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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6142725" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Here's what I have:Sure, you could make a "balanced" monster with all equal ability scores, two equal skills (one attack, one defense), and flavor-only perks.  Or something like that.  Which sounds balanced, except not all abilities are created equal, and you could have one skill with lots of points or one skill per level (with one point each).  And perks can maximize offense, or maximize defense, or add yet more skill points or ability points.So I'm not even sure what a "balanced" monster would be.  I guess another way to put it would be "survivable," as in, it has the skills to survive to relatively old age.Here's my first crack:A balanced monster has a good, average, and bad ability score.  These progress at a 3/2/1 ratio.And it generally has three skills: one offense, one defense, and one flavor.  And these also progress at 3/2/1.Perks do not factor into balancing, unless the above systems leave a big hole.Also, abilities look like this:Metaphysical: you can't armor your Metaphysical, so it should have a defense skill or be really high.Physical: this can be armored fairly easily (with perks or money), but if it isn't, it'll also need a decent defense skill.Mental: this can only be protected by spells or perks, or by being the highest stat.So there should be an armored stat, a skill-protected stat, and one likely weak spot (which could be the highest stat).Questions:- Does it make sense for balanced monsters to have more or less skills?- Should perks play a more important role in balancing a monster?- Is the 3/2/1 progression for abilities and skills reasonable?</blockquote>

Verification