Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 8560732" data-attributes="member: 1465">I must say my own definition of balance is completely different.I absolutely do not see balance in terms of "players VS the game", so for me % of success is not only unimportant, but it actually feels wrong for me to set a predefined number for it. Challenges are as difficult as they are, and variety is paramount against the game being too predictable.Instead I only see balance in terms of "players VS players" and "players VS selves". By "players VS players" I mean that I generally want all players to have equally good opportunities. It is however hard to define... it means that very generally I want all macro-choices to be equally attractive: all classes first and foremost should normally result in characters equally amazing to play. But it doesn't mean that every character should be equally good at all pillars or at all roles, it is for me only meant in very general terms. Races are already less important but still fairly so, therefore I don't mind too much if some races are slightly off, but feel mostly equal. Backgrounds even less important, but they are also following such a simple structure (at least in PHB) that they are automatically balanced. I worry slightly less whether all combinations of those macro-choices are equally good... it doesn't bother me too much if there are better and worse class-race combinations, as long as differences are small, and there aren't single winners or losers.And finally by "players VS selves" I mean that, when looking at a certain micro-choice for each player (i.e. within the chosen class) in a vacuum there is pros and cons for every choice, and reason for anything to be chosen. It doesn't have to be so that e.g. every single 3rd-level spell for a certain class is always equally good, but that they are reasonably within the same range of usefulness, and if something is sub-par then at least it has some redeeming feature that makes it certainly a good choice for someone. Despite this type of micro-balance being perhaps less important, it is very irritating when you see two very similar alternative choices with one of them straight better than the other, that makes you think the latter should never be chosen.</blockquote>

Verification