Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?

[Nifft]

If you're redrafting things, "trap feats" don't have to be traps. Monkey Grip could simply have been the Feat version of the Powerful Build racial ability- ditch the bathwater but keep the baby, baby.

So your solution to Powerful Build being unbalanced is to introduce a feat tax on everyone else?

Can't say I like this idea. Feats should be nice, not required.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So your solution to Powerful Build being unbalanced is to introduce a feat tax on everyone else?

Actually, I was putting aside the issue of whether or not Powerful Build was balanced.

In short, my solution to having something available to only one race that others want to use- balanced or not- is to make it available to everyone in some way.

For instance, if Minotaur's Gore racial ability were popular, I'd have no problem with WotC (or a HR) making a Feat that made it available to every PC who had horns...or even a specially designed horned helmet (though THAT might get you some combat penalties). Minotaurs can Gore naturally, but others could learn how to fight that way.

 

[Lanefan]

If you are going to design a massively multiple source book game, like 4E, and have it run without serious tweaks at a table then some common design assumptions are needed. If Minotaurs had +8 to strength then every strength based power woould need to be re-evaluated relative to PCs being able to start with a 26 (as opposed to a 20).

By the time you get to this point, it's already too late to save the design.

The primary mistake, after which things become unrecoverable, is to allow Minotaurs and other such monsters as PC races at all; because once this happens either believability or balance goes out the window. 4e sacrificed believability. 3e sacrificed balance. Either way it's a train wreck.

Or you can restrict options to a narrow set of races.

Bingo.

Lan-"I am not a Minotaur"-efan

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

By the time you get to this point, it's already too late to save the design.

The primary mistake, after which things become unrecoverable, is to allow Minotaurs and other such monsters as PC races at all; because once this happens either believability or balance goes out the window. 4e sacrificed believability. 3e sacrificed balance. Either way it's a train wreck.

I'll just state at this point that, IMHO, Monte Cook's AU/AE RPG modified Savage Species' approach solved the monster race issue pretty handily. Adding those racial benefits over time is pretty balanced...and has worked pretty well for me when I built racial character classes for my homebrewed campaigns.

It does involve a bit of work, though.

 

[AllisterH]

[w] multiplication.

4e is very much unlike 3e in this regard. In 3e, your weapon's base damage was often irrelevant compared to bonus damage. In 4e, a weapon's base damage matters more at higher level.

Cheers, -- N

If 4e had gone the route of fixed damage a la ToB (so that you at higher levels had say 5d6 plus wpn dmg), it wouldn't be THAT big of issue (although even then, the big brute races would still be better choices).

Of course, that means that basically wpn choice become irrelevant and that's something I'm not really a fan of.

 

[Nifft]

Actually, I was putting aside the issue of whether or not Powerful Build was balanced.

In short, my solution to having something available to only one race that others want to use- balanced or not- is to make it available to everyone in some way.

For instance, if Minotaur's Gore racial ability were popular, I'd have no problem with WotC (or a HR) making a Feat that made it available to every PC who had horns...or even a specially designed horned helmet (though THAT might get you some combat penalties). Minotaurs can Gore naturally, but others could learn how to fight that way.

So, you'd allow PCs to cherry-pick the best racial powers and traits? IMHO that's a terrible idea.

(...) Of course, that means that basically wpn choice become irrelevant and that's something I'm not really a fan of.

Yeah. It's a trade-off. I'm actually pretty happy with weapon choice still mattering at 30th level.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So, you'd allow PCs to cherry-pick the best racial powers and traits? IMHO that's a terrible idea.

It works just fine in M&M, HERO, GURPS and other point based systems.

Besides, you'd still have to meet the Feat's prereqs- Gore, for instance, would require some kind of horns on the head...or at least on the body.

 

[Doug McCrae]

It works just fine in M&M, HERO, GURPS and other point based systems.

I'm less familiar with GURPS but I'd say lack of balance is the biggest flaw of M&M and HERO. It's a direct consequence of the freedom of point buy systems. More options = more divergence between the most optimised and least optimised character.

One would think that it would be possible to create a properly balanced point buy system where 1 point always gets you an equal amount of utility. But seemingly that's not the case. No one's even come close.

 

[Glyfair]

One would think that it would be possible to create a properly balanced point buy system where 1 point always gets you an equal amount of utility. But seemingly that's not the case. No one's even come close.

You'd need to complete eliminate any synergy between abilities or else have a super complex system that changed the point value of an ability based on a lot of subtle things. For example, buying an ability with a ranged power is much more "powerful" for a character who focused on range than one who focused on melee.

Pretty much a completely balanced system is a pipe-dream.

 

[Hussar]

You'd need to complete eliminate any synergy between abilities or else have a super complex system that changed the point value of an ability based on a lot of subtle things. For example, buying an ability with a ranged power is much more "powerful" for a character who focused on range than one who focused on melee.

Pretty much a completely balanced system is a pipe-dream.

It would be interesting to see if you could build a TTRPG with this sort of point buy system - one that accounts for other choices - using some sort of spread sheet type computer program.

It would be insanely complex to do in a pure pnp game, but, you'd think that a bit of synergy with a computer could do the trick.

I do agree with your second point completely though. You cannot ever have a completely balanced system. Nor, honestly, would you really want to in a game which allows so much player freedom. There's just no way to do it without ramming huge walls around player choices inside the game world.

But, you can still attempt to approach it though.