Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why Balance is Bad
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MoonSong" data-source="post: 6239026" data-attributes="member: 6689464"><p>I think that deep down nobody really has a problem with balance, balance is a necessary part of games, or they wouldn't be games, nobody wants to feel really useless all the time after all. However balance can be and usually is an issue, but not for the obvious reasons, deep down nobody hates balance, most of the time when someone complains about too much balance, balance isn't the real issue at hand, but the most immediate sign one can perceive of the real issue: too little tolerance to variance.</p><p></p><p>Which is the reason 'Balance is bad', too much balance can imply little room for variance, and usually it does (but it doesn't have to). </p><p></p><p>On the flip-side I've seen many people complain about too many options (option bloat), because too much variance can upset balance, and it usually does (but it doesn't have to). However it is actually the same issue, most editions of D&D have little tolerance for variance on their balance, they just choose to privilege one or the other, or just take the ball and run with it: </p><p></p><p>4e decided to be upfront about it and removed a lot of variance to preserve balance (and to sell more books too, you can only convert a very reduced subset of core-only 3.x characters using core-only 4e, the amount of core-only 3e pcs convertable to 4e increased over time when more splats and dragon issues showed up, though a few corner cases -and a lot of splat pcs- were never convertible. This compared with the 3e phb, which is enough to convert the practical totality of 2e phb characters, some complete book characters, a few AD&D characters not present in core 2e, and on top added new kinds of pcs not seen before), 2e on the flipside just kept on adding variance balance be dammned, 1e and 3.x had meassures of balance, but those got blatantly ignored by a bunch of the playerbase: Ad&d appraoch also focussed on reduced variance but most groups played outside the ideal circumstances, 3.x instead got one dm guideline blown out of proportion while the others got promptly forgotten in turn causing an arms-at-race of power creep that left balance in the dust while we kept getting more and more variance following the tendence set by 2e, though IMO this was a case where they weren't interrelated. </p><p></p><p>Just to be short the reasons some of us "hate balance", don't have to do so much with balance itself as with losing character variance in the process. And the opossite is also true.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MoonSong, post: 6239026, member: 6689464"] I think that deep down nobody really has a problem with balance, balance is a necessary part of games, or they wouldn't be games, nobody wants to feel really useless all the time after all. However balance can be and usually is an issue, but not for the obvious reasons, deep down nobody hates balance, most of the time when someone complains about too much balance, balance isn't the real issue at hand, but the most immediate sign one can perceive of the real issue: too little tolerance to variance. Which is the reason 'Balance is bad', too much balance can imply little room for variance, and usually it does (but it doesn't have to). On the flip-side I've seen many people complain about too many options (option bloat), because too much variance can upset balance, and it usually does (but it doesn't have to). However it is actually the same issue, most editions of D&D have little tolerance for variance on their balance, they just choose to privilege one or the other, or just take the ball and run with it: 4e decided to be upfront about it and removed a lot of variance to preserve balance (and to sell more books too, you can only convert a very reduced subset of core-only 3.x characters using core-only 4e, the amount of core-only 3e pcs convertable to 4e increased over time when more splats and dragon issues showed up, though a few corner cases -and a lot of splat pcs- were never convertible. This compared with the 3e phb, which is enough to convert the practical totality of 2e phb characters, some complete book characters, a few AD&D characters not present in core 2e, and on top added new kinds of pcs not seen before), 2e on the flipside just kept on adding variance balance be dammned, 1e and 3.x had meassures of balance, but those got blatantly ignored by a bunch of the playerbase: Ad&d appraoch also focussed on reduced variance but most groups played outside the ideal circumstances, 3.x instead got one dm guideline blown out of proportion while the others got promptly forgotten in turn causing an arms-at-race of power creep that left balance in the dust while we kept getting more and more variance following the tendence set by 2e, though IMO this was a case where they weren't interrelated. Just to be short the reasons some of us "hate balance", don't have to do so much with balance itself as with losing character variance in the process. And the opossite is also true. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why Balance is Bad
Top