Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Spatula" data-source="post: 5315851" data-attributes="member: 2198">Older editions were not really balanced at all, and you didn't have to be a power gamer or look for exploits to take advantage of that. From my personal experience, I would say that balance issues didn't crop up all the time because most everyone at the table knew what the sub-standard character options were and avoided them. There were still problems though - the 1e cavalier class (or hell, most anything from the 1e UA), many 2e kits, playing a thief in a combat-heavy game or a 2e bard in a dungeon crawl game, etc.Playing 3e or 4e, the balance problems become more glaring, for a number of reasons. #1, we're adults now and have less free time to game or to read over books. #2 is that the sheer number of character options creates serious balance issues. The difference between a haphazardly made PC and an optimized one is HUGE. When you're playing in a group of people that have varying levels of system mastery, that's a problem.Not in my experience. But back then one didn't have the ability to bitch and moan in an online echo chamber about things, so it was much less visible. If message boards like this existed back then, I guarantee you that we would have the same state of affairs.Well, sure. But what does that mean in practice, throwing balance to the wind? Not caring about rules balance is as easy as ignoring the online discussions &amp; arguments and not using the errata. Plenty of people play the game that way already - the folks that post here or on other RPG message boards are a tiny minority of the player base.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Spatula, post: 5315851, member: 2198"] Older editions were not really balanced at all, and you didn't have to be a power gamer or look for exploits to take advantage of that. From my personal experience, I would say that balance issues didn't crop up all the time because most everyone at the table knew what the sub-standard character options were and avoided them. There were still problems though - the 1e cavalier class (or hell, most anything from the 1e UA), many 2e kits, playing a thief in a combat-heavy game or a 2e bard in a dungeon crawl game, etc. Playing 3e or 4e, the balance problems become more glaring, for a number of reasons. #1, we're adults now and have less free time to game or to read over books. #2 is that the sheer number of character options creates serious balance issues. The difference between a haphazardly made PC and an optimized one is HUGE. When you're playing in a group of people that have varying levels of system mastery, that's a problem. Not in my experience. But back then one didn't have the ability to bitch and moan in an online echo chamber about things, so it was much less visible. If message boards like this existed back then, I guarantee you that we would have the same state of affairs. Well, sure. But what does that mean in practice, throwing balance to the wind? Not caring about rules balance is as easy as ignoring the online discussions & arguments and not using the errata. Plenty of people play the game that way already - the folks that post here or on other RPG message boards are a tiny minority of the player base. [/QUOTE]

Verification