Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7177133" data-attributes="member: 6683613">It's... not, though.I really don't know what else to say. Your argument is resting on premises that simply do not obtain.Designing the game to be played with physical dice and nothing more than the simplest arithmetic closes off some design options.Deciding the game is going to be in the heroic fantasy genre closes off some design options.Accepting the standard societal norms against offensive content closes some design options.Avoiding copyright infringement closes some design options.So it's true, writing a balanced game closes off some design options, but not all options are good options. Cardinal rule of game design: just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Yes, you could write a system that relies on longitudinal balance. You could also write a virulently racist cyborg character named &quot;Marvel's Wolverine&quot; whose attacks deal damage equal to the natural log of a d417 roll. But if you did, you would be actively making your game worse.Then you're not really &quot;looking at the game overall&quot;, are you? Because the game overall does include short campaigns and fixed-level campaigns.And speaking personally, I would not at all be interested in a campaign where my character undercontributes for several years straight, and then when I do finally get powerful, it's my friend's turn for their character to undercontribute for however many more years it takes until the campaign ends or the character dies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7177133, member: 6683613"] It's... not, though. I really don't know what else to say. Your argument is resting on premises that simply do not obtain. Designing the game to be played with physical dice and nothing more than the simplest arithmetic closes off some design options. Deciding the game is going to be in the heroic fantasy genre closes off some design options. Accepting the standard societal norms against offensive content closes some design options. Avoiding copyright infringement closes some design options. So it's true, writing a balanced game closes off some design options, but not all options are [I]good[/I] options. Cardinal rule of game design: just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Yes, you could write a system that relies on longitudinal balance. You could also write a virulently racist cyborg character named "Marvel's Wolverine" whose attacks deal damage equal to the natural log of a d417 roll. But if you did, you would be actively making your game worse. Then you're not really [I]"looking at the game overall"[/I], are you? Because the game overall does include short campaigns and fixed-level campaigns. And speaking personally, I would not at all be interested in a campaign where my character undercontributes for several years straight, and then when I do finally get powerful, it's my friend's turn for [I]their[/I] character to undercontribute for however many more years it takes until the campaign ends or the character dies. [/QUOTE]

Verification