Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="seskis281" data-source="post: 4868983" data-attributes="member: 41593">The big point of contention rests on perception - especially perception of such words as &quot;broken,&quot; &quot;wonky,&quot; &quot;balance&quot; etc.&nbsp;To some people, unless the core mechanics seek to &quot;balance&quot; all characters equally, the system is flawed. Others see the balancing as a flawed concept. Neither or inherently &quot;wrong&quot; or &quot;right&quot; - they are just different approaches and philosophies of RPG gaming, sometimes drawn along generational lines, sometimes on system preference lines, sometimes just very arbitrarily. &nbsp;One person's &quot;warts&quot; are another person's &quot;beauty marks.&quot; Same thing with such things as AC (I like the development of Ascending myself, but I understand the theory behind the other, and that it isn't always just because of &quot;nostalgia,&quot; though for some it is). &nbsp;My personal likes are in imbalance, meaning the need for balance comes from the party as a whole. I understand completely and have many friends who feel the opposite ways. For that school of thought, the mechanical changes that led 1st through 3rd edition and ultimately to 4th are a &quot;fix&quot; and a wonderful thing. For those who don't like it, it's a further shift away from a paradigm/theory that we like and prefer. &nbsp;Again, this is all a matter of personal perception. Luckily, the gaming world is big enough and there are burgeoning avenues (both traditional and non-traditional, as Erik Mona pointed out on another thread) for all of us.&nbsp;<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="seskis281, post: 4868983, member: 41593"] The big point of contention rests on perception - especially perception of such words as "broken," "wonky," "balance" etc. To some people, unless the core mechanics seek to "balance" all characters equally, the system is flawed. Others see the balancing as a flawed concept. Neither or inherently "wrong" or "right" - they are just different approaches and philosophies of RPG gaming, sometimes drawn along generational lines, sometimes on system preference lines, sometimes just very arbitrarily. One person's "warts" are another person's "beauty marks." Same thing with such things as AC (I like the development of Ascending myself, but I understand the [I]theory[/I] behind the other, and that it isn't always just because of "nostalgia," though for some it is). My personal likes are in imbalance, meaning the need for balance comes from the party as a whole. I understand completely and have many friends who feel the opposite ways. For that school of thought, the mechanical changes that led 1st through 3rd edition and ultimately to 4th are a "fix" and a wonderful thing. For those who don't like it, it's a further shift away from a paradigm/theory that we like and prefer. Again, this is all a matter of personal perception. Luckily, the gaming world is big enough and there are burgeoning avenues (both traditional and non-traditional, as Erik Mona pointed out on another thread) for all of us. :D [/QUOTE]

Verification