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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dkyle" data-source="post: 5896136" data-attributes="member: 70707">That's exactly what balance in a primarily player vs. environment game means. Fighter vs. Wizard is really about what capabilities each has in interacting with the world and achieving their goals. The could have radically different abilities and approaches, but have similar overall power in the world.The talk about who would win in a fight is just a way to compare their combat capabilities; two classes could be terribly mismatched in a fight between each other, yet still balanced in regards to the overall game.Obviously, balance in a game with character progression is referring to balance between characters of similar amounts of progression.Players don't choose their level.  They do choose their class.  Balance is about options the players have available to them.Not at all. That's not what anyone who is advocating for balance is suggesting when referring to balance. It's simply a cartoonish straw-man.Who is suggesting that games should not have results tied to their "play"? Of course how well someone plays should impact results. That's the whole point of a "game".Puerto Rico is balanced because each player has the same opportunities, and the same mechanics available to them.  Balance does not mean that the game must play out for everyone the same exact way.  What an absurd notion!RPGs are trickier to balance, because we expect meaningfully different character archetypes available to each player. If, on the other hand, we were content with "Everyone plays a Wizard!" or "Everyone plays a Fighter!", the game would be a lot easier to balance.Who is suggestion no accountability for actions?And again, balance is not about what the players decide to do in-character.  It's about what each of them can do, according to the mechanics of the game.</blockquote>

Verification