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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6177310" data-attributes="member: 17106">Okay, but since there are no "balanced games" under the D&D name (or even under the rubric of D&D-like games), I don't know what your point is.Well now you're just crossing threads. To reference the ten years ago, I find the idea of creating a standardized play experience or publishing a specific adventure a complete non-issue when actually designing the game. It would be like designing the rules of football specifically to balance the Ravens and the Broncos, which could create very disappointing results when all the other teams start playing.As to the last point, I think class choice is invariably wrapped up in it. If you're playing a game set in the wilderness, druids are more useful. If you're in a city, druids are less useful. And endless list of similar contextual variables exists for each class. Trying to figure out what will be the most useful choice is part of what character creation in rpgs is all about.Doesn't it always? Again, I think if you run through a hundred different situations, the big guy with X amount of skill will come out on top more often than the small guy with the same amount of skill (realizing that now we're talking about levels in the same class, not different classes). But it won't be a hundred to zero.It's worth noting that when we had a few bard PCs, I had ten players, and now I have three. I much prefer the three, but clearly a smaller party disincentivizes certain character types. Which is not a "bias", simply a natural consequence of a character type that is built on its ability to influence others.I imagine he would consult someone with high BAB for tactical decisions, since D&D has no skill for tactics that I'm aware of. In any case, he'll consult each character when it makes sense to, and act rationally. He won't say to himself "gee that bard player hasn't gotten a lot of love this session" and slavishly attend to only his whims.Sure, but all your ongoing stuff about bards being great influencers of people also rests in the investment of limited resources. It's fairly easy to make a bard that focuses on other things. As to intimidating, I do think it works no matter who has the ranks.That would be another one of those ridiculous overstatements. Then again, said game would be every bit as valid as a "balanced" game where all character choices have been homogenized.Which leads to you trying to take an orange and make it redder and taking an apple and trying to give it a rind to peel. I don't see any reason why different things have to be made the same, only that they need to be independently worthwhile.</blockquote>

Verification