Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6006192" data-attributes="member: 17106">Are you sure you want to state that?Let's get this straight.Balance is some immutable property of the rules; it remains the same whether you or I are playing them, whether we're playing urban intrigue or kick on the door, whether we're system experts of newbies, whether we're trying to break the game or not, none of that matters. 3e is an unbalanced ruleset. Period.But it matters which arbitrary metagame role is assigned to a particular character? It matters which person has control of that character, despite the fact that that designation is a social contract and not part of the game rules? PCs and NPCs don't need to be balanced on the same level?Seriously?Not once you factor in LA or the equivalent. Same standards.There are a relatively small number of monsters that have characteristics that make them poorly suited to be adventurers, such as unintelligent, immobile, or otherwise unbalanced monsters, but even in this case, they'r just as poorly suited to become NPC adventurers as they are PCs.Well yes, higher level goblins have more treasure; that's part of the expected wealth by level guidelines. But say you gave that NPC an ability or item that wasn't within the basic advancement structure of the game (say, give it double hit ponts for its level). Then there would need to be a reason.Of course not. Who said they should?You are remarkably dismissive of all the D&D games that don't fit this description at all. Do you really think that all or most or even many fighters played over the last three decades fit your model? Do you really think that every 3.5, PF, TB, and other 3.X fighter (to say nothing of the other versions) is being categorically outshown by a spellcaster?Sure, class balance is at issue. There are dead levels, weak abilities, all kinds of problems with 3e D&D classes, and other rules. Unbalanced feats, spells, races, items, etc. That doesn't mean the system itself is unbalanced (though it is to some extent; number scaling can get wonky). More to the point, it doesn't mean the system itself needed to be thrown out.</blockquote>

Verification