Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Orius" data-source="post: 4410569" data-attributes="member: 8863">Dammit, now that he changed the sig, I don't get the joke.&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/rant.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":rant:" title="Rant&nbsp; &nbsp; :rant:" data-shortname=":rant:" />I think perhaps &quot;balance&quot; is something that cannot always be measured objectively, and that in at least some cases it varies from person to person.Or maybe different playing styles require different levels of balance.&nbsp;Don't know if this is a good thing or bad.&nbsp; I don't always like randomness myself, sometimes it can really screw things.&nbsp; But there are times that the unpredictability of randomness can shake thing up and make them more interesting. Sometimes, the two are indistinguishable.... <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devil.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":devil:" title="Devil&nbsp; &nbsp; :devil:" data-shortname=":devil:" />Haven't played 4e yet, but I can understand why randomness was removed.&nbsp; New DM haven't learned how to fudge well (that's one of those things that has to be learned through experience), so when they let the dice fall where they may, sometimes very bad things happen.&nbsp; Also, such randomness makes it harder to adapt the rules to an electronic format; human DMs can always fudge, but a computer running a D&amp;D-based game can't.&nbsp; Video game adaptations of D&amp;D have been largely hit and miss, and I'm sure one of the things Hasbro wanted from the new edition was a game that could be used for electronic gaming adaptations.&nbsp; Perhaps a default non-random ruleset with some basaic guidline for more experienced DMs would have been a better solution.&nbsp; For example, the random treasure table ideas that have been mentioned here come to mind.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Orius, post: 4410569, member: 8863"] Dammit, now that he changed the sig, I don't get the joke. :rant: I think perhaps "balance" is something that cannot always be measured objectively, and that in at least some cases it varies from person to person. Or maybe different playing styles require different levels of balance. Don't know if this is a good thing or bad. I don't always like randomness myself, sometimes it can really screw things. But there are times that the unpredictability of randomness can shake thing up and make them more interesting. Sometimes, the two are indistinguishable.... :devil: Haven't played 4e yet, but I can understand why randomness was removed. New DM haven't learned how to fudge well (that's one of those things that has to be learned through experience), so when they let the dice fall where they may, sometimes very bad things happen. Also, such randomness makes it harder to adapt the rules to an electronic format; human DMs can always fudge, but a computer running a D&D-based game can't. Video game adaptations of D&D have been largely hit and miss, and I'm sure one of the things Hasbro wanted from the new edition was a game that could be used for electronic gaming adaptations. Perhaps a default non-random ruleset with some basaic guidline for more experienced DMs would have been a better solution. For example, the random treasure table ideas that have been mentioned here come to mind. [/QUOTE]

Verification