Pathfinder and 4e....and BALANCE.

[malraux]

A quick note on my general impression of 4e balance:

There are actually two separate aspects to 4e balance. First, classes within roles are balanced against each other with respect to power. Rangers, rogues, sorcerers, and avengers will all do on average pretty close to the same amount of damage. The various leaders will all heal for pretty close to the same amount with giving similar boosts to other players. Similarly with controllers and defenders.

Now across roles, there's a slightly different balance. Each role is likely to have at all times something interesting and useful to do that won't be stepped on by someone else in a different role.

 

[ggroy]

Fundamentally, spellcasters increase in power exponentially as they gain levels and nonspellcasters increase in power linearly in 3.5E, and Pathfinder didn't really do anything to change that. In plainer english, magic using PCs gain in power as they level at substantially faster rate, and at higher levels a non-spellcaster cannot compete with a well played spellcaster in terms of raw power. In addition, in 3.5E/Pathfinder the differences in power between a well built character and a poorly built one are so vast that the two really aren't playing the same game anymore.

How would exponential power scaling work for spellcasters?

Could the spellcasters' powers just be scaling quadratically, and not exponentially?

 

[renau1g]

Funny enough it seems most of the broken stuff in 4e was in PHB, but they've done a great job correcting that. Orbizard stunlockers were just updated this week.

One thing though is that all the "best" PP's come from PHB, Daggermaster, Stormwarden and Pit Fighter (for rangers) are among the kings of the DPR crowns over in 4e char optimzation, especially now that Student of Caiphon PP only works with Warlock powers. (I foresee Daggermaster getting this treatment as well)

 

[thecasualoblivion]

(I foresee Daggermaster getting this treatment as well)

Mild off topic--

I don't see them changing Daggermaster like they changed Student of Caiphon. Student of Caiphon was changed because it was being abused by non-Warlocks. As powerful as Daggermaster is for other classes, it is still most powerful in the hands of the Rogue class itself. Student of Caiphon wasn't nerfed for being too powerful, it was nerfed because of 4E's other priority--transparency.

 

[Votan]

But my point is...couldn't Pathfinder have been more successful in creating balance by "fixing an old game" rather than 4e creating balance by "making a newer game focused on balance"? I suppose I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who prefers to buy older versions of Windows...because the bugs have been ironed out. Rather than the newest/greatest thing that is an improvement.

All systems will tend to suffer from issues as options are added. Like it or lump it, systems with more options (in a pick from X list type of format) will eventually result in lack of balance due to unexpected synergies, if nothing else. In 3.5 it was spells and feats. In 4E I expect it to come mroe from improvements in the power lists.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

All systems will tend to suffer from issues as options are added. Like it or lump it, systems with more options (in a pick from X list type of format) will eventually result in lack of balance due to unexpected synergies, if nothing else. In 3.5 it was spells and feats. In 4E I expect it to come mroe from improvements in the power lists.

There is a bit of truth to this, though its more of a two-tiered effect than imbalance. Specifically, from a balance standpoint, classes that don't have their accompanying power book(Martial Power, Arcane Power, ect.) are at a disadvantage over those that do. Martial/Arcane/Divine/Primal power all boosted the power of the classes contained within to a significant degree by giving them a better choice of powers. The new classes in PHB3 will be at a disadvantage until they get the same treatment. On the other hand, I don't think the release of Martial Power 2 has altered the balance landscape significantly. Its added some things that didn't exist before, like ranged options for Rogue and Warlord and melee/ranged attacks for Rangers that use Str(ranged)/Dex(melee), but it hasn't changed the balance landscape to the degree the first wave of X Power books did. Once powers gain a critical mass, option creep derived from them slows down.

 

[Garmorn]

3.x/PF and 4.e are also balanced differently. PF/3.x is balanced across the campaign life. It is set up so the combat types are stronger at first the the spell casters catch up the over take the combat types. This is a hold over from the original approach and campaign styles the game was originally designed far. 4e is designed to be balanced at all levels.

The both do the job well for their approach to balance but the give to completely different feels to a campaign.

 

[Layander]

Balance is important because people aren't perfect, and RPG players are rare enough to be valuable, even if they aren't perfect. In a game situation where everyone is perfect(and it does happen), balance can be set aside. When just one of those players decides to use the system to be more powerful, it affects everyone else. If somebody optimizes, balance becomes important.

I am sorry could you explain this better because I do not understand. I get that your saying people are not perfect but because we are not perfect the system has to make all tanks balanced?
If my group has a fighter, mage, priest, and rogue, why do they all have to be balanced against each other to complete an adventure? why cant the fighter protect the casters, theif kill the enemies priest heal the fighter and mage make sure they do not get in to deep?
Why do we worry about if the fighter in my group is stronger than the fighter in yours? why do we have to have everone equal in every way? It isnt a single player game.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I am sorry could you explain this better because I do not understand. I get that your saying people are not perfect but because we are not perfect the system has to make all tanks balanced?
If my group has a fighter, mage, priest, and rogue, why do they all have to be balanced against each other to complete an adventure? why cant the fighter protect the casters, theif kill the enemies priest heal the fighter and mage make sure they do not get in to deep?
Why do we worry about if the fighter in my group is stronger than the fighter in yours? why do we have to have everone equal in every way? It isnt a single player game.

What I'm saying is that you can't count on everybody to play nice. Its hard enough to find people to play without placing stringent demands on them. In a game where optimizing can have a huge impact on play, it only takes on person to make system installed balance important.

Balance wasn't an issue in 3E if everybody played nice. I don't think the reality of things lived up to this a majority of the time, I don't think the system should assume everybody will play nice.

On a more philosophical level, I don't think people who are less skilled at optimizing to be relegated to being sidekicks, and I think its condescending when people say or imply that those people should be happy playing the game at a lesser level of effectiveness.

 

[Layander]

What I'm saying is that you can't count on everybody to play nice. Its hard enough to find people to play without placing stringent demands on them. In a game where optimizing can have a huge impact on play, it only takes on person to make system installed balance important.

Balance wasn't an issue in 3E if everybody played nice. I don't think the reality of things lived up to this a majority of the time, I don't think the system should assume everybody will play nice.

On a more philosophical level, I don't think people who are less skilled at optimizing to be relegated to being sidekicks, and I think its condescending when people say or imply that those people should be happy playing the game at a lesser level of effectiveness.

Ok if your saying that balance is important because some bad players can not work as a team and treat other players as sidekicks I can totally buy that. Thank you for clearing it up. I agree but I do not like playing with those guys and go out of my way to form groups I can trust when I can.