Game Balance?
- MormonYoYoMan
- Ulthal
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 7:00 am
- Location: Texas
Game Balance?
One of the things which WotC touted about D&D4e was that it was all so balanced now. No player class or species didn't "equal out," and the adventure challenge was to balance with the party's ability. blah blah blah
I never concerned myself with play balance, knowing my players and their characters knew when to run away and scheme. Our group was delighted when Call of Cthulhu was published - and there's a classic example of NO play balance at all! (You're doomed; you're all doomed. My wife ran a campaign which ended with those of us who survived sitting in a hotel room with ALL the lights on, crying hysterically. For all I know, they're still there.)
Is play balance really that essential? Doesn't it make the story just a little too predictable?
I never concerned myself with play balance, knowing my players and their characters knew when to run away and scheme. Our group was delighted when Call of Cthulhu was published - and there's a classic example of NO play balance at all! (You're doomed; you're all doomed. My wife ran a campaign which ended with those of us who survived sitting in a hotel room with ALL the lights on, crying hysterically. For all I know, they're still there.)
Is play balance really that essential? Doesn't it make the story just a little too predictable?
-
*jeep! & God Bless!
--Grandpa Chet
"Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports." - George Washington.
*jeep! & God Bless!
--Grandpa Chet
"Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports." - George Washington.
Re: Game Balance?
No, it isn't. And as I don't railroad (have a story pre-written) the PC's get to make choices that can lead them to easy pickens or, deadly peril. As we all know, life doesn't come pre-balanced...MormonYoYoMan wrote: Is play balance really that essential? Doesn't it make the story just a little too predictable?
-
- Ulthal
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Re: Game Balance?
Totally overrated!
-
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 2732
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:00 am
- Location: The Court of the Crimson King
Re: Game Balance?
I trust the balance or lack of balance of what's there in the rules I've bought. When I do care about balance is when someone wants to add something new to the game, a new class or race or some special ability.
My C&C stuff: www.rpggrognard.com
- Omote
- Battle Stag
- Posts: 11560
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
- Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
- Contact:
Re: Game Balance?
I'm not interesting in it for this game. The balance is me (CK).
~O
~O
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4051
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Game Balance?
Monsters don't care about balance. All they care about is if you're crunchy and taste good with ketchup. lol
"Rolling dice and killing characters since September 1976."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
- Sir Ironside
- Lore Drake
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am
Re: Game Balance?
To me, it seems, that the all importance of game balance has been more of a recent phenomena in the last ten years or so. I know GURPS makes an attempt at it dating back to the late 80's, but even GURPS never put a lot of stress on its importance. Some games, like Paranoia, just didn't give a shit about xp.
That being said I, like others don't even bother with game balance. It... unbalances what an rpg is suppose to be. Living in a fantasy, vicariously through imagination and some rules. I'm not a one true way dude, you having fun the way you like to play, then cool. I just find trying to achieve game balance is far too weighted that the rules become unwieldy as it starts to look like filling out tax forms.
I just want fun where your totally immersed into the campaign/story that your playing in and not worried about who is leveling up, and when you can, so you can kill greater monsters, using your super cool new powers.
That being said I, like others don't even bother with game balance. It... unbalances what an rpg is suppose to be. Living in a fantasy, vicariously through imagination and some rules. I'm not a one true way dude, you having fun the way you like to play, then cool. I just find trying to achieve game balance is far too weighted that the rules become unwieldy as it starts to look like filling out tax forms.
I just want fun where your totally immersed into the campaign/story that your playing in and not worried about who is leveling up, and when you can, so you can kill greater monsters, using your super cool new powers.
"Paranoia is just another word for ignorance." - Hunter S. Thompson
Re: Game Balance?
I'll just weigh in to concur with the others. I think "game balance" is a product of the video game age. MMORPG players are constantly whining about balance, classes getting nerfed, that build is "OP," etc. These concepts didn't exist in the old days of role playing, at least not in any way that most players cared about. Sure, even E.G.G. could occasionally be heard discussing "balance" in the rules and among the classes, but no one really put much stock in it. Originally, everyone knew the Magic-User would be lucky to make it to 5th level, and everyone equally knew at 12th level or higher the same Magic-User owned you. A good DM would keep the pressure on the players with devilishly crafted encounters, but would "dial" the dice - like knobs on a pressure cooker - to keep the whole thing from blowing up (unless the players were being particularly stupid and deserved a TPK). Thus, "balance" was driven by the DM, at his or her whim. That's why you hear stories of DMs who loved to kill parties, DMs who gave away the kingdom (Monty Hall), and every DM in between. There was your "balance."
"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs. He presents opportunities
for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own.” -- E. G. G.
--------------------------------------------------
Castles & Crusades Society Member
Re: Game Balance?
Go0gleplex wrote:Monsters don't care about balance. All they care about is if you're crunchy and taste good with ketchup. lol
That's why my characters long ago stopped carrying bottles of the stuff in their backpacks to put on all that beef jerky. It just encourages those monsters.
Re: Game Balance?
I dunno...
Throwing jerky down a dark corridor to see if something comes to eat it -instead of me- is not the worst idea I've ever heard.
Throwing jerky down a dark corridor to see if something comes to eat it -instead of me- is not the worst idea I've ever heard.
Re: Game Balance?
My party usually just chucks the party's halfling down the hallway (covered in ketchup)kajukenbo wrote:I dunno...
Throwing jerky down a dark corridor to see if something comes to eat it -instead of me- is not the worst idea I've ever heard.
Re: Game Balance?
No play balance isn't essential. It is quite for everyone to have fun where one person is a combat monster and the others are weak in combat. It can however be more difficult to design interesting adventures. If the other players are sidelined and not able to contribute (not necessarily in combat but somehow), they can grow to dislike the game. IMHO the nice feature of 4E D&D is that I find it easier to DM. I remember an encounter in a 3.5 game where the CR should have been appropriate for us but for our party it was near impossible (high AC but could be taken down by magic relatively easily but our spellcasters didn't focus on damage spells). Balancing an encounter in 3.5 requires some knowledge of the party composition and strength (assuming you expect them to fight obviously as an unbalanced encounter they should flee from is different). The game balance of 4E means that assuming the encounter is of appropriate level you shouldn't have such a problem.
Re: Game Balance?
I am firmly in the camp against "game balance".
If players are actually role-playing then they will have enough sense to avoid situations that they cannot handle.
I do not consider it to be the job of a CK/GM/DM to make sure PCs have a chance to win an encounter.
I try to give them a fair shot at surviving, but that means things like they can get help, run away or simply apologize for whatever transpired.
The politically-correct idea that everyone is as good as everyone else (everyone is special, everyone is a winner, everyone gets a trophy - all of that) is BS.
WoTC making changes to The Game to reflect -and passively encourage- this trend in our society is just another mark against them in my opinion.
If players are actually role-playing then they will have enough sense to avoid situations that they cannot handle.
I do not consider it to be the job of a CK/GM/DM to make sure PCs have a chance to win an encounter.
I try to give them a fair shot at surviving, but that means things like they can get help, run away or simply apologize for whatever transpired.
The politically-correct idea that everyone is as good as everyone else (everyone is special, everyone is a winner, everyone gets a trophy - all of that) is BS.
WoTC making changes to The Game to reflect -and passively encourage- this trend in our society is just another mark against them in my opinion.
Re: Game Balance?
Yes, important distinction there. Also, it really ups the tension and feeling of accomplishment when the PC's DO prevail.kajukenbo wrote: I try to give them a fair shot at surviving, but that means things like they can get help, run away or simply apologize for whatever transpired.
Re: Game Balance?
Absolutely!Arduin wrote:Yes, important distinction there. Also, it really ups the tension and feeling of accomplishment when the PC's DO prevail.
There is a big difference between the sense of accomplishment and an expectation due to a false sense of entitlement.
Re: Game Balance?
Yes, this was part of the problem with games like 4.X. The expectation that, like a video game, the encounters would be level "appropriate".kajukenbo wrote:Absolutely!Arduin wrote:Yes, important distinction there. Also, it really ups the tension and feeling of accomplishment when the PC's DO prevail.
There is a big difference between the sense of accomplishment and an expectation due to a false sense of entitlement.
Re: Game Balance?
I think some modicum of fairness is expected. A party of 1st level characters should not reasonably encounter a series of all-powerful magicians at every inn in every town, unless there are some specific circumstances that warrant such a thing; this is not a "don't let them hang themselves with the rope" either. But, this idea of 'fair' is not the rules... it is in the play. For example, in a recent game, our 2nd level party encountered some orcs. We decided to investigate and it ended badly, resulting in combat. We were doing well and then, from nowhere, time stop resulting in the entire party being captured. Sure, there may be a reason for it, and it is probably a good one, but that does not take the sting out of the feeling that it was complete BS.
Re: Game Balance?
Sounds like some of the games I've seen with children GMing...serleran wrote:We were doing well and then, from nowhere, time stop resulting in the entire party being captured. Sure, there may be a reason for it, and it is probably a good one, but that does not take the sting out of the feeling that it was complete BS.
- Sir Ironside
- Lore Drake
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am
Re: Game Balance?
To me balance and adventure are two different things. For the fun of it, the majority of interaction is such that it weighs towards the group or having a chance to succeed. (I have no control over the dice.) Every once in awhile I'll put in overwhelming odds that are better to run away and come back to fight another day, type encounter. This isn't a dead end, but information they can use later on, if they happen to stumble across it, before they are ready to challenge it. (For instance a 2nd level group come across a red dragon that possess' an item they are looking for. The best option, run away, then come back when they are strong enough to defeat the dragon. They may not have the fire power, now, to kill it, but they at least know where the item can be found.)
This is why I only roll on a random encounter table that suits the level they are on. That is what it is there for.
I look upon GMing the same way I look upon the protagonist being picked to follow in a story. Books/movies etc. are created to follow the adventures of that one character/party, because a book about a turnip farmer would be boring. These are people who are telling a compelling story that is worth writing about. (The mud farmers in; Monty Pythons: In Search for the Holy Grail, where amusing for the 5 minutes they where in it, but I'd rather follow King Arthur than watch the mud farmers go about their daily routine.)
This is why I only roll on a random encounter table that suits the level they are on. That is what it is there for.
Though I wouldn't word it so harshly. I agree. If the bold above serves a purpose then it is part of your adventure. If there really is no reason to it, then It would kind of bother me as it would seem it is just the GM, flexing his muscles.Arduin wrote:Sounds like some of the games I've seen with children GMing...serleran wrote:We were doing well and then, from nowhere, time stop resulting in the entire party being captured. Sure, there may be a reason for it, and it is probably a good one, but that does not take the sting out of the feeling that it was complete BS.
I look upon GMing the same way I look upon the protagonist being picked to follow in a story. Books/movies etc. are created to follow the adventures of that one character/party, because a book about a turnip farmer would be boring. These are people who are telling a compelling story that is worth writing about. (The mud farmers in; Monty Pythons: In Search for the Holy Grail, where amusing for the 5 minutes they where in it, but I'd rather follow King Arthur than watch the mud farmers go about their daily routine.)
"Paranoia is just another word for ignorance." - Hunter S. Thompson
Re: Game Balance?
Didn't mean it to be harsh. Just sounded like games my kids put together where random, high powered things happened without rhyme or reason because, well, they were kids and liked to make stuff go boom.Sir Ironside wrote:Though I wouldn't word it so harshly. I agree. If the bold above serves a purpose then it is part of your adventure. If there really is no reason to it, then It would kind of bother me as it would seem it is just the GM, flexing his muscles.Arduin wrote: Sounds like some of the games I've seen with children GMing...
Re: Game Balance?
I think game balance and/or play balance is achieved by the CK along with the players and a good set of rules (like C&C, OD&D or AD&D). But I don't know that claiming an RPG is game balanced necessarily means that the game will play out as such.
One of the great things about the SIEGE engine is, that it allows the CK to balance the play and running of the game. It really is powerful and thus flexible, so the game play can be very balanced.
One of the great things about the SIEGE engine is, that it allows the CK to balance the play and running of the game. It really is powerful and thus flexible, so the game play can be very balanced.
Lord Tadhg - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Ardmore
"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax
"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth
"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax
"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth