Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?
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="Mistwell" data-source="post: 5138556" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>I think this is an important point, for the 4e aspects of this discussion.</p><p></p><p>It's fair to say that 4e did not present the full array of options with just the initial three books. And, if you feel you should not have to buy a ton of books, or subscribe to the DDI in the alternative, to get the full array of options, then that's a fair reason to be critical of the options 4e offers.</p><p></p><p>However, 4e has changed a LOT since those first three books, and I think a lot of critics of the options available in 4e are simply unaware of those changes. The expansion of not just races and classes, but actual mechanics (like a class that doesn't even have encounter powers, for example), is pretty massive as the books progressed. </p><p></p><p>We've now gotten to the point where you can make a skill focused character, with skill powers, Martial Practices (skill based out of combat "tricks", including essentially a reintroduction of the Craft rules), significantly improved skill challenge rules and advice, and a host of additional things that allow for a lot of out of combat interesting activities.</p><p></p><p>We've now gotten hybrid rules, many additional classes and races, and more multiclassing options, and paragon paths, that allow for a great many more character concepts to be embraced fully with the rules. And there is DM advice on reskinning names and descriptions as well. If you can imagine the concept, you might not have been able to make that concept fully realized under the initial 2-3 4e books, but you probably now can since the supplements that came out since then.</p><p></p><p>So yes, the game has changed to allow for a lot more flexibility in character concepts, and out of combat adventuring, since the first three books came out. It's fair to be bothered that you had to wait for supplements before your desired level of flexibility could be fully achieved with the rules. But, I think some of the claims about lack of flexibility mentioned in this thread are a bit unfair. The flexibility is there now. With a single month of DDI access (which is cheap) you could get all the info you needed for whatever kind of character you want to play, with whatever level of focus the DM/Players want on combat vs. out of combat play. You can now realize a lot more campaign ideas than you previously could.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 5138556, member: 2525"] I think this is an important point, for the 4e aspects of this discussion. It's fair to say that 4e did not present the full array of options with just the initial three books. And, if you feel you should not have to buy a ton of books, or subscribe to the DDI in the alternative, to get the full array of options, then that's a fair reason to be critical of the options 4e offers. However, 4e has changed a LOT since those first three books, and I think a lot of critics of the options available in 4e are simply unaware of those changes. The expansion of not just races and classes, but actual mechanics (like a class that doesn't even have encounter powers, for example), is pretty massive as the books progressed. We've now gotten to the point where you can make a skill focused character, with skill powers, Martial Practices (skill based out of combat "tricks", including essentially a reintroduction of the Craft rules), significantly improved skill challenge rules and advice, and a host of additional things that allow for a lot of out of combat interesting activities. We've now gotten hybrid rules, many additional classes and races, and more multiclassing options, and paragon paths, that allow for a great many more character concepts to be embraced fully with the rules. And there is DM advice on reskinning names and descriptions as well. If you can imagine the concept, you might not have been able to make that concept fully realized under the initial 2-3 4e books, but you probably now can since the supplements that came out since then. So yes, the game has changed to allow for a lot more flexibility in character concepts, and out of combat adventuring, since the first three books came out. It's fair to be bothered that you had to wait for supplements before your desired level of flexibility could be fully achieved with the rules. But, I think some of the claims about lack of flexibility mentioned in this thread are a bit unfair. The flexibility is there now. With a single month of DDI access (which is cheap) you could get all the info you needed for whatever kind of character you want to play, with whatever level of focus the DM/Players want on combat vs. out of combat play. You can now realize a lot more campaign ideas than you previously could. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Can somebody explain the bias against game balance?
Top