Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4658567" data-attributes="member: 22779">Oh, now here I would totally agree.&nbsp; We can never, ever make things perfectly balanced.&nbsp; Impossible goal.&nbsp; What we can, however, do, is mitigate obvious imbalances through mechanics.&nbsp; Make two weapons equal, for example, and the choice of one weapon or the other becomes a simple matter of taste (do I use a morningstar or a mace (3e)?)&nbsp; No, I don't believe so, and Umbran has already pointed out why.&nbsp; See, the thing is, if you want to talk about getting rid of the problems created by balance, first you have to define what those problems are.&nbsp; So far, very little of that has been done (although you took an interesting stab at it).&nbsp; In your own examples, the problems aren't one of balance though, IMO.The problem is, you made choices that you knew were inferior, beyond mechanics, beyond anything else, you knew these choices were inferior, and then you complain that they don't work in the game.&nbsp; You chose roller skates for your character, knowing that in game issues would make them of very limited use.&nbsp; No amount of mechanical balance is going to help that.It's like the wizard player who complains that he can't stand on the front line and swing a sword just like a fighter.&nbsp; Yes, he can certainly try, but, unless we make the wizard par with the fighter, he's just not going to be able to do it.&nbsp; So, yup, you could make the wizard just as good of a fighter as the fighter (1e elf f/mu anyone?), but then there's no point in taking a straight fighter.&nbsp; Why bother?&nbsp; It's deliberately choosing to gibble yourself to play a plain fighter when you have a clearly superior choice in front of you.As was mentioned earlier, a balanced system does not prevent you from making less powerful characters.&nbsp; It does prevent you, OTOH, from making characters far MORE powerful than everyone around you.&nbsp; But, you can work around the balance by simply adding in goodies to make that character more powerful.If that's what the group wants, go for it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4658567, member: 22779"] Oh, now here I would totally agree. We can never, ever make things perfectly balanced. Impossible goal. What we can, however, do, is mitigate obvious imbalances through mechanics. Make two weapons equal, for example, and the choice of one weapon or the other becomes a simple matter of taste (do I use a morningstar or a mace (3e)?) No, I don't believe so, and Umbran has already pointed out why. See, the thing is, if you want to talk about getting rid of the problems created by balance, first you have to define what those problems are. So far, very little of that has been done (although you took an interesting stab at it). In your own examples, the problems aren't one of balance though, IMO. The problem is, you made choices that you knew were inferior, beyond mechanics, beyond anything else, you knew these choices were inferior, and then you complain that they don't work in the game. You chose roller skates for your character, knowing that in game issues would make them of very limited use. No amount of mechanical balance is going to help that. It's like the wizard player who complains that he can't stand on the front line and swing a sword just like a fighter. Yes, he can certainly try, but, unless we make the wizard par with the fighter, he's just not going to be able to do it. So, yup, you could make the wizard just as good of a fighter as the fighter (1e elf f/mu anyone?), but then there's no point in taking a straight fighter. Why bother? It's deliberately choosing to gibble yourself to play a plain fighter when you have a clearly superior choice in front of you. As was mentioned earlier, a balanced system does not prevent you from making less powerful characters. It does prevent you, OTOH, from making characters far MORE powerful than everyone around you. But, you can work around the balance by simply adding in goodies to make that character more powerful. If that's what the group wants, go for it. [/QUOTE]

Verification