Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7293797" data-attributes="member: 12731">Thanks. As any decent game designer would know, to achieve balance you must look at the extremes. In this case, any light armor should be priced with +5 Dex in mind. This means that: not really, you don't need to differ between the two cases, because you'll price the armor for &quot;best case scenario&quot;. If it's balanced for the minmaxer its balanced for everybody. Do note that a +0 Dex character is assumed to simply choose something else to buy for her money (where she isn't at a disadvantage). There is no reason to &quot;go soft&quot; on that character, because if you can choose rationally, you will always pick an item where you're at or near the best case scenario. All of this assumes competive play. If your players don't care about efficiency or balance, then you don't need to respond because none of this matter. Again, since accurate prices only matter for people that care, prices should be accurate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7293797, member: 12731"] Thanks. As any decent game designer would know, to achieve balance you must look at the extremes. In this case, any light armor should be priced with +5 Dex in mind. This means that: not really, you don't need to differ between the two cases, because you'll price the armor for "best case scenario". If it's balanced for the minmaxer its balanced for everybody. Do note that a +0 Dex character is assumed to simply choose something else to buy for her money (where she isn't at a disadvantage). There is no reason to "go soft" on that character, because if you can choose rationally, you will always pick an item where you're at or near the best case scenario. All of this assumes competive play. If your players don't care about efficiency or balance, then you don't need to respond because none of this matter. Again, since accurate prices only matter for people that care, prices should be accurate. [/QUOTE]

Verification