Terath Ninir
Yog Sothoth loves you
I had in mind something like what the Rules forum operates under, but I see your point, there.BryonD said:
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
How important do you think game balance is?
- Thread starter Terath Ninir
- Start date
Balance is important if you, say, have a new DM who has to take CR at face value and/or runs pre-made modules without knowing what to modify to challenge the PCs. Constant cakewalks and meatgrinders are no fun.
Once you have an experienced DM, the balance between the PCs and the bad guys is not super important because the DM can adjust the opposition. The balance between the different PCs is still important, though. It's rarely fun feeling like the fifth wheel or when the party could be described as PC X and his sidekicks.
Once you have an experienced DM, the balance between the PCs and the bad guys is not super important because the DM can adjust the opposition. The balance between the different PCs is still important, though. It's rarely fun feeling like the fifth wheel or when the party could be described as PC X and his sidekicks.
IronWolf
blank
I went with 'not very important', probably a different answer than I would have given a year ago. I do think a definition of "balance" for the sake of the poll could help some. I see you mentioned what the Rules Forum operates under, but I am not sure I am familiar with that definition either.
I think a DM with some experience can help compensate for a lot of things that come up in a game. So my feelings on the issue have gone from one of everything must be balanced to a little more towards the other side of the scale.
I think a DM with some experience can help compensate for a lot of things that come up in a game. So my feelings on the issue have gone from one of everything must be balanced to a little more towards the other side of the scale.
IronWolf
blank
der_kluge said:
Not to side track to much, but why the Order of the Bow Initiate. I've watched this PrC get stomped on a few times in various games, enough that I certainly wouldn't consider it out of balance. Just curious, maybe I am missing something.
EDIT: Started a new thread to avoid diverting the intention of this current thread.
Last edited:
generally...
I would say from a rule POV they should be kept balanced unles the campaign is intended to be unbalancing... ie.) if the army (in this case made up of primarily wizards) rules the city and takes all non-wizards as slaves then in this case wizards should be possibly given ability to make them slightly more powerful.
in a group balance POV, this can be difficult because all it takes is some bad rolls from one party member, or poor allotment of skill points from a new player to make a team really unbalanced. In the game I'm currently PLAYING in my fighter (at first lvl) became a beast really quick... I rolled 3 natural 18, a 17,14,11 I dumped 18 into str, con, dex, 14 int, 17 cha, and finally 11 wis... so I have a whip and a bastard sword (monkey grip allows me to do this effectively), 2 weap fighting, 2 weap def... chainshirt (total AC 20) I basically trip people, and stab them... over and over and over... its hard to beat with anything that should be thrown at a 1st lvl party.
none the less, I'm off track. A good DM should be able to balance things like this out. by simply giving stronger, good fighting members of the party more phsycal challenges, and better skill based characters good skill related challeges. The Key is the DM NEEDs to know his characters. Dont throw 4 orc barbarians at a group of 4 lvl 1 characters... because ONE of them is strong... on the same hand dont throw 1 civilian at the same group because 3 of them cant fight... the one fighter will make up for the slack and decimate them EVERY time... even if this means when a party is stomping on a enemy group... maybe throw one or two more in to help the enemies... maybe they heard the battle.
For these reasons I said "somewhat important"
I would say from a rule POV they should be kept balanced unles the campaign is intended to be unbalancing... ie.) if the army (in this case made up of primarily wizards) rules the city and takes all non-wizards as slaves then in this case wizards should be possibly given ability to make them slightly more powerful.
in a group balance POV, this can be difficult because all it takes is some bad rolls from one party member, or poor allotment of skill points from a new player to make a team really unbalanced. In the game I'm currently PLAYING in my fighter (at first lvl) became a beast really quick... I rolled 3 natural 18, a 17,14,11 I dumped 18 into str, con, dex, 14 int, 17 cha, and finally 11 wis... so I have a whip and a bastard sword (monkey grip allows me to do this effectively), 2 weap fighting, 2 weap def... chainshirt (total AC 20) I basically trip people, and stab them... over and over and over... its hard to beat with anything that should be thrown at a 1st lvl party.
none the less, I'm off track. A good DM should be able to balance things like this out. by simply giving stronger, good fighting members of the party more phsycal challenges, and better skill based characters good skill related challeges. The Key is the DM NEEDs to know his characters. Dont throw 4 orc barbarians at a group of 4 lvl 1 characters... because ONE of them is strong... on the same hand dont throw 1 civilian at the same group because 3 of them cant fight... the one fighter will make up for the slack and decimate them EVERY time... even if this means when a party is stomping on a enemy group... maybe throw one or two more in to help the enemies... maybe they heard the battle.
For these reasons I said "somewhat important"
BryonD
Hero
Even under RAW it varies by perception.Cyberzombie said:
The balance of a bard in a RAW hack n slash vs RAW political is very different.
If the idea of a game is pure hack n slash, then a RAW bard is gonna suck a little, therefore, balance is not a good thing.
But if the game offers a chance for the fighter to kick butt and the bard to get an inside edge here and there, then everyone can have some time to shine, and hopefully no time to be completely on the back burner.
Thus people who desire a game that focuses on one area will just find balance to be something that gets in the way.
JVisgaitis
Explorer
I'd be really surprised to see someone vote not important for game balance. Its the most crucial aspect of the game.
Eternalknight
First Post
JVisgaitis said:
I would argue that the most crucial aspect of the game and design is to ensure it's fun. If a balanced game is fun, then yep, it's important. Otherwise, I couldn't care if the game is way unbalanced, as long as its fun.
1st Edition WFRP wasn't balanced real well but a lot of people love that system.
William Ronald
Explorer
I voted "extremely important."
I have seen what were once good games fall apart because a DM stopped caring about balance issues. In fact, balance issues were one of the reasons I left a group that I had been a member of for many years. I think every player wants to feel that there is at least some area where his character can make a difference and shine. This may be in combat, spell casting, role playing encounters, or other areas. I think that it is important that everyone at the gaming table -- including GMs -- have fun. Otherwise, what is the point in showing up at a gaming table if you are not having fun?
Sometimes, I think that we have to remember that a good game depends on many factors. These include a good ruleset, a good GM who knows the rules but also uses sound judgement and tries to understand the views of the players, as well as players who enjoy gaming with each other. In most cases, a good game will also have characters who can cooperate with each other, although there are some exceptions.
I have not particularly had a problem with the D&D 3.5 rules. However, I did see some abuses of the 3.0 rules -- haste (which was good enough to almost always appear on a character's spell list), some of the implementation of the metamagic feats, skill bonus items (let's say I saw some truly broken stuff done with that), and I did not care for every supplement. However, I like to think that rules systems do change in part from customer feedback. I have not heard as many complaints about the D&D 3.5 character class books as I did about the 3.0 books.
Cyberzombie -- A quick offtopic question? I remember sometime back that you were looking for some advice on implementing some of the stunts from Exalted into D&D? How did that work out?
I have seen what were once good games fall apart because a DM stopped caring about balance issues. In fact, balance issues were one of the reasons I left a group that I had been a member of for many years. I think every player wants to feel that there is at least some area where his character can make a difference and shine. This may be in combat, spell casting, role playing encounters, or other areas. I think that it is important that everyone at the gaming table -- including GMs -- have fun. Otherwise, what is the point in showing up at a gaming table if you are not having fun?
Sometimes, I think that we have to remember that a good game depends on many factors. These include a good ruleset, a good GM who knows the rules but also uses sound judgement and tries to understand the views of the players, as well as players who enjoy gaming with each other. In most cases, a good game will also have characters who can cooperate with each other, although there are some exceptions.
I have not particularly had a problem with the D&D 3.5 rules. However, I did see some abuses of the 3.0 rules -- haste (which was good enough to almost always appear on a character's spell list), some of the implementation of the metamagic feats, skill bonus items (let's say I saw some truly broken stuff done with that), and I did not care for every supplement. However, I like to think that rules systems do change in part from customer feedback. I have not heard as many complaints about the D&D 3.5 character class books as I did about the 3.0 books.
Cyberzombie -- A quick offtopic question? I remember sometime back that you were looking for some advice on implementing some of the stunts from Exalted into D&D? How did that work out?
Last edited:
MadMaxim
First Post
I'd say it's important. It helps define D&D as a game where teamwork is required and nobody is a master at everything. If you had a cleric with d12 HD, good BAB, all good saves, full spellcasting, bonus feats like a fighter and proficiency in all martial weapons and all armor and shields, where would the fun be for the other party members, because this fellow doesn't need anybody else.
Similar Threads
- Poll
