Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6344390" data-attributes="member: 177">I add my voice to the others who are noting that &quot;equal&quot; isn't helpful here - we must be sure we are comparing apples to apples.&nbsp; In what sense are we to consider a sneaky rouge &quot;equal&quot; to a tank fighter?&nbsp; Clearly, they have different operation, so they cannot be equal in *every* aspect.&nbsp; It is like saying my toaster is not equal to my car - true, but not helpful. So, give us some sense in which they are supposed to be equal, or not, and maybe that becomes a useful discussion.My personal notion of balance is akin to DMMike's - options are &quot;balanced&quot; if, in the broad sense, they have similar potential to be useful in the game.&nbsp; They don't need to be &quot;equal&quot;, except in their overall ability to contribute.&nbsp; In essence, options need to have similar ability to take good spotlight time.If your game is mostly about killing things and taking their stuff, then the combat-oriented definition comes rather closer to holding than you seem to suggest.&nbsp; I know some folks do like to play support roles (I tend to be one of them, in fact), but in the long run, being able to have spotlight matters, and giving everyone a +1 to hit simply isn't *dramatic*.&nbsp; It doesn't get spotlight.&nbsp; If your game really is honestly varied, and combat *doesn't* take up any more of your playtime than anything else, then notions of balance can be broad.&nbsp; But to serve your players well, you need to be honest with yourself about that.&nbsp; If it is D&amp;D, for example, look at your adventure design, and figure out how many of the XP are bound up in things that the majority of folks really are going to just fight their way through.&nbsp; Some will blithelly respond to, &quot;Well, they don't *have* to fight it!&nbsp; They could find another way around, if they are creative.&quot;&nbsp; That's kind of like saying that since your artwork is in black and white, you cant' see the skin colors, so your racial representation is good!*Design* for non-combat, rather than &quot;combat can be avoided if you work at it,&quot; and then you get to say that combat equality doesn't matter.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6344390, member: 177"] I add my voice to the others who are noting that "equal" isn't helpful here - we must be sure we are comparing apples to apples. In what sense are we to consider a sneaky rouge "equal" to a tank fighter? Clearly, they have different operation, so they cannot be equal in *every* aspect. It is like saying my toaster is not equal to my car - true, but not helpful. So, give us some sense in which they are supposed to be equal, or not, and maybe that becomes a useful discussion. My personal notion of balance is akin to DMMike's - options are "balanced" if, in the broad sense, they have similar potential to be useful in the game. They don't need to be "equal", except in their overall ability to contribute. In essence, options need to have similar ability to take good spotlight time. If your game is mostly about killing things and taking their stuff, then the combat-oriented definition comes rather closer to holding than you seem to suggest. I know some folks do like to play support roles (I tend to be one of them, in fact), but in the long run, being able to have spotlight matters, and giving everyone a +1 to hit simply isn't *dramatic*. It doesn't get spotlight. If your game really is honestly varied, and combat *doesn't* take up any more of your playtime than anything else, then notions of balance can be broad. But to serve your players well, you need to be honest with yourself about that. If it is D&D, for example, look at your adventure design, and figure out how many of the XP are bound up in things that the majority of folks really are going to just fight their way through. Some will blithelly respond to, "Well, they don't *have* to fight it! They could find another way around, if they are creative." That's kind of like saying that since your artwork is in black and white, you cant' see the skin colors, so your racial representation is good! *Design* for non-combat, rather than "combat can be avoided if you work at it," and then you get to say that combat equality doesn't matter. [/QUOTE]

Verification