[baronspam]

Honestly, my opinion is that all the bitching about "balance" this and "balance" that needs to come to an end. From what I can tell this idea of "balance" stems from MMOs and is part of why D&D 4th became the PoS system that it is. When you have a system that is what MMO players call "balanced" (that is everything is completely equal), you end up with a flat, boring system that may be all right for your occasional diversion (like once every five or six years) but has little actual value of being played beyond that.

You are really pissed they took Wish out of DnD, aren't you?

I have never understood anti-balance arguments.  Lets assume you have a class based game system.  How does having a game where one class has more to contribute than another make the game more enjoyable?  And balanced games do not strive to make "everything completely equal".  They strive to make sure the primary character options all have a role to play, and something to contribute to the party that will be of roughly equal value to the success of the group's in game goals.  I would call a balanced game one where all characters had a meaningful way to regularly and consistently contribute to the success of the party.  Things aren't "equal"  Some characters are better at melee, some are better at ranged, some do more damage, some are more about status effects, some are about healing and support.  But I think a good game gives everyone something to do most of the time (no long periods of time when you hide in back with your crossbow waiting for your one spell) and it does not let anyone get so powerful that others become irrelevant to success.  Lets face it, if you ever played higher level 3rd ed DnD can  you really tell me it didn't eventually become a game of keep the spell casters alive for a round so they can defeat the encounter?   The fighter that was the star of the show at level 1 (not much fun for the wizard or druid) eventually became hitpoints with a name at later levels. (not much fun for the fighter).  If you find the idea of everyone being busy and helpful to be "too MMO" then I guess I would rather plan the MMO.

[All4BigGuns]

The thing is, from what I can tell, most people who cry for "balance" and whine "imba! imba!" do not share your idea of "balance". I can understand your idea of it, but most arguments I've seen are claiming all characters should be equal in all ways, and I quite honestly believe that to be bull crap.

[baronspam]

The thing is, from what I can tell, most people who cry for "balance" and whine "imba! imba!" do not share your idea of "balance". I can understand your idea of it, but most arguments I've seen are claiming all characters should be equal in all ways, and I quite honestly believe that to be bull crap.

Well, I won't call you a liar, but I don't think I have ever seen anyone on any message board say they want "all characters equal in all ways."  We must move in very different gaming circles.  I respect your right to hold your opinion, but I simply do not find that attitude in the people I game with or the websites I have frequented at various times.  I have certainly seen people have disagreements over what constitutes a mechanical imbalance for a given system, and what might be overpowered or under powered, but as I said, "all characters equal in all ways", I have just never run into that.

[ArkangelWinter]

Balance is never the system or players' fault. It's on the GM to concoct situations that each player will feel useful in. Its not just about the charsheet, player personality and tendencies contribute too.

[baronspam]

Balance is never the system or players' fault. It's on the GM to concoct situations that each player will feel useful in. Its not just about the charsheet, player personality and tendencies contribute too.

I agree its not just about the charsheet, the players and gm have a major role, but rules matter to.  If one character option is broadly powerful and useful, and another character option only contributes in niche situations, I don't think its reasonable for the GM to have to constantly manufacture these niche situations so the player with the second option can avoid sitting around with nothing to do.  Not every character has to have an answer for anything, but if you have a mechanical situation where someone just doesn't have as much to offer, then I think you need to address that at a mechanical level and just not a storytelling level.

[UmaroVI]

The thing is, from what I can tell, most people who cry for "balance" and whine "imba! imba!" do not share your idea of "balance". I can understand your idea of it, but most arguments I've seen are claiming all characters should be equal in all ways, and I quite honestly believe that to be bull crap.

That's quite the straw man you set up there.

Also, the idea that people wanting balance in RPGs comes from MMOs is pure nonsense. Plenty of RPGs published before MMOs talk about game balance and such - Champions does, for example.

[Mirikon]

Wanting game balance is an idea that has been around long before DikuMUD ever crawled up onto Telnet. The simple explanation is that a game is about having fun, within the structure of the rules. However, no one likes to be Bulma next to someone else's Goku. To take D&D as an example, in 3.5 if you're a caster in a low level game, you suck, and hard, while the rest of your team is stronger, better equipped for fighting, and in general just better able to handle the challenges of adventuring. Take the same caster in a high level game, and you are practically a god, while the rest of the team is there to keep the nasties off you while you nuke them. D&D 4 is a well balanced combat system. However, they achieved that balance by stripping out everything that every other edition of D&D before it had done, and eliminating the customization that was the hallmark of 3.X. Which is why some people hate it.

[Kontact]

You plan on running a single character through MORE than 20 years of game time, baron?  If that's really the case, then why not plan on leonization costs to drop as that technology becomes as old as a 486 computer is today.