Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6069157" data-attributes="member: 17106">In some cases, yes. I'm no more a fan of ambiguity on that front than anywhere else. Rules that describe the character and metagame rules are apples and oranges. Let's call an apple an apple and an orange an orange. A feat is a property of the character. A plot point is a property of the player.I don't buy that. If one player has a character with certain abilities, and that player can't show up for a session and hands his character sheet to another player, everything on that character sheet is transferred to the new player. Classes, feats, ability scores, spell slots, equipment, experience points, the whole of it. All of those rules describe the character, regardless of which player (or DM) is controlling that character. A character sheet is aptly named for that reason. By convention, a player adopts the role of one character and shares that character's resources, but they still fundamentally belong to the character. You're right that the two were occasionally conflated before 4e scrambled them together, but I would call any of those instances good game design.Actually, you could get all 18's, if the DM gave you enough points (presumably because he wants Bruce Wayne). Point buy is a system, the amount of points you get is merely a recommendation. Whereas, when you run out of spell slots, you can't cast any more spells unless you actually break the rules. But that's getting tangential.Indeed, it is at issue. Again, in-game and metagame abilities are apples and oranges.[EXTENDED METAPHOR]What you're talking about is a case where one type of character has a huge basket overflowing with apples, and another has one that's not even half full. And you want to create balance by adding a bunch of oranges to the second one. Does that create balance? Depends on how you define balance. If balance is solely the weight of the basket, yes. Otherwise no. I think it makes much more sense to take some apples away from one and/or give them to the other, and leave the oranges separate.[/EXTENDED METAPHOR]In other words, trying to take an imbalance in the game world and fix it with counterbalancing metagame abilities is not a good idea. At best, you'll end up patching the problem, not really fixing it. You're also completely excluding anyone who looks at the game with the rules=physics of the game world approach even by making the attempt. Why not look at the imbalance in the context of the game world and fix it there? What's wrong with doing that?</blockquote>

Verification