Your misunderstanding of my point seems to be growing.
This is why I'm trying to rephrase it to see if I'm correct in my perceptions, because I happen to disagree with your basic premises as I understand them.
I am not interested in the dynamic where I say a thing, you make declarative statements about what I mean, and then I have to disabuse you of misconceptions, only to find you hanging on to those misconceptions even more tightly, making even stronger and more negative declarative statements. If you aren't going to let go of your prejudgements, or maybe even ask an honest question to be sure you understand, we can just stop.
And, as pointed out by other contributors, you also seem to have very strong prejudgements, so maybe start by applying your own advice to yourself ?
So, any given group has finite time at the table. Spotlight moments, where a character does something dramatic, pivotal, or otherwise really cool, happen, and take up time.
The thing is that, no, again I don't agree. They don't necessary take a lot of time, for example compared to the overall amount of time spent fighting or just discussing. So my point of view is that there is no reason to consider them a limited resource.
Moreover, although some points can more or less be planned for by the DM, if you run more sandboxy games, it's much harder to plan them. They are circumstantial, usually due to an alignment between the character, the circumstances, the player reacting particularly well and luck.
And while I agree that they don't happen all the time, it's not a question of them taking up time, it's a question of the stars aligning more or less often. And this is not something that you really control, only something that you can encourage, at least for the players for whom it is important.
Ergo, there will be a finite number of spotlight moments in your game - they are a finite resource. Sorry, but that's just the nature of being finite beings living in linear time.
But they are not finite because of the amount of time they take. The main limitation is about stars aligning. And this is where it's important for me, to recognise that:
- While some players love them, other players have a lot of fun playing without them, there is no reason for them to be the ultimate arbiter of balance.
- And that second category of players are not exceptions, are not lesser players, they are just players with different tastes.
Now, there is another matter, that of spotlight hogging, but for me it's something very different, it's about people trying to occupy all the social space of the game, and trying to shut down other players, all the time, or in specific segments of the game. And that is certainly to be discouraged.
So no, I don't recognise spotlight, in whatever form, as the intent of the game and in particular of balance.
The entire point I started to make is that, in fact, players shouldn't have to fight over these moments - what I think of as a well-balanced system will tend to distribute them fairly evenly just as a result of engaging in play.
I honestly don't see the relationship between a well-balanced system and spotlight moments. A well-balanced system might make people overall of similar efficiency, but will do absolutely nothing about aligning the stars.
No fighting required. No GM choosing where they go is necessary. They just happen, as a natural result of engaging with the game.
But they can be encouraged, for the players who like them, for example by highlighting the drama around these occasions, or by making sure that luck is "directed" in the occasions where it might happen. And that's great, as long as it's also recognised that, while it might be valuable for some players, it might not be the thing to do for others.
And yes, 4e was a pretty well balanced system. I didn't care all that much for the details, but I accept its balanced nature.
As mentioned numerous times, 4e was not my kind of edition, I referenced to it in this discussion because it was the most technically balanced of editions (although that had a cost), but also because they recognised the specific type of players that I know quite a few members of, the Watchers, who are great to have around, but who will certainly not hog the spotlight, but who will not even seek it, or who, in extreme cases, will be uncomfortable when put in there.
