Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 4657596" data-attributes="member: 48965">Again...it is balance without consideration for how it is achieved that messes up certain playstyles or goals other than "equal tactical combat", I've said this over and over again and yet you come along and say just balance... again without discussing what is lost or gained in the trade off for it.As an example, I have every edition of Stormbringer/Elric that has been published and the game started off very true to Moorcock's work... Sorcerer's and Melniboneans were hands down better than other classes and races... but as time progressed Chaosium strived more and more for balance until it became a good game for Dark Fantasy/Swords and Sorcery but not really the "Stormbringer" game to many fans.  Their last edition (before loosing the license to Mongooose did horribly, Michael Moorcock was unsatisfiesd with both the way their business transactions went and their more and more divergent vision of the game, and in the end I don't believe it sold very well.  I also believe this had everything to do with trying to achieve balance, instead of trying to achieve a game that was true to the Young Kingdoms as a world.  I wanted to play in Moorcock's world with all it's idiosyncracies... not a balanced S&S game with a coating of Moorcockian influences.  YMMV of course.So, you're stating subjectively, for your group... it doesn't help enough to be viable for you all.  My group believes otherwise.  You can't state this objectively however.  I mean do your player toss a +2 weapon into the garbage because it isn't viable?... or never take Weapon Focus?  Just curious.It's not about purposefully creating imbalance either... I never said imbalance in and of itself was a good thing either.  What I don''t necessarily want is a game where everything must be so meticulously balanced that you aren't allowed to do this or that... or this and that don't exist... because it imbalances the game, if it's a trope, trapping, etc. of the genre/world/whatever that you are playing in.  Exalted is a good example, fun game but you're playing reborn god-kings... no everyone is not going to be equal in everything and they shouldn't be.  Yet many people have...Gasp!... fun with the game, and are actually able to run it without it imploding.  I personally think creating a strict box into which all Solars will be equal in combat and outside of combat... would suck, and actually diminish the game.You're avoiding the real issue Hussar by making balance this thing that can be achieved without tradeoffs.  Simplifying it to a point that's almost absurd.  I am not stating... "I don't like balance ever.", I am stating that I don't think the sacrifice of certain things, for me are an equal tradeoff for ultimate balance.  I believe that with some games I will deal with imbalances in order to have an experience more true to the genre tropes, or closer to simulating a certain type of world.  Maybe I'm weird like that but I liked Aragorn much more than Legolas, and even though humans are weaker in Decipher's LotR rpg... I chose to play one.  I have played plenty of games where the PC's weren't totally balanced... but it was still fun.  Cyberpunk 2020, Decipher's LotR, Scion: Hero, Scion: Demigod, Exalted, Stormbringer, Hawkmoon, In Nomine, Armageddon, etc.I also believe some groups probably do have problems playing with games like these... but that doesn't mean every group should suffer because of it.  Yes there should be some balanced games for those groups, but that doesn't mean "balance" is objectively better or even objectively desirable and doesn't create certain problems with other playstyles... too bad you can't see that.</blockquote>

Verification