Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6178729" data-attributes="member: 17106">Of course not. But has there ever been any version of D&D where any class actually was that? I think the barbarian's a tad better than some of the other classes. It's not dominant. I think the bard's a tad worse than the other classes. It's not worthless. Shades of gray. Certainly, they're both "commensurately competent contributors", one just naturally contributes a little bit more, on average, all things considered.No wonder people hate those "leader" classes so much.You seem to think that the main difference between one profession and the other is that one gives the other orders. This is not at all the case. One has a doctoral degree and a so-called unlimited license to practice, while the other does not. And that's just the start of it.I think modern professions are very good analogies for classes. Are doctors balanced with lawyers? With horticulturists? With prostitutes? With fighter pilots? No. But then again, it depends on the situation. Same for fantasy "professions". In D&D, I can create a gladiator, an enchanter, a warlord, a dilettante, an assassin, an academic, etc. etc. How could all of those things ever be balanced?Really? What is it about? Balance?Not that this territory hasn't been covered before, but creating a story is sine qua non to the experience of D&D; by playing the game you are doing so, regardless of your intent or perspective, regardless of the nature of the story, regardless of whether you record it, etc.Holy over-generalization, Batman! I don't know about you, but I consider storytelling and playing D&D to be closely related activities. I use a similar process for both. Several of the people who've played D&D and gone on to film and TV careers have reported similar things.No. What would that be?You do realize that this isn't at all what I was getting at, right?Roleplaying and balance are independent concepts. The latter doesn't take the former and bash it with a stick. It's just secondary, that's all. My point is that this balance concept isn't essential or even helpful for creating a roleplaying game, and indeed, one could make a great roleplaying game without even considering the concept as you're defining it here and while allowing wildly unbalanced characters that D&D would never dream of.Balance is simply a separate agenda, essentially a callback to the tactical wargame roots of D&D, and an attempt to recreate said wargame in a different context. I tend to see D&D as the standard bearer for rpgs, rather than as being specific to any one tradition. My opinion is that those roots just aren't all that important, and that trying to create it falls under the "fine, but not essential" category, along with other legacy issues and specialized playstyles.</blockquote>

Verification