks to learn to adjust for imbalance - if they don't figure that out, eventually the game won't feel much like it's worth playing. Intentionally trying to fix or further break an imbalanced game requires some understanding of it. Breaking a balanced game, OTOH, just requires fiddling with it unadvisedly - breaking it to order, say, wanting to make this or that class OP, but only to a certain degree, might require some thought. Classes, Feats, Races, combinations of the same in a single character or a party, and, pacing (a tension among DM and player choices), monsters, numbers and mixes of same, item placement, pillar emphasis, etc... An extreme example, of course. I ran a thieve's campaign once, it didn't last long, because, well, 1e thieves (kinda the opposite problem), everyone very quickly wanted to play something else. ;) That'd be another factor that could reduce the importance of balance (and perception of imbalance even when it manifests) for you. I got that, yes. Balance is a system quality, so, logically, 'blame' the creators of the system if it lacks that quality to an excessive degree. TL;DR: You're blame'n the victim, dude. [/QUOTE]

Verification