Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alex319" data-source="post: 4657537" data-attributes="member: 45678">Like a lot of these types of discussions, there are really several different issues being discussed here, and several different types of things people want to do. I will try to summarize these issues, and solutions from the associated discussions, here. I will also offer some of my own thoughts and suggestions.Issue 1: I want one particular character class to be more powerful than another, because in my fiction/world/milieux, that character class is more powerful (e.g. wizards as more powerful than fighters.)Solution: This is very easy to fix in 4e. Simply make the characters of that character class higher level than the others.Issue 2: There's a specific ability I want my character to have (e.g. ability to control a creature and have both me and that creature attack every round) that was possible in 3e, but they took out in 4e because it was unbalanced.Solution: First of all, observe that there are lots of "specific abilities" that weren't in 3e - or any edition - because of game balance. For a trivial example, "the ability to cast a spell at-will that automatically kills someone with no save" is not in any edition, so you wouldn't be able to play a character with this ability, in any edition, if that's for some reason what you wanted. So these limitations on abilities are not unique to 4e. (If there were no limitations on any abilities, there would effectively be no rules at all, and it would just be free-form roleplaying.)But, anyway, if the specific ability you want does fall into the category of "in 3e but not in 4e", there are a few options. One is to just put it back in with no alterations - say, make a houserule that you don't have to spend your standard action to cause the monster to use his standard action. (This will of course make that build more powerful and "unbalanced," but if you don't mind it being "unbalanced" then that's not a problem.)If you want to have the extra ability but want to maintain "balance," then one solution is to design a new character class that is exactly the same as the character class you want to base it off of, except with the extra ability but then with something else less powerful as a trade-off. For example, say you can have both you and your animal companion make an attack every round, but your animal companion is less powerful than the animal companion of a regular beastmaster ranger. (And, of course, if you want a character with the extra ability, but with nothing taken off as a trade-off, and you also want it to be balanced, then you are asking for something self-contradictory. By definition adding an extra ability without taking anything away makes a character stricly more powerful.)Issue 3: I don't like the fact that all characters can contribute in all situations. I would prefer if characters were more specialized - that there are some situations where a character can't contribute at all.Solution: First of all, why do you want this? Why is the game more fun or interesting (or whatever quality you are looking for) if some players have to sit out for part of the game? The only thing I can think of is that it helps the suspension of disbelief if a character "realistically" wouldn't be able to help in a given situation.But be aware that if you do try to do this, you'll have to make sure that you actually include challenges that challenge each character. The problem with this is that it often requires some wonky adventure design (the so-called "Eigen Plot") which could potentially wipe out any gain in suspension of disbelief from before.Issue 4: There's a specific ability or set of abilities that I want to be more (or less) powerful than would be "balanced", because it seems that "realistically" or "logically" they should be more (or less) powerful, and the way they are hurts the suspension of disbelief.I've seen this type of complaint before (e.g. AngelTheTechrat's most recent post) but I haven't heard many specific examples. If we could talk about more specific examples then we could get closer to figuring out solutions.One possible solution might be to change the given power however you want, but also make a compensating balance change to another power of the same class/build/etc. For example, supposed you think it's "unrealistic" that rogue's sneak attack works on undead. Then what you could do is make sneak attack not work on undead, but give rogues some other power that's designed to fight undead. Then rogues won't have to hide in the corner every time undead show up.Issue 5: I want to create scenarios that deny my players the primary uses of their abilities, in order to force them to be creative and find alternative ways of solving their problems.Solution: If this is your goal, then what you're effectively wanting to do is design your own custom encounter that restricts the players' abilities. If you want to do this, then it's your encounter, your dungeon, so put in whatever immunities, special rules, etc. you want.The main difference between systems in which balance is not a primary goal and systems which are is that in the former, you often have to actively AVOID designing an encounter that denies some players opportunities to use their abilities. In the latter, you still can do that if you want to, you just have to actively try to do it.</blockquote>

Verification