Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack7" data-source="post: 5024660" data-attributes="member: 54707">BG, all of the things you mentioned could be described as emphasizing the very opposite of balance, as it now is commonly defined. Then again one might argue they imposed a sort of superficial, or I prefer the term mytho-poetic balance, as applied to and on a game that was not "technically balanced, nor desired to be" in the modern sense. By mythopoetic I mean the fact that the Paladin doesn't have to be the equal of the Ranger in every way. Or vice-versa. The Paladin is a Demon-killer, the Ranger is a Giant-killer. They are by nature different in function and abilities. Just as thieves are naturally different in nature and capabilities from the Wizard. They don't need cross-over capabilities, their function is Mythopoetic and peculiar to their individual nature as characters and classes, not Geek-interchangeable, as is common thinking where one technologically, "trades out and exchanges parts as required by the situation." In Star Trek a Geek centered world, one trades out parts and roles as needed to solve a problem. In mythopoetic situations only the Knight can slay the dragon, and only the Wizard  can work the magic, and only the Thief can effectively footpad. Roles aren't interchangeable or balanced, they are unique and indispensable. And in time fantasy-games have become Geek-incentivized. Not myhtically and historically incentivized. I'm just offering this as a social and psychological evaluation of how the idea of balance has changed over the years within game design.The Geek sees your list of items and says to himself, "see there, it's proof that the game was trying to be balanced by artificially correcting built in and obvious imbalances." (Read, Paladin slays demons,  Thief steals treasure.) The Nerd sees the same items and comparing them to modern standards says, "this is the very opposite of balance, it displays the obvious and intentional imbalances in design." (Because Paladins shouldn't have powers that resemble those of thieves. And yes, I'm only using this analogy in the metaphorical sense.)Although I might not have used the same term(s), I thought Canis answered this pretty well:</blockquote>

Verification