Game Balance: what does it mean to you?

[Umbran]

While you can calculate your chances of hitting with every edition, 3.0+ have moved into a system that favors min/maxing.

Now, let's be fair - all the previous systems favored min/maxing. Min/maxing is about having success in the game based on common tasks (like frequent combat). So long as there are rules and these tasks, characters that work within the system to succeed at those tasks are favored. The others fail... and die.

What is next, get rid of die rolling all together? No to hit roll for combat?

Well, there are popular games out there that don't have dice (or enforced randomness) at all - often enough they use a resource/bidding mechanic. So let us not act as if the idea were absurd.

 

[Cadfan]

DM-Rocco:

Yes, you might get screwed once by a hitpoint die roll, but a fair DM will usually allow a second roll if it happens twice in a row, if that is your major concern.

I like how you justify keeping a bad rule by noting that a fair DM won't follow it.

If it weren't for the fact that, unlike in classic first edition D&D, we now have feats to choose, skills to select, a better use of the different ability scores encouraging differentiation, and a wider set of weapon options and combat styles, I might agree with your argument that similar hit points make similar characters. Back in time, all a fighter had once you ignored his gear was his ability scores and his hit points. Its been a long time since that was the whole game.

 

[Jhaelen]

Because the game is where I go to take a break from the unfairness of life?

Spot on!
I've seen players have their characters commit suicide right away if they didn't like the stats they rolled. It's simply not fun having to play a sub-par character because of some random die rolls. Now, playing a sub-par character because you choose to, that may be fun for some.

So, I greatly appreciated the point-buy method when I first found it in the DMG. Since buying higher stats costs more points proportionally it also takes makes min-maxing more 'painful'. Most players prefer several above average stats over a single maxed stat.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Anyway, one of the things I was trying to figure out with this thread is why people feel they need max hit points each level to make their characters feel balanced and fair. IMO this would just make the characters seem static and stale. Yes, role-playing makes them different, but stat wise they are the same.

I don't think I've encounted any of these people who feel max HP are needed to feel balanced and fair. I do know people who feel that PCs need above average HP to be fun to play.

To me that is what balance means: fun to play. If you have to watch the other players do everything great while your PC sits around because he is much less effective in almost every situation, then it isn't fun. If every fight is a cakewalk, it isn't fun. If every fight ends in PCs dying, it isn't fun.

 

[DM-Rocco]

I look for each of the primary character builds to have an equal opportunity to shine within a game session, and that's pretty much about it. The most important thing about that is that it is an opportunity I want, not a guaranteed result: if I screw up playing the character or the dice turn against me, let 'em fall where they may.

To me, that means that we still use dice for combat, skill tests, damage and so forth, but the baseline for character creation isn't random. Stat points, hit points and class abilities shouldn't be randomly determined.

With that said, I do like the card method that Psion has discussed for determining ability scores, since it has a strong element of determinism to it without being entirely fixed. Random hit points, however...bleh!

Just my $.02.

--Steve

Please elaborate on this card character creation method please. I haven't heard of this.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Now, let's be fair - all the previous systems favored min/maxing. Min/maxing is about having success in the game based on common tasks (like frequent combat). So long as there are rules and these tasks, characters that work within the system to succeed at those tasks are favored. The others fail... and die.

I don't really wish to comment on this. I understand that every edition has had min/maxers, but it seems that, IMO, that you have it more so in more current editions. I never planned out my character in AD&D to 20th level before I even got in one roll of the die at 1st level. I do in the current edition.

Anyway, I've already said more than I intended to on the subject, let's just drop the edition thing.

What I really want to know is about what people think makes a fair and balanced game. Static hit points each level and point buys is just the tip of the ice berg I suspect. I don't agree with this, but I understand others do. I don't think below average characters should be PCs, but you never get a PC with below an 8 in an ability score in a point buy. That might seem fair in most peoples eyes, but it doesn't always make interesting characters and it doesn't always mean they are weak. I had a character I made and rolled a 4 for Chr and a 7 for Wis. You might think he was weak, and against some mind controlling opponents he may have been, but he had a good Str and Con and he made an excellent fighter. Because of his low Chr and Wis, he also proved to be more interesting to play because he had a flaw and not just an 8 min. In a point buy system, he would not have been as interesting.

Now, I just got off the phone with a friend as I am writing this and he too likes static hit points, as do many of you guys, but he prefers a d4 roll for wizards, d4+2 for d6 classes, d4+4 for d8 classes, d4+6 for d10 classes and d4 +8 for d12 classes. Now that you might be able to talk me into.

Well, there are popular games out there that don't have dice (or enforced randomness) at all - often enough they use a resource/bidding mechanic. So let us not act as if the idea were absurd.

Are you serious? I was being sarcastic. I didn't even think that a game has already done this. I'm sure it can be done, but not ever having seen one, I can't figure out how.

 

[Victim]

I don't really wish to comment on this. I understand that every edition has had min/maxers, but it seems that, IMO, that you have it more so in more current editions. I never planned out my character in AD&D to 20th level before I even got in one roll of the die at 1st level. I do in the current edition.

Well, I wish to comment on this.

The reason people didn't plan out their characters was that there was no advantage to really doing so. Mechanical character optimization was almost entirely a result of initial choices (or non choices, in the case of random stats and such). To make a more powerful character, pick a more powerful class/race/kit/proficiency set up at the beginning of the game. Later character building choices have little impact, unless you're using Weapon Mastery type stuff - but you're still pretty setting the path the character will take at first level.

I'd argue that minmaxing in previous editions was less a matter of making mechanical trade offs to emphasize certain abilities and more a matter of convincing the DM to allow one to use options that were superior in pretty much every respect anyway.

 

[Umbran]

Are you serious? I was being sarcastic. I didn't even think that a game has already done this. I'm sure it can be done, but not ever having seen one, I can't figure out how.

Yes, quite serious. Take a look at the Amber Diceless RPG, Nobilis, and the Marvel Universe RPG (which used the SAGA diceless system, which was also used for a Dragonlance game, IIRC). And those are just the ones off the top of my head.

 

[Victim]

Yes, quite serious. Take a look at the Amber Diceless RPG, Nobilis, and the Marvel Universe RPG (which used the SAGA diceless system, which was also used for a Dragonlance game, IIRC). And those are just the ones off the top of my head.

The short lived, newer Marvel game also used a diceless system involving bidding various amounts of energy, besides the older version using the SAGA system.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I don't think below average characters should be PCs, but you never get a PC with below an 8 in an ability score in a point buy.

Why don't you get a PC with an ability below 8 with point buy? Nothing prevents you from doing it. You get those points back to use in buying up other ability scores. I have done this on a couple of occasions when it made sense for the character concept I had. Drop Dex from 8 to 6 and have two additional points to distribute to another stat. You don't see it, not because it can't be done, but because most people choose to not go below 8. Those same people often will reroll a character with below average stats.

That might seem fair in most peoples eyes, but it doesn't always make interesting characters and it doesn't always mean they are weak. I had a character I made and rolled a 4 for Chr and a 7 for Wis. You might think he was weak, and against some mind controlling opponents he may have been, but he had a good Str and Con and he made an excellent fighter. Because of his low Chr and Wis, he also proved to be more interesting to play because he had a flaw and not just an 8 min. In a point buy system, he would not have been as interesting.

Interesting characters are not determined by their stats, but by their concept and how they are run by the player. Stats just make them more or less effective, which some people might find more or less fun to play.