tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7239577512598038009.post244472428934909339..comments2024-02-27T01:17:39.925-08:00Comments on The Nine and Thirty Kingdoms: I Hate Game Balance, Part IITalysmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02162328521343832412noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7239577512598038009.post-22915084016018291422013-08-15T09:56:56.685-07:002013-08-15T09:56:56.685-07:00Loved the rant (started skimming a bit towards the...Loved the rant (started skimming a bit towards the end though, 'cause I gotta get ready for work). What I can't stand is how people claim older editions of D&D, and even 3.0, weren't "balanced". They clearly were, it's just that they were based on a totally different - and in my opinion, superior - definition of balance: make everything different. The less similar two classes are, the harder it is to compare them. Because neither is the strictly superior choice, it comes down to your own subjective values. An example of unbalanced classes would be a fighter and some kind of super-fighter that can do everything a fighter can, plus more, with no drawbacks. Nobody in their right minds would ever choose the regular fighter, making that class a useless waste of ink<br /><br />3.5 seemed to be built on a point system of balance. Each perk has some value, and you add all these up to get the class' total worth. To be balanced, every class has to have the same point total. The problem with this is that, especially as it gets tweaked, everything becomes the same. There's absolutely no variation, which is ridiculous since games are all about variety!Holly Oatshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01703437987958922954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7239577512598038009.post-71291733921642955852013-08-13T15:25:32.608-07:002013-08-13T15:25:32.608-07:00Have you looked at Torchbearer or Apocalypse World...Have you looked at Torchbearer or Apocalypse World (or one of its hacks)? Although fundamentally different, they were both designed as games (1) where players only make choices that matter* and (2) no choice or outcome results in a dead end.<br /><br />*Well, at least when the game system comes into play; stupid GMs can still ask questions that don't matter.Ynas Midgardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14972628887096890642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7239577512598038009.post-72088357461201265452013-08-12T12:49:29.987-07:002013-08-12T12:49:29.987-07:00I feel the same way, I have found game "Balan...I feel the same way, I have found game "Balance" does far more damage to a game than any other modern game concept.<br /><br />For us game "balance" always came down to having the right members or classes in a party of adventurers.<br /><br />ERIC!ERIC!https://www.blogger.com/profile/18251132223571608976noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7239577512598038009.post-75218316088750203062013-08-12T10:44:20.585-07:002013-08-12T10:44:20.585-07:00Awesome series of posts. I think we would have way...Awesome series of posts. I think we would have way better games if the designers and players focused as much energy on making systems of "meaningful choices" as they do on "balance." Because choosing is fun, balancing is accounting, IMHO :)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15632176589503480466noreply@blogger.com