Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7247144" data-attributes="member: 996">You can't, there's no such thing as 'perfect balance.'&nbsp; There is, however, a vast spectrum of degrees of balance D&amp;D has achieved over it's long history.&nbsp; That spectrum ranges from execrable through disgraceful, appalling, laughable, ineffectual, baroque, inadequate, perverse, etc, etc...consult your local Thesaurus... all the way up to bad, poor, indifferent, rough, and, arguably, even 'fair' for a minute or two there.&nbsp; But 'perfect?' not ever even remotely on the table.&nbsp; ;P&nbsp; &nbsp;Nod. You could start with a system that works consistently for some baseline, but, say, lacks flexibility and is not at all robust, and simply adjust it from there. 5e encounter guidelines are not such a system:&nbsp; they don't work consistently, even for some hypothetical baseline.&nbsp; In theory, BA should render such guidelines relatively robust to variations in rolled stats, system mastery, etc - in practice, it doesn't seem to help much.&nbsp; Maybe it'd be even worse if had it been designed with a different philosophy?&nbsp; IDK, encounter guidelines haven't been this weak since we first got them in 3.0...The resource-pressure of 6-8 encounters can paper-over and average-out a lot of rough spots, yes.&nbsp; It's a good prescription to help make the game more balancable...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7247144, member: 996"] You can't, there's no such thing as 'perfect balance.' There is, however, a vast spectrum of degrees of balance D&D has achieved over it's long history. That spectrum ranges from execrable through disgraceful, appalling, laughable, ineffectual, baroque, inadequate, perverse, etc, etc...consult your local Thesaurus... all the way up to bad, poor, indifferent, rough, and, arguably, even 'fair' for a minute or two there. But 'perfect?' not ever even remotely on the table. ;P Nod. You could start with a system that works consistently for some baseline, but, say, lacks flexibility and is not at all robust, and simply adjust it from there. 5e encounter guidelines are not such a system: they don't work consistently, even for some hypothetical baseline. In theory, BA should render such guidelines relatively robust to variations in rolled stats, system mastery, etc - in practice, it doesn't seem to help much. Maybe it'd be even worse if had it been designed with a different philosophy? IDK, encounter guidelines haven't been this weak since we first got them in 3.0... The resource-pressure of 6-8 encounters can paper-over and average-out a lot of rough spots, yes. It's a good prescription to help make the game more balancable... [/QUOTE]

Verification