Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Be honest, how long would it really take you to notice all of this stuff...?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 6319804" data-attributes="member: 18"><p>If you didn't notice 3.XE's broken-ness, then yeah, you're not going to notice this sort of stuff. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I think it's a lot to do with individual mind-sets, and where your background is, and also whether enjoy genuinely analyzing things, or prefer to either ignore the details, or generalize about them.</p><p></p><p>If you're from any kind of gaming background where rules-mastery actually matters, and where rules change with some frequency, or are very very complex, then you probably have had to develop some degree of ability to analyze rules, to think of the consequences of rules, and to look at the maths behind the game.</p><p></p><p>That would include most TT wargames, but not really stuff like chess, where the actual rules are relatively simple.</p><p></p><p>I think with RPGs, another factor is how much you've been exposed to the consequences of badly-made rules - particularly where those consequences aren't just a "common sense" issue, but are a math issue, or something that is so fantastical that "common sense" approaches don't easily apply. If you've never had a game get messed up because a designer clearly didn't understand the consequences of a rules-design he made, you're much less likely to be keen on analyzing them.</p><p></p><p>Personally I'm pretty good at picking up "Potential Offenders", but I'll always have some "false positives" and miss some offenders too. As Mistwell has noted in other threads, a lot of stuff simply won't show up as fine or broken until the game is actually played. </p><p></p><p> [MENTION=371]Hand of Evil[/MENTION] - That's the problem we're discussing, you seem not to understand that. First off, is it the DM's job to think about balance when determining what PCs can pick race/class-wise? Not everyone would agree - some would suggest that if it's in, say "The Basic Set" or "The Official Book", it should already be balanced, and the DM shouldn't have to take precautions.</p><p></p><p>This was discussed at some length earlier in 5E's history, when some people felt that potentially-dangerous classes and races should be clearly labelled as such.</p><p></p><p>But that leads to another problem - many RPG authors are terrible at balance and do not know it. So they add something to a game, and don't understand how broken it is. If these professionals can't do it, why would we expect normal DMs to?</p><p></p><p>Some of us can, of course, but a lot of DMs just don't recognise balance problems, and few RPGs, certainly not earlier editions of D&D, train you to recognise them, because they usually operate on the basis that the RAW are pretty solid (which they often are not). I mean, here I am, highly experience with dozens or hundreds of rules-sets, understanding design principles, maths, and so on, extremely good at reasoning out the consequences of rules (by typical standards), and enjoying rules-analysis, and even I'm missing a lot of stuff, so to expect the average DM to be able to reliably pick out balance-issues before the game even starts? I don't think that's reasonable.</p><p></p><p>I won't even get into how DMs who feel the need to "balance" stuff aggressively but don't understand the rules very well often end up making things even less balanced.</p><p></p><p>EDIT - 5E proposes a VERY interesting solution to this, in the whole "Living Rules" concept, where they will apparently be monitoring the game regularly via surveys and the like to attempt to determine if stuff is seen as out-of-whack, but where they will, unlike 4E, be taking player sentiment into account, rather than just rules-designer analysis of whether something is functioning correctly (this is also unlike most on-going computer games, where typically player sentiment is largely discounted in favour of developers deciding "where they want the game to go" and so on).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 6319804, member: 18"] If you didn't notice 3.XE's broken-ness, then yeah, you're not going to notice this sort of stuff. :) I think it's a lot to do with individual mind-sets, and where your background is, and also whether enjoy genuinely analyzing things, or prefer to either ignore the details, or generalize about them. If you're from any kind of gaming background where rules-mastery actually matters, and where rules change with some frequency, or are very very complex, then you probably have had to develop some degree of ability to analyze rules, to think of the consequences of rules, and to look at the maths behind the game. That would include most TT wargames, but not really stuff like chess, where the actual rules are relatively simple. I think with RPGs, another factor is how much you've been exposed to the consequences of badly-made rules - particularly where those consequences aren't just a "common sense" issue, but are a math issue, or something that is so fantastical that "common sense" approaches don't easily apply. If you've never had a game get messed up because a designer clearly didn't understand the consequences of a rules-design he made, you're much less likely to be keen on analyzing them. Personally I'm pretty good at picking up "Potential Offenders", but I'll always have some "false positives" and miss some offenders too. As Mistwell has noted in other threads, a lot of stuff simply won't show up as fine or broken until the game is actually played. [MENTION=371]Hand of Evil[/MENTION] - That's the problem we're discussing, you seem not to understand that. First off, is it the DM's job to think about balance when determining what PCs can pick race/class-wise? Not everyone would agree - some would suggest that if it's in, say "The Basic Set" or "The Official Book", it should already be balanced, and the DM shouldn't have to take precautions. This was discussed at some length earlier in 5E's history, when some people felt that potentially-dangerous classes and races should be clearly labelled as such. But that leads to another problem - many RPG authors are terrible at balance and do not know it. So they add something to a game, and don't understand how broken it is. If these professionals can't do it, why would we expect normal DMs to? Some of us can, of course, but a lot of DMs just don't recognise balance problems, and few RPGs, certainly not earlier editions of D&D, train you to recognise them, because they usually operate on the basis that the RAW are pretty solid (which they often are not). I mean, here I am, highly experience with dozens or hundreds of rules-sets, understanding design principles, maths, and so on, extremely good at reasoning out the consequences of rules (by typical standards), and enjoying rules-analysis, and even I'm missing a lot of stuff, so to expect the average DM to be able to reliably pick out balance-issues before the game even starts? I don't think that's reasonable. I won't even get into how DMs who feel the need to "balance" stuff aggressively but don't understand the rules very well often end up making things even less balanced. EDIT - 5E proposes a VERY interesting solution to this, in the whole "Living Rules" concept, where they will apparently be monitoring the game regularly via surveys and the like to attempt to determine if stuff is seen as out-of-whack, but where they will, unlike 4E, be taking player sentiment into account, rather than just rules-designer analysis of whether something is functioning correctly (this is also unlike most on-going computer games, where typically player sentiment is largely discounted in favour of developers deciding "where they want the game to go" and so on). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Be honest, how long would it really take you to notice all of this stuff...?
Top