DISCREPANCY: The Game of Imbalance

[Aberzanzorax]

A thought occurred to me as I rewatched xmen 1 for the umpteenth time.


"What ABOUT power mismatches?" What about a game that acknowledged them (like the avengers: Hulk vs. Hawkeye)?


There has been much debate regarding fighters and wizards...and rogues versus jedi, and such and so on.



So, if we start with "there are memes...or archetypes...or narrative constructs...or ideals" that are simply better than other ones.........




How can a game be made that engages it all?

 

[Stormonu]

You give everybody something to do.

You won't ever seek Hulk on a mission that requires stealth - where you could easily see Hawkeye doing that.

Even guys like Superman can't be everywhere and do everything - you definately see Team-ups between Superman and Batman that still challenge them both, and even some missions Batman would be far more efficient in than Superman.

 

[ComradeGnull]

One of the assumptions in comics that helps that work that isn't present in RPGs is the idea of pairing off heroes and villains- send the Hulk to fight the giant monsters, let Hawkeye pick off one or two as they come in the door, Captain America can go lead the people trapped in the building out to safety, etc.

So, in a game could you say: Mage, fight the evil wizard, rogue go rescue the prisoners, fighter and cleric kill the legions of 1 HD mooks that are coming to help the evil wizard?

One problem with it is that you end up with split parties during combat, which complicates things significantly. There is also the problem that there is limited incentive to not play 'the guy who can do everything', which is the power level complaint with high-level D&D- that a wizard with appropriate spell selection can be the best at countering enemy magic, better than the rogue at opening doors and stealth, AND better at killing legions of mooks than the fighter.

So you need offsetting weaknesses- like Hulk being unable to stealth, and also being a ravening monster who is as likely to harm his allies as his enemies- he can't control how his power is used all the time. Games try to do this by limiting the armor, BAB, saves, hit points, & weapon choice of casters, but then supernatural abilities often end up eliminating those weaknesses.

Other problem: idle periods. A comic hero with lame powers may be perfectly happy idling in the X-jet and then showing up at a key moment, but a player probably won't be. 2e mages don't want to keep going after they've used their three spells a day or whatever. A rogue doesn't want to show up to a game for a month to wait for the one day when the wizard doesn't memorize Knock so he can show his stuff.

I actually do like the idea of giving players different tasks in combat. Yes, it's splitting the party, but presumably you're on a round-based time scale at that point. Requires a little extra record keeping for the DM, but not impossible. The problem is, how to ensure that there is enough to do in every combat, and how to make it so the same guy isn't always getting to be the one to go toe-to-toe with the "Big Bad" for that combat.

 

[haakon1]

You give everybody something to do.

Nod. In addition, what works for me:

1) Trust the players. Trust each player to chose a character they want to play. Trust the players to act as a team. In baseball, I don't expect an outfielder to be jealous that the pitcher gets to pitch. Why should D&D players be jealous of other people's characters contributing to the team?

2) Don't play a high level game. I don't like high level play anyhow, but I assume Angel Summoner v. BMX Bandit situations, if they exist in reality at all, are mostly a problem in high level play. I've never played or run anything higher than 13th level (in AD&D and 3e).

3) Roleplay the NPC's and monsters, don't leave them as static encounters waiting to die when the PC's show up. I see a lot of complaints about how mages can spam the same tactic over and over, "nova and take a 15 minute work day", or how tactics like Invisibility are unstoppable by those without magic. If the enemy is intelligent and pro-active, this isn't going to work for long. I know lots of old school anti-Invisibility tactics, so my wizened old kobold king might teach his minions some too.

4) No free lunch in my campaign. We always start at 1st level. Choices for players starting later are:
-- Start at first level and earn it, like everyone else. I'm OK with ECL's "for free" from a different race if they have a character concept like that.
-- Take over an existing PC from someone bowing out.
-- Take over an existing NPC, weaker than the weakest in the existing party.

The XP rules mean they get close to catching up quickly anyhow, and enforcing this style for leveling means "everybody earned their character, so no complaints". The Wizard didn't just spring up fully formed and full of puissance -- he had to pay his dues with Magic Missile and a crossbow, same as everyone else.

 

[Stormonu]

The Wizard didn't just spring up fully formed and full of puissance -- he had to pay his dues with Magic Missile and a crossbow, same as everyone else.

Forget the crossbow, give him a dagger or a staff and let 'im whimper when he runs out of spells.

--------------------------------

One of the problems I see in later editions of D&D is the movement towards specialization. Every character gravitates towards a single job that they do extremely well. This becomes the easiest way to kill a party because if your specialist gets taken out or otherwise neutralized, you're screwed because no one else can do the job. For a truly successful party, you need overlap in skill areas - and that takes teamwork and working together, rather than oneupmanship. Let the rogue deal with locks - he can do it all day long. But either the fighter should consider packing an adamantine sword/axe or the wizard should have A knock spell or scroll if some trap or wandering monster splatters the rogue.

And for Pete's sake, on the converse, limit your spellcasters. It's okay if there are spells for every occasion (and a mundane way as well), it's not okay if your spellcasters are packing every single spell. Put in limits so they can't do everything, and they won't do everything. In the example above, it's not a bad idea if a spellcaster has one scroll of knock for emergencies, but it's in poor taste if he's packing a wand of knock. A spellcaster with a spell for every occasion - regardless if it's memorized or stored in a magic item - is as bad as PC with a portable hole arsenal. Going back to the superhero analogy, not even Superman has every superpower in existence.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Barnhill8
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[Yora]

Good games should be unbalanced. But in a fair way.
If a rogue is as good a fighter as a warrior, than you don't need warriors. They'd just be weaker rogues.

 

[haakon1]

it's not a bad idea if a spellcaster has one scroll of knock for emergencies, but it's in poor taste if he's packing a wand of knock.

Wands come up a lot in overpowered casters/3e is broken complaints. I haven't seen that problem, but I haven't seen a lot of wands -- and never a wand of CLW or Knock.

I haven't see a PC take Craft Wand as a feat -- Scribe Scroll, Brew Potion, Craft Magic Arms & Armor, and Craft Wondrous item are chosen instead -- I think because "mass storage of the same spell" just hasn't been all that interested to the people I've game with. The first two allow for variety (scrolls of seldom needed but important spells), risk spreading (everyone can have CMW potions, in case they are separated or the cleric goes down), and the second two allow greater choice in the most critical types of gear.

And they're not able to buy Wands, since buying magic items more powerful than a CLW potion or Fireball scroll is rare and difficult in campaign, for the most part.

Which circles back to making Create Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item much more valuable, when you can't get "custom ordered" stuff without either finding it in a treasure pile (which I do with random generation, old school AD&D style), finding it in a rare magic shop (again, stocked by random determination), or making it yourself.

A spellcaster with a spell for every occasion - regardless if it's memorized or stored in a magic item - is as bad as PC with a portable hole arsenal. Going back to the superhero analogy, not even Superman has every superpower in existence.

I'm not bothered by the spellcasters planning ahead for a variety of continencies. If the wizard has a scrolll of Mount, a scroll of Knock, a scroll of Leomund's Tiny Hut, and a scroll of Extended Rope Trick for emergencies, that's fine with me. Then they can concentrate on making stuff go boom with their "natural" daily spells.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Virginia7
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 10
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[LostSoul]

You play a game that's not about power. (Or, if it is about power, what does this power cost you?)