[Not a Troll] An Honest Question (really) About Game Balance

[Zappo]

There is nothing "necessary" in a roleplaying game, except for the players. We could play just by chatting among ourselves if we wanted to.

However, there are qualities that are desirable; qualities that are likely to make the game more enjoyable. Game balance is highly desirable. It is very likely to make the game much more enjoyable.

First, let me define game balance. You have game balance when there is a huge number of possible characters of roughly equal power, and no possible character significantly more powerful than any one of them. Power means ability to overcome challenges. Ideally, the set of equal-power characters should match the character concepts which the players are supposed to play (eg, "heroes" in D&D, meaning that it's OK if the NPC classes are weak).
Think about it; it basically means that players must be free to make whatever reasonable character they want, and not worry about another PC being much more powerful than them.
This defines game balance for characters; the definition extends naturally to spells, feats, whatever.

What are the consequences of lack of game balance?

If there are a few character types more powerful than all the others, then
- players will tend to make characters of those types. Since these "overpowered" types are few by definition, this greatly reduces the variety of characters that are used in game. Generally, lack of variety makes for a worse game.
- consistancy problems arise between the setting and the rules that are supposed to model it. If I play 3.0, I can't help wondering why Raistlin never casts Haste. Lack of consistancy invariably makes for a worse game.
- if everyone plays overpowered characters, there are huge consistancy problems (ie, the game looks ridiculous).
- if everyone plays normal-power characters, this works, but it doesn't happen often, it doesn't solve consistancy problems, and becomes progressively harder as the game balance breaks more. In other words, just because in 3.0 noone in my party used Harm except in very exceptional cases, it doesn't mean that it wasn't broken.
- if some people play normal characters and one or two play overpowered characters, then the overpowered characters "outshine" the rest - that is, they solve more challenges, because by definition they are more able to do so. This deprives the rest of the party of challenges, which almost always makes for a worse game.

Not caring about game balance can appear to have a couple of pluses.
- balance is, by far, the hardest quality to achieve. If it isn't a priority, game design becomes a hell of a lot easier. IMO, that's not a justification, because the game also becomes much worse.
- many adventuring parties of literature aren't even remotely balanced; just see LotR or Star Wars. IMO, that's not a justification, because a roleplaying game is not a novel and has extra requirements.

There are some approaches that are routinely proposed to make the game enjoyable without balance.
- tailor challenges to each characters. It doesn't work. It means that some players play and some sit and wait. You can tailor a challenge to the party, but not to a single character; not all the time, anyway. Also, it doesn't solve the consistancy issue.
- simply ignore consistancy issues. It doesn't work. It doesn't address the main problem, that of some characters solving more challenges than the rest and therefore stealing the spotlight.
- say that, since this character is so powerful, he attracts more enemies and more problems than anyone else. It doesn't work. First of all, it makes life more interesting for the character, which is not what the character wants but it often is exactly what the player wants. Secondly, when the character isn't fighting off the next Zhentarim who wants the secret of Spellfire, he still is overpowered. Thirdly, it doesn't really make sense either, because an overpowered 3rd level character is probably still less powerful than any 7th level character, so why don't these guys go after someone else? Fourthly, the extra challenges can and will draw in the other PCs. Fifthly, it is an attempt to punish the player for an error the game designers did.
- house rule the imbalance away. It does work. But that's the designers' work, not mine. My house rules should be directed at enhancing and customizing particular aspects of the game and at better shaping the setting, not at fixing bugs.

There are exceptions. There are groups that don't care if someone hogs the spotlight. There are players that, despite having an awesome challenge-solving power, won't use it. There are games for which an imbalance is built-in and makes sense (Ars Magica where one player is the mage and the others are followers). IMO, Magic Missile is fine as it is because everyone having it has become part of the D&D metasetting.

But in the vast, vast majority of cases, game balance is a very desirable quality, enough that lack of it can spoil the game.

 

[MerricB]

I agree with Zappo.

However, I'm going to give this addendum: Balance is of lesser importance to experienced players, because we can correct some of the imbalances as they occur.

It is of paramount importance to new players. If I introduce a new player to D&D, I don't want them to have an experience similar to what happened to me in an early game of AD&D.

I was playing a 1st level magic-user. My one spell: shocking grasp. That was going by the rules of the game. I had one attack that was less powerful than the attacks of the fighter characters, and I had no hit points, an AC of 10 - I was inferior in every way to the other characters. I got completely frustrated in that game, and it ended up in my character dying stupidly.

For novice players and DMs, the issue of game balance is constantly there. The normal D&D game adventure, as presented in the rules, is a combination of combat and challenges you need a rogue for, and that is the way most people begin playing the game. Many continue playing the game in that vein, where role-playing may occur but combat is of primary importance.

A good DM adjusts his game to fit the players, but good DM's come from inexperienced DMs, and the game should be balanced with an eye to helping keep people interested in the game.

Cheers!

 

[CRGreathouse]

I think that game balance is very important. If a game is well-balanced, the players and DM can concentrate more on the flow of the game itself and the plot.

I think Zappo's post explains game balance -- what it is and why it matters -- very well.

 

[swrushing]

Question: Is game balance really necessary in an RPG?

yes.

each player deserves similar levels of cocus on their character, spotlight on relevance of their character, and opportunity to make significant differences in the ongoing story and campaign as the other. They deserve balance with the other characters and players or at the very least the chance of it.

That requires the Gm to present challenges and situations that over time provide each player those similar levels of significance, spotlight and impact for their character, based on his/her traits and choices.

now, does this mean that every character component mustr be run thru some mythical game setting no one plays and even out by some formulaic expectation? nope. Does balance ON PAPER matter? nope.

It means the components provided to build characters must produce divergent strengths and weaknesses so that the characters created are "BALANCEABLE IN ACTUAL PLAY" in reasonable situations within the genre.

 

[Dark Jezter]

I was going to write a big, long post about why game balance is a good thing, but Zappo's post covered all of the points I was going to go over and more.

 

[Wormwood]

Balance good.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Most people on these boards play D&D, which is pretty Gamist. In D&D, the extent to which you can do things to affect the "plot", so to speak, relates pretty directly to how effective you are on adventures.

There are other games in which this isn't a focus, and balance isn't as much of an issue in them. Things like screen time become more important then. I know in my games (d20modern right now) I try to make sure the less combat-effective characters get a chance to shine, sometimes even getting more screen time than the others.

The real deal is this: Everybody wants to feel like their characters are "cool". How you do that depends on how you run the game. If the focus of the game is mostly on solving problems (crawling a dungeon, defeating an enemy, what have you) then you want everyone to be able to contribute to that, and balance helps ensure that nobody feels superfluous.

 

[Spatula]

BTW, with the exception of Hong (ENWorld's problem child) the responses have been good.

Hong's point was that since your definition of game balance:

That the party is equal to the encounters they face in an adventure.

That each member is as able to shine as any other.

That the party has a chance to win.

...has no relation to the rules of an RPG, then your question about whether game balance is important in an RPG is meaningless. Everything in the above list is the province of the GM, and has nothing to do with the rulesets of RPGs.

 

[Liolel]

First of all I haven't read all 3 pages of the thread so if the discussions changed please excuse me.

My opinion is that balance is needed for a good game. But there needs to be the right amount, not to little and not to much.

It the game is too balanced then it means that every class is about just as good at everything and there is little diversity.

If the game isn't balance enough then either all the players play the same overpowered characters or play something else and are left far behind in terms of power.

So balance is good if the designers hit the right amount.

 

[diaglo]

where is that dinosaur pic?


no, balance is not necessary. read my sig.

the reason: yes, rpg are different from traditional board or card games. the only way to win is to survive until next session. there is an open end to the game.

and second D&D can be played with characters of varying power. i did it for many years. i started all characters at 1st lvl, all the time.

the key is to keeping the players interest. whether they are superhero gods or pig farmers when they play their characters.