Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5796058" data-attributes="member: 53980">I think fun and balance are too closely related to say that one is the goal while the other is a footnote.I would say that balance is (for many) necessary for achieving fun, though certainly not sufficient in itself to that end. Balance is a means, not an end itself.I think balance is quite important. You, yourself, said above that you wouldn't want to play a class that is sidelined by another class. Balance helps to ensure that that doesn't happen.Fun is, of course, of top importance. However, if balance is necessary for some groups to have fun (meaning that the rogue isn't constantly overshadowed by the wizard, or visa versa) then that means balance is also of top importance. Not because balance is itself important, but rather because those players won't have fun without it.Now, granted, it is possible for balance to overshadow fun and I don't think that's a good thing. Balance should never be placed above fun in importance. For some, 4e certainly went too far in this respect. However, unless you're the type who absolutely has to play something ten times more powerful than what the other guys at the table are playing (slight hyperbole there), I believe that you can achieve balance without hindering fun.Balance should serve "the fun", as opposed to lording over it. So long as that rule is observed, I think balance is highly desirable.</blockquote>