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="Marshall" data-source="post: 6243930" data-attributes="member: 765"><p>Why?!? The DM can always add skills available to the skill challenge(chance are he designed it to start with) and characters that naturally fall into the primary skills are going to be better(and characters with abilities specific to skill challenges will be even better).</p><p></p><p>Where do you get the idea that having abilities that make you good in skill challenges means you suck out of them? Or that not having special abilities for skill challenges, means you cant contribute at all? </p><p></p><p>Again, you're stuck in this binary mode of thinking that being able to contribute at all means that you are as competent as the best candidate for the job with the only other option being worthless.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, basically, you want it the way 4e does it? In that there is no binary built into any class. They are all at least somewhat competent in all aspects of the game.</p><p></p><p>5-10 minute encounters is just absurd. You cant do anything in that little time. It takes more than 5 minutes for the DM to set a scene properly and describe the environs to the players. I dont know who you're playing with, but most people I know like to strategize with the other players/PCs, discuss options and decide what to do and where to do it and thats out of combat...</p><p></p><p>I cant even contemplate a game where I could run 24+ meaningful encounters in a 4 hr session.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Back in high school, a couple of buddies and I decided to play Car Wars. Two of us sat down and started building cars and the 3rd said "I'll be the Ref." I thought that was strange, but hey, I'll play along. After we had our cars done, the Ref set up a highway and placed some debris and wrecked cars on it and placed my friends and I cars on one end of the map. He then told us that there were people milling about the wreck site. My friend and I promptly started attacking each other and mowing down the crowd. </p><p></p><p>Which person in this story is playing the wrong game?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>....and theres a huge difference between sharing the spotlight and heading to the kitchen to make a snack because you are a detriment to the team in these conditions. All my players will let someone else take the lead as long as they get to fall in line behind. What shouldnt happen is a system that makes the game into a series of encounters where only one player participates at a time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marshall, post: 6243930, member: 765"] Why?!? The DM can always add skills available to the skill challenge(chance are he designed it to start with) and characters that naturally fall into the primary skills are going to be better(and characters with abilities specific to skill challenges will be even better). Where do you get the idea that having abilities that make you good in skill challenges means you suck out of them? Or that not having special abilities for skill challenges, means you cant contribute at all? Again, you're stuck in this binary mode of thinking that being able to contribute at all means that you are as competent as the best candidate for the job with the only other option being worthless. So, basically, you want it the way 4e does it? In that there is no binary built into any class. They are all at least somewhat competent in all aspects of the game. 5-10 minute encounters is just absurd. You cant do anything in that little time. It takes more than 5 minutes for the DM to set a scene properly and describe the environs to the players. I dont know who you're playing with, but most people I know like to strategize with the other players/PCs, discuss options and decide what to do and where to do it and thats out of combat... I cant even contemplate a game where I could run 24+ meaningful encounters in a 4 hr session. Back in high school, a couple of buddies and I decided to play Car Wars. Two of us sat down and started building cars and the 3rd said "I'll be the Ref." I thought that was strange, but hey, I'll play along. After we had our cars done, the Ref set up a highway and placed some debris and wrecked cars on it and placed my friends and I cars on one end of the map. He then told us that there were people milling about the wreck site. My friend and I promptly started attacking each other and mowing down the crowd. Which person in this story is playing the wrong game? ....and theres a huge difference between sharing the spotlight and heading to the kitchen to make a snack because you are a detriment to the team in these conditions. All my players will let someone else take the lead as long as they get to fall in line behind. What shouldnt happen is a system that makes the game into a series of encounters where only one player participates at a time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why Balance is Bad
Top