FireLance
Legend
Maybe he's coming in from the angle that balance is ruling over all other game considerations, e.g. flavor, theme, imagination and creativity?
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
The Problem of Balance (and how to get rid of it)
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
AngeltheTechrat
First Post
Oh, hmm.. In that case, I think I'm out. I was hoping for more of a compromise or way to reverse the continuing trend a bit.
yesnomu
First Post
A bit off-topic, but...
-Hedge Wizard's Gloves, from the AV, give you Prestidigitation and Mage Hand, and are very low level items, under 900 gp. So with that out of the way, I'd start off as a Ranger, MC Wizard for an encounter ranged magic attack.
-I'd pick a Beastmaster Ranger if you want to feel like a 3.5 Ranger again. You can still pick powers intended for the other options, you just won't get Prime Shot, or free Defensive Mobility or Toughness. Granted, your beast won't attack with you unless you use a Beast power (though many have both of you attack together, including an at-will), but at least you can both move independently and flank.
-For stats, you probably want high Strength and Int. Wisdom should be next, a lot of Ranger powers use it for something or other.
I think that addresses your concept. Anything else you wanted to do?
In case you were interested in making this concept more effective, I have a couple of tips:
-Hedge Wizard's Gloves, from the AV, give you Prestidigitation and Mage Hand, and are very low level items, under 900 gp. So with that out of the way, I'd start off as a Ranger, MC Wizard for an encounter ranged magic attack.
-I'd pick a Beastmaster Ranger if you want to feel like a 3.5 Ranger again. You can still pick powers intended for the other options, you just won't get Prime Shot, or free Defensive Mobility or Toughness. Granted, your beast won't attack with you unless you use a Beast power (though many have both of you attack together, including an at-will), but at least you can both move independently and flank.
-For stats, you probably want high Strength and Int. Wisdom should be next, a lot of Ranger powers use it for something or other.
I think that addresses your concept. Anything else you wanted to do?
Last edited:
resistor
First Post
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and assert that this discussion is conflating two different issues: mechanical balance, and narrative balance, which mirror the concepts of task and conflict resolution, if you're familiar with them.
Task balance is the standard idea that every in-world character concept should be of equal in-world effectiveness.
Narrative balance is the idea that every player should have equal narrative input over extended periods of play.
----
To assist me, I'm going to introduce two different kinds of gaming mechanics: conflict resolution, and task resolution.
To go back to the *BANG* You're dead! scenario, conflict resolution is a game mechanic that occurs ONLY when players disagree. In this case, they might, say, have a bidding war with narrative tokens to see who gets to decide what really happens.
A task resolution system, on the other hand, is concerned with modeling (at least in the abstract) the imagined world. In this scenario, a task resolution system would model how good Character A was with a gun versus how strong Character B's body armor was, and assign an outcome based on that.
----
This whole argument really boils down to one of the great failings of task resolution systems: if the task resolution is task-unbalanced, then narrative balance suffers (some players dominate the narrative compared to others). However, building a fully task-balanced system narrows the range of viable character concepts to those that can be modelled at approximately an equal level of effectiveness.
Conflict resolution systems dodge the bullet addressing narrative balance directly. However, these kinds of abstract/meta-level mechanics aren't to many people's taste.
Some people have brought up the Buffy RPG, which is a good example of a hybrid system. While fundamentally a task-resolution system, it also has a narrative-balance regulating subsystem.
Task balance is the standard idea that every in-world character concept should be of equal in-world effectiveness.
Narrative balance is the idea that every player should have equal narrative input over extended periods of play.
----
To assist me, I'm going to introduce two different kinds of gaming mechanics: conflict resolution, and task resolution.
To go back to the *BANG* You're dead! scenario, conflict resolution is a game mechanic that occurs ONLY when players disagree. In this case, they might, say, have a bidding war with narrative tokens to see who gets to decide what really happens.
A task resolution system, on the other hand, is concerned with modeling (at least in the abstract) the imagined world. In this scenario, a task resolution system would model how good Character A was with a gun versus how strong Character B's body armor was, and assign an outcome based on that.
----
This whole argument really boils down to one of the great failings of task resolution systems: if the task resolution is task-unbalanced, then narrative balance suffers (some players dominate the narrative compared to others). However, building a fully task-balanced system narrows the range of viable character concepts to those that can be modelled at approximately an equal level of effectiveness.
Conflict resolution systems dodge the bullet addressing narrative balance directly. However, these kinds of abstract/meta-level mechanics aren't to many people's taste.
Some people have brought up the Buffy RPG, which is a good example of a hybrid system. While fundamentally a task-resolution system, it also has a narrative-balance regulating subsystem.
