Do we need/want game balance?

[coffee]

admin said:

ffilz said:

Sure, you can't balance for player skill, nor would you want to. If there is a huge disparity of player skill that actually causes the game to be unenjoyable for one player (or several players), then some kind of handicap may be desireable.

I actually did this quite often in one of my gaming groups. One particular player seemed too able to take over a party, so I started giving him characters with high intelligence, wisdom, and charaisma but almost no fighting prowess whatsoever.

What happened is that he still took over the party, but did so more as a coordinator and tactician rather than leading the charge. It became a challenge for him to grow and take on a different role in the group, and overall he had a great time with it.

That's awesome!

And to think, there are still some people out there who thing that RPGs are "evil" or "stupid" or a "waste of time". I say they can be vehicles for personal growth and are an awful lot of fun!

[brumbar]

"I think this highlights issue: imbalance is really only an issue in combat... and the more combat there is, the more of an issue it becomes."

I have to agree that combat is the only real place where you would notice an imbalance but a little creativity can fix that. The game is really about the roleplaying and how creative the players are with there characters. That is where the true fun in this game lies.

[crimhthanthegreat]

brumbar said:

"I think this highlights issue: imbalance is really only an issue in combat... and the more combat there is, the more of an issue it becomes."

I have to agree that combat is the only real place where you would notice an imbalance but a little creativity can fix that. The game is really about the roleplaying and how creative the players are with there characters. That is where the true fun in this game lies.

I don't think the imbalance has that much significance in OD&D like it may have it later versions of the game. It is not an issue, or at least should not be an issue, that creates problems in the game, of course in my game, although it is deadly, that are plenty of places for the characters to shine besides in combat.

[coffee]

I think that the balance issue is better in OD&D than in some later editions of the game. That, of course, depends on how they are played.

I was in a 3.5 game that was almost ALL combat. The other players would min/max their character builds so that they could be total butt-kickers when the fighting started. I played a single-classed Bard. By any rational system, a single class character should truly shine over the others, but when you're a bard that's not in combat!

I remember after one spectacular attack, one of the 'combat monsters' was rolling damage. He rolled his dice, looked at them for a minute, and then announced "I'm grouping them into fifties."

I'll take the unbalanced old school OD&D any day, over that nonsense.

[crimhthanthegreat]

"Grouping them into fifties." No never mind, I know I don't want to know what that means.

[coffee]

crimhthanthegreat said:

"Grouping them into fifties." No never mind, I know I don't want to know what that means.

Trust me; you really, really don't...

[raithe]

No you don't. I just got out of a game like that. (power-attack full etc right coffee?)
You have to be careful with balance IMO. Otherwise you wind up with Blizzard syndrome. A>B so nerf A to oblivion and jack up B, oh no B is overpowered. nerf B and up C,D,&Q etc etc etc.
Just roll with it and you can make it all work out in the end; no need for more rules.