Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5634534" data-attributes="member: 54877">Well, it only took the Hero System six versions and 3 to 4 different lead designers to more or less nail it down.  And they mainly didn't have to deal with large packages at a class level, that system being designed around effect-based powers.  OTOH, they were well on their way in Champions 3E before they added other genres and massively expanded the universe they had to balance across. So when I said it was ambitious and difficult, this is what I meant. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Of course, AD&D 1E isn't a poster child for balance, and we made it work.  Somehow, I think a version as poorly balanced at 1E--but with the options classified and called out clearly--isn't unreasonable.  There will be pieces that will be terribly unbalanced, but everyone will know which ones and how much, in short order--well before any systematic fixes can be made (for the ones that aren't just valued wrong, but concretely screwed up).  There is a sense in which you can't expand scope without losing balance.  But you can expand scope in a measured design that will let you gradually handle the balance issues over time (versions).</blockquote>