Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 3281291" data-attributes="member: 22424">Dragonlancer might not have missed the point you're making, but I certainly have. I see no benefit (from a game point of view) for discarding balance as a goal - such games are only fun if you happen to be the player in the beneficial position (or, in odd cases, if you've agreed to the weaker position in advance, but that won't apply to new players).I certainly see a marketing advantage to ditching balance - if the new thing is always slightly but noticably more powerful than it's immediate predecessor then players can be caught on an endless power-creep treadmill, where they always have to have the latest books to remain competitive.But that's a lousy way of building a game when Games Workshop do it, and it would be a lousy way of building a game if Wizards of the Coast were to do it.</blockquote>