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
Collecting Definitions of "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="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5856978" data-attributes="member: 58197"><p>There are fundamentally two forms of balance: PC versus PC, and PC versus World. They serve very distinct purposes.</p><p></p><p><strong>PC versus PC</strong>:This type of balance exists to ensure that every PC gets a roughly equal share of the spotlight*. It applies to class abilities, magic items intended for PC use, feats, henchmen, XP, etc. These elements may be thrown together or split out into silos; see the bit on scope below.</p><p></p><p><strong>PC versus World</strong>: This type of balance exists to inform the DM's assessment of how tough an obstacle is, both in absolute terms and relative to the PCs. It applies to monsters, traps, and skill challenges or equivalent. This information <em>may</em> be used a) to award experience, and b) to design suitable adventures for a given party.</p><p></p><p>In addition, there is the question of <em>scope</em>. Balance can be viewed as a literal balancing act, where you put (for instance) a bunch of fighter abilities in one pan of a scale, and a bunch of wizard abilities in the other, and see how the scale hangs. Scope is the question, "How much stuff are we putting in each pan?"</p><p></p><p>AD&D had a very broad scope, throwing the entire campaign's worth of fighter abilities in one pan and the entire campaign's worth of wizard abilities in the other. Thus, the fighter was stronger than the wizard at low levels but weaker at high levels, and this was seen to balance out because the scope included all levels. Likewise, noncombat utility and combat utility all got thrown together.</p><p></p><p>4E, on the other hand, had extremely narrow scope. Classic 4E had the narrowest scope of any edition: You took the combat abilities of the fighter in a single encounter at a given level, and weighed them against the combat abilities of the wizard in a single encounter at the same level. Essentials broadened the scope from "encounter" to "day," but it was still very tight.</p><p></p><p>Broad scope allows for maximum flexibility in class design, but carries the risk that any given campaign may include only a fraction of the scope in question. If your AD&D game wrapped up at level 6, the fighter would never get the "weak levels" to counteract the strong. Moreover, an overly broad scope can exceed the players' attention span. Many players don't feel that six months of frustration followed by six months as king of the hill, or vice versa, is a fun way to play.</p><p></p><p>Narrow scope ensures that balance applies everywhere, but places heavy constraints on design. Classic 4E demonstrated this with its rigid AEDU structure, which many players felt was stifling and boring.</p><p></p><p>[SIZE=-2]*D&D game balance does not generally concern itself with actual PC-on-PC combat. The fighter and wizard are assumed to be on the same side, so it doesn't matter which of them would smoke the other in a duel.</p><p>[/SIZE]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5856978, member: 58197"] There are fundamentally two forms of balance: PC versus PC, and PC versus World. They serve very distinct purposes. [B]PC versus PC[/B]:This type of balance exists to ensure that every PC gets a roughly equal share of the spotlight*. It applies to class abilities, magic items intended for PC use, feats, henchmen, XP, etc. These elements may be thrown together or split out into silos; see the bit on scope below. [B]PC versus World[/B]: This type of balance exists to inform the DM's assessment of how tough an obstacle is, both in absolute terms and relative to the PCs. It applies to monsters, traps, and skill challenges or equivalent. This information [I]may[/I] be used a) to award experience, and b) to design suitable adventures for a given party. In addition, there is the question of [I]scope[/I]. Balance can be viewed as a literal balancing act, where you put (for instance) a bunch of fighter abilities in one pan of a scale, and a bunch of wizard abilities in the other, and see how the scale hangs. Scope is the question, "How much stuff are we putting in each pan?" AD&D had a very broad scope, throwing the entire campaign's worth of fighter abilities in one pan and the entire campaign's worth of wizard abilities in the other. Thus, the fighter was stronger than the wizard at low levels but weaker at high levels, and this was seen to balance out because the scope included all levels. Likewise, noncombat utility and combat utility all got thrown together. 4E, on the other hand, had extremely narrow scope. Classic 4E had the narrowest scope of any edition: You took the combat abilities of the fighter in a single encounter at a given level, and weighed them against the combat abilities of the wizard in a single encounter at the same level. Essentials broadened the scope from "encounter" to "day," but it was still very tight. Broad scope allows for maximum flexibility in class design, but carries the risk that any given campaign may include only a fraction of the scope in question. If your AD&D game wrapped up at level 6, the fighter would never get the "weak levels" to counteract the strong. Moreover, an overly broad scope can exceed the players' attention span. Many players don't feel that six months of frustration followed by six months as king of the hill, or vice versa, is a fun way to play. Narrow scope ensures that balance applies everywhere, but places heavy constraints on design. Classic 4E demonstrated this with its rigid AEDU structure, which many players felt was stifling and boring. [SIZE=-2]*D&D game balance does not generally concern itself with actual PC-on-PC combat. The fighter and wizard are assumed to be on the same side, so it doesn't matter which of them would smoke the other in a duel. [/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Collecting Definitions of "Game Balance"
Top