Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6013883" data-attributes="member: 87792"><p>It is <em>impossible</em> to design a system to punish people who set out to understand it. Which is what is at the root of all optimisation. The best you can do is produce a balanced system (as Gygax realised) so that the marginal gains for optimisation are small.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>This from the person who <em>never</em> uses a monster straight out of the monster manual? Seriously, all you've done by making it more labourious is set a <em>challenge</em>. Which just makes it more interesting to unpick the system and work out how it works.</p><p> </p><p>Optimisation is a game in its own right - and can be seen as a mix of simulationist and gamist play. The simulationist element of <em>finding out what is there and how it works</em> combined with the gamist element of keeping score. The harder you make it to figure out what is there the more of a challenge it becomes.</p><p> </p><p>As for making it laborious for the people who want to just produce a powerful character, this might have worked <em>before the internet</em>. But the first guides - the first netdecks - will hit within a couple of weeks of launch produced by people who like understanding how things work and the kudos they get for this. And once they are out there anyone with google and an interest can follow them.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>If the game is well designed, <em>yes</em>. Gygax did it. 4e did it. 3e <em>set out to reward system mastery</em>.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>As another self-admitted optimiser, one of the reasons I love 4e is that I <em>can't </em>break it. I know most of the tricks in 3.X (and managed to create 20th level characters in 3e with four iterative attacks and 9th spells).</p><p> </p><p>Optimisation for power simply isn't fun in play - but in a game with a <em>hideous</em> power disparity (like 3.X) you need to know what level of optimisation everyone else is using to know where to aim at. If someone's using a netbook you probably need to break out optimisation-for-power in self defence.</p><p> </p><p>On the other hand in a game with <em>minor</em> power disparity and a lot of options (e.g. 4e) allows me to take an interesting character concept and build to it - for instance the princess or hanger on who mostly runs round screaming but the party wouldn't be the same without. (Lazy Warlord or Bard). I get the same creative satisfaction of a job well done when building Martel, my Warlord (who was an extremely reckless party strategic reserve - waiting before throwing himself into the fray with almost reckless abandon, Leonidas style) as I do in building a wizard able to shatter the earth in 3.X. </p><p> </p><p>To not use the tools I have to polish my character in character creation feels like leaving the job half finished, and it's going to irritate me for as long as I play that character. But with a balanced system doing the job properly is going to add depth and colour to the character and is unlikely to crack the game. On the other hand to e.g. intentionally pick a bad spell loadout feels like I'm deliberately lobotomising the character.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 6013883, member: 87792"] It is [I]impossible[/I] to design a system to punish people who set out to understand it. Which is what is at the root of all optimisation. The best you can do is produce a balanced system (as Gygax realised) so that the marginal gains for optimisation are small. This from the person who [I]never[/I] uses a monster straight out of the monster manual? Seriously, all you've done by making it more labourious is set a [I]challenge[/I]. Which just makes it more interesting to unpick the system and work out how it works. Optimisation is a game in its own right - and can be seen as a mix of simulationist and gamist play. The simulationist element of [I]finding out what is there and how it works[/I] combined with the gamist element of keeping score. The harder you make it to figure out what is there the more of a challenge it becomes. As for making it laborious for the people who want to just produce a powerful character, this might have worked [I]before the internet[/I]. But the first guides - the first netdecks - will hit within a couple of weeks of launch produced by people who like understanding how things work and the kudos they get for this. And once they are out there anyone with google and an interest can follow them. If the game is well designed, [I]yes[/I]. Gygax did it. 4e did it. 3e [I]set out to reward system mastery[/I]. As another self-admitted optimiser, one of the reasons I love 4e is that I [I]can't [/I]break it. I know most of the tricks in 3.X (and managed to create 20th level characters in 3e with four iterative attacks and 9th spells). Optimisation for power simply isn't fun in play - but in a game with a [I]hideous[/I] power disparity (like 3.X) you need to know what level of optimisation everyone else is using to know where to aim at. If someone's using a netbook you probably need to break out optimisation-for-power in self defence. On the other hand in a game with [I]minor[/I] power disparity and a lot of options (e.g. 4e) allows me to take an interesting character concept and build to it - for instance the princess or hanger on who mostly runs round screaming but the party wouldn't be the same without. (Lazy Warlord or Bard). I get the same creative satisfaction of a job well done when building Martel, my Warlord (who was an extremely reckless party strategic reserve - waiting before throwing himself into the fray with almost reckless abandon, Leonidas style) as I do in building a wizard able to shatter the earth in 3.X. To not use the tools I have to polish my character in character creation feels like leaving the job half finished, and it's going to irritate me for as long as I play that character. But with a balanced system doing the job properly is going to add depth and colour to the character and is unlikely to crack the game. On the other hand to e.g. intentionally pick a bad spell loadout feels like I'm deliberately lobotomising the character. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
Top