Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8252837" data-attributes="member: 7023840">So here is the difference:A difference in XP progression is an attempt to balance. A Thief is a weaker class than a Paladin. But a Thief advances more quickly (Paladins take 2751 XP to get to 2nd level, which would get a Thief more than 250 XP into 3rd level). This is an attempt to balance.Demi-humans get special abilities that humans do not. For example, they are allowed to multiclass (humans can only dual-class, with all the restrictions of doing that). They also get various racial abilities, from the dwarven bonus to saves v. rod, staves, wands, spells, and poison to the elvish bonus to hit with a bow or sword. The multiclass and racial abilities are balanced by the cap that demi-humans have - they aren't allowed to advance as far as humans are in any class except Thief (Assassin for half-orc), and in some cases, only NPC classes are allowed (usually cleric). The overall balance between classes is also skewed; the famous example is the MU. Compared to editions that follow, the MU is underpowered, but the balance is specifically achieved in 1e across levels; the low-level MU is weak, and at higher levels becomes more powerful, whereas other classes have a more gradual power curve (and pity the poor illusionist).This is in contrast to the ability scores; that is in no way a balancing mechanism. That is, for lack of a better analogy at this point, something that more closely models the real world (simulation) than something that is there for game balance. The better you are (abilities), the better you are, in an endless virtuous cycle. Good abilities give you access to certain classes, and bonuses, and psionics, and XP bonuses, and so on. It has nothing to do with balance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8252837, member: 7023840"] So here is the difference: A difference in XP progression is an attempt to balance. A Thief is a weaker class than a Paladin. But a Thief advances more quickly (Paladins take 2751 XP to get to 2nd level, which would get a Thief more than 250 XP into 3rd level). This is an attempt to balance. Demi-humans get special abilities that humans do not. For example, they are allowed to multiclass (humans can only dual-class, with all the restrictions of doing that). They also get various racial abilities, from the dwarven bonus to saves v. rod, staves, wands, spells, and poison to the elvish bonus to hit with a bow or sword. The multiclass and racial abilities are balanced by the cap that demi-humans have - they aren't allowed to advance as far as humans are in any class except Thief (Assassin for half-orc), and in some cases, only NPC classes are allowed (usually cleric). The overall balance between classes is also skewed; the famous example is the MU. Compared to editions that follow, the MU is underpowered, but the balance is specifically achieved in 1e across levels; the low-level MU is weak, and at higher levels becomes more powerful, whereas other classes have a more gradual power curve (and pity the poor illusionist). This is in contrast to the ability scores; that is in no way a balancing mechanism. That is, for lack of a better analogy at this point, something that more closely models the real world (simulation) than something that is there for game balance. The better you are (abilities), the better you are, in an endless virtuous cycle. Good abilities give you access to certain classes, and bonuses, and psionics, and XP bonuses, and so on. It has nothing to do with balance. [/QUOTE]

Verification