PDA

View Full Version : Class/level Imbalance and System Versitility



AKA_Bait
2008-05-23, 08:08 AM
Ok, so I was reading this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81113)thread and this proposition sort of popped into my head. I'm curious to see what the playground has to say about it.

Proposition: Class imbalance and level power discrepancies can make a system more conducive to a wide range of playstyles.

Basically, the argument is this: looking at 3.x one should admit that a pretty wide range of playstyles can be accomidated by the system. There seem to me to be a two primary reasons why.

1. A non-linear power differential from level to level. i.e. games played a low, medium and high levels are by and large more conducive to different styles of play. Very low levels are grittier with a solid chance of PC death, midlevels are more heroic fantasy style games, and high levels are godlike tales. That there is this differential allows different styles of game to be played under the same general system, just using different parts of the level spectrum.

2. Class imbalance and a wide range of optimized powerlevels. Even at the herioc level, a game can be much grittier if some of the less powerful classes are selected by the PC's without much power oriented optimization. A heroic teir game can also get godlike with heavily optimized PCs using strong classes. There's also the whole range in between.

So, it seems to me that part of the reason that 3.x has the range of versitlity it does is as a consequence of the imbalances and 'design flaws' in the system.

Of course, I'm not arguing that 3.x did this well or on purpose. There are few options for casting classes that will not trounce melee classes at similar levels and those that exist tend to have huge mechanical problems (like the Truenamer). However, it does seem that a thought worth entertaining when designing a new system is to purposefully put such imbalances into the game but have them executed in a more consistant manner from one type of PC class to another type of PC class. i.e. there is a low powered fighter type class playable from level 1 - 20 and also a low powered casting class playable from levels 1 - 20 as well as high powered versions of each.

I'm not convinced of this proposition myself btw, but I'm curious to get the playgrounds feedback.

Morty
2008-05-23, 09:14 AM
The idea isn't bad, but it'd take tremendous amount of work to design and balance twice as much classes.

AKA_Bait
2008-05-23, 09:22 AM
The idea isn't bad, but it'd take tremendous amount of work to design and balance twice as much classes.

True. However, splat books would help with this. There were plenty of base classes to go around to accomidate different powerlevels (had they been so balanced) just from PBH1, PHB2 and CA alone.

A system with the initial classes (if balanced against eachother well) that scales similarly to 3.x would provide the first set of options for play at various power levels through picking the starting PC character level of the game. Adjustment classes for higher and lower powerlevels at each PC character level could be fully implemented in pretty short order thereafter I'd think.

Roderick_BR
2008-05-23, 09:23 AM
You mean create two(or more) sets of classes, and put them in tiers, like
Low tier: "fighter, sorcerer"
High tier: "warblade, wizard"
Trying to not leave anyone out (like what happens now with little to none good meelers for "high level")? Could work, but as it was M0rt mentioned, more work than most here have available.

AKA_Bait
2008-05-23, 09:31 AM
Could work, but as it was M0rt mentioned, more work than most here have available.

Oh don't get me wrong. I'm not asking the playground to actually come up with a system like this. I'm just floating the idea for discussion. It seemed interesting to me because one of the 'screw ups' of the 3.x system may actually have worked to the benifit of the system in some areas.

If the proposition is accurate, it prompts the question of what makes a better system, poorly balanced PC class aginst PC class or a system which is perfectly balanced but places the power level within one style of play.

RukiTanuki
2008-05-23, 05:20 PM
Counter-Proposition: Class variety (both among classes, and among choices within a class) can make a system more conducive to a wide range of playstyles.

Counter-Proposition Corollary: Power level discrepancies between classes can be counteracted by ensuring that all class playstyles remain useful at all power levels.

That's my thoughts. Imbalance doesn't make things more fun to me, and often makes things far less fun. But then, my litmus test for balance is to attempt to maximize this value:

Approximate "fun balance" = (amount of fun had using the power) / (amount of frustration felt having the power used on self)^2

I think it's telling that many groups who seem to have fun despite the power imbalance are either playing the high-power classes at a significantly reduced level, or include players who don't mind that their contributions are grossly outclassed by others'.

So, to answer your final comment, I'd prefer a system that keeps the power level (in terms of contribution, i.e. the effect the PC's presence has on the encounter) roughly equal for all classes, while expanding class variety to support multiple styles of play. In particular, I think achieving the latter is entirely possible to do without imbalancing things (it's just that imbalancing things is so easy to do).

Roog
2008-05-23, 06:35 PM
Ok, so I was reading this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81113)thread and this proposition sort of popped into my head. I'm curious to see what the playground has to say about it.

Proposition: Class imbalance and level power discrepancies can make a system more conducive to a wide range of playstyles.

Basically, the argument is this: looking at 3.x one should admit that a pretty wide range of playstyles can be accomidated by the system. There seem to me to be a two primary reasons why.

I disagree with your proposition, and think that class imbalance has little to do with the ability (or lack there of) of 3.x to support a wide range of playstyles.


1. A non-linear power differential from level to level. i.e. games played a low, medium and high levels are by and large more conducive to different styles of play. Very low levels are grittier with a solid chance of PC death, midlevels are more heroic fantasy style games, and high levels are godlike tales. That there is this differential allows different styles of game to be played under the same general system, just using different parts of the level spectrum.
Your argument here seems to be independant of your proposition. If you took a balanced (at a given level) group of characters, your comments about style would still apply to them.

But a system where (without a great deal of work to change it) if you play as standard, your group of characters will be forced to go through a gritty->heroic->godlike progression, does not seem to be a good argument that the game is conductive to a wide range of playstyles. What if the progression I want is professional->gritty->political-powergames, each of these could be reasonbly played in 3.x with the right game-meachanical settings + character level, but that "non-linear power differential from level to level" is then about as much use as a goldfish starting height and weight table.


2. Class imbalance and a wide range of optimized powerlevels. Even at the herioc level, a game can be much grittier if some of the less powerful classes are selected by the PC's without much power oriented optimization. A heroic teir game can also get godlike with heavily optimized PCs using strong classes. There's also the whole range in between.

How does lack of balance help this? Of couse selecting lower power characters for a game of given level of power helps to create a gritier game, but there are many ways* to select lower power characters without a need for imbalance. Similarly there are many ways to increase character power* for a godlike game.

* The most obvious being: Increase/Decrease level, optimise more/less, give house ruled penalties/bonus, play a lower/higher powered class.

Using imbalanced classes as the way to adjust power levels forces a choice of class based on powerlevel, not on character concept, making the game system less versatile.