Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9481002" data-attributes="member: 20564">First, balance is something that happens between characters -- it has zero to do with difficulty.  Not sure why some people are bringing that up.Second, the wider RPG meaning of balance is that the spotlight time given by the mechanics (as opposed to other parts of the game where a character get the spotlight) is somewhat even over time.This wider definition is really important because those who play games primarily like D&D can think it has to do with combat balance.  This is a distortion caused by combat-to-the-death as a common stake, so the most mechanically important part of the game is combat.  So it twists the idea of balance to primarily there, with for some with a wider viewpoint also including utility in other parts as a secondary.(Mind you, even in the pure combat definition, players want balance.  If you ask any player to always be two levels behind everyone else, the majority will say no.  They want to be on equal footing, unless trying something for the experience.  The idea that players want balance is pretty trivially settled with questions like this.)But if you look at games in genres where common stakes don't include the potential for character death, you get a wider understanding.  A common example I use is Marvel Heroic Roleplay: you can have a buddy night's out with Thor and Hawkeye going drinking, with high jinks provided by Loki, and both players can have loads of fun.  Are Thor and Hawkeye "balanced" against each other in power?  Heck no.  But both of the players will have their character get spotlight due to what they do mechanically about even, because that's how the system is built.Bringing that back to D&D, look at the evolution of the cleric (into a wider base of healing classes) over the editions of D&D.  A cleric was a required contributor in early editions, and carried their weight.  But they had less (but still some) flashy change-the-course-of-the-scene mechanical options, so got less spotlight.  And often people didn't want to play them because of that.  So they got more power -- even though already an equal contributor -- to make them more attractive == give them more spotlight.Players don't want mechanics that give others big moments but not themselves.  They want balance.  I'm approaching it from the "do you want to be less" side because that's more universal.  Some players would be fine without balance as long as they are the ones who benefit, while others are more team-minded, so the "more" side is fraught with personality traits that impact the ability to form a consistent picture.</blockquote>

Verification