New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 91 to 91 of 91
  1. - Top - End - #91
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue

    Default Re: "Beating" a game vs. the game letting you win

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    What they can do is extrapolate that it will be harder unless the game compensates the melee for that inherent deficiency, and does so adequately. They can further extrapolate that if, like most RPGs, the game compensates through armor (i.e. the big strong fighter gets plate, while the skinny archer can't wear that), the onus will be on them to find and equip that plate.

    Again, not exactly Special Relativity - these are all common sense deductions to make.
    Everyone has an onus to optimize on equipment--ranged characters simply optimize for different slots, enchantments, stats, etc. That is not even a significant difference, let alone a significant difference in how strong a character is, let alone a difference in how hard the character is to play. Moreover, while it is the case that many RPGs compensate through armor, it is not the case that most RPGs only compensate through armor.

    As for "it will be harder unless," that's the point, isn't it? You have no firm basis for arguing the frequency or rarity of that "unless". So there is no reason to extrapolate from being melee vs. ranged to difficulty of play merely because melee characters are disadvantaged relative to the counterfactual where the melee characters had more range.

    So these two arguments do not update my previous position significantly.
    Last edited by Lethologica; 2015-03-20 at 12:47 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •