Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7907881" data-attributes="member: 22779">Nope.&nbsp; That's balanced 1/3 of the time and crap 2/3rds of the time.&nbsp; No interest in playing a game that is crap most of the time.Orthagonal to game design.&nbsp; A &quot;shine all the time&quot; class can contribute &quot;notwithstanding&quot; just as much as anyone else.Really?&nbsp; The Critical Role players frequently sit around for four hours not contributing to the game and not saying very much?Oh, you mean the audience?&nbsp; Do you sit down to play D&amp;D to be part of the audience?There is a difference though.&nbsp; Is the reason you have little to do simply an artifact of the situation, or is it because the mechanics of your character mean that you can't really contribute anything?&nbsp; The first, sure, that is going to happen.&nbsp; It's unavoidable.&nbsp; But, that's not what we're talking about.&nbsp; We're talking about being sidelined because the mechanics of the game - a 3e rogue in a dungeon full of plant monsters and no traps.&nbsp; The rogue player did nothing wrong, but, because of the mechanics, cannot really contribute anything mechanically to the game.&nbsp; Sure, he might have great ideas, but, that is irrelevant to the class he is playing.True enough.&nbsp; In 1e, it was actually fairly valid for an MU to fall back on a staff or darts and actually contribute.&nbsp; Thus, balance was, somewhat, achieved.&nbsp; The point is, if the mechanics of the game is sidelining a character, then that is rather poor balance.&nbsp; And, again, I do not believe in long term balance.&nbsp; That's an illusion and it doesn't actually work because there are far, far too many presumptions built into it.&nbsp; Primarily, will the campaign actually last long enough?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7907881, member: 22779"] Nope. That's balanced 1/3 of the time and crap 2/3rds of the time. No interest in playing a game that is crap most of the time. Orthagonal to game design. A "shine all the time" class can contribute "notwithstanding" just as much as anyone else. Really? The Critical Role players frequently sit around for four hours not contributing to the game and not saying very much? Oh, you mean the audience? Do you sit down to play D&D to be part of the audience? There is a difference though. Is the reason you have little to do simply an artifact of the situation, or is it because the mechanics of your character mean that you can't really contribute anything? The first, sure, that is going to happen. It's unavoidable. But, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about being sidelined because the mechanics of the game - a 3e rogue in a dungeon full of plant monsters and no traps. The rogue player did nothing wrong, but, because of the mechanics, cannot really contribute anything mechanically to the game. Sure, he might have great ideas, but, that is irrelevant to the class he is playing. True enough. In 1e, it was actually fairly valid for an MU to fall back on a staff or darts and actually contribute. Thus, balance was, somewhat, achieved. The point is, if the mechanics of the game is sidelining a character, then that is rather poor balance. And, again, I do not believe in long term balance. That's an illusion and it doesn't actually work because there are far, far too many presumptions built into it. Primarily, will the campaign actually last long enough? [/QUOTE]

Verification