Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Derren" data-source="post: 6348346" data-attributes="member: 2518">Except the example DM did.And as the system defines the in game reality it is part of the role.Not totally identical (except with perfect balance), but when you strictly enforce balance the roles you are allowed to play are more identical than with less strict adherence to balance.Do you really think you could play something like RIFT where you could have a beggar, a dragon and a mech pilot, complete with mech, in the same party if you enforced balance the way D&amp;D does?Again, you confuse viability with combat power. That shows your priority for gaming, but other people have different ones. When someone wants to play a con artist charlatan mage who can only cast prestidigitation, why deny him just because he doesn't meet your idea of minimal hack ability?No, balance removes the influence players have as it limits heavily the options players have (yes, non optimized options are also options) and because the DM, if he is serious about balance, has to constantly railroad the the players into situations which promote the use of so far &quot;weaker&quot; abilities and tactics to balance them out.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Derren, post: 6348346, member: 2518"] Except the example DM did. And as the system defines the in game reality it is part of the role. Not totally identical (except with perfect balance), but when you strictly enforce balance the roles you are allowed to play are more identical than with less strict adherence to balance. Do you really think you could play something like RIFT where you could have a beggar, a dragon and a mech pilot, complete with mech, in the same party if you enforced balance the way D&D does? Again, you confuse viability with combat power. That shows your priority for gaming, but other people have different ones. When someone wants to play a con artist charlatan mage who can only cast prestidigitation, why deny him just because he doesn't meet your idea of minimal hack ability? No, balance removes the influence players have as it limits heavily the options players have (yes, non optimized options are also options) and because the DM, if he is serious about balance, has to constantly railroad the the players into situations which promote the use of so far "weaker" abilities and tactics to balance them out. [/QUOTE]

Verification