After considering it a while, I must politely disagree with your use of Animal Farm in this video. Animal Farm is a morality tale about the evils of statements of equality in spite of an inequal, unfair, unchanged system in place. As such, it goes completely against your statements in the video of ignoring systemic inequality. So having an unequal system and pretending it's equal isn't a good thing, if utilizing the Animal Farm as a reference. The pigs say "some are more equal than others"
@ZeavoTown Is that the superhero miniature game with the dials or what-nots on the bases ? If so, I've watched a full game in a gaming shop a few years ago. I thought it was pretty cool. I used to play and run a Marvel Super Heroes RPG in the '80s-early '90s. That was fun, made up our own superheroes. I always think one can role-play Heroclix or board games, like Diplomacy, Risk, Axis&Allies. Though, by strict definition Heroclix and board games are not 'RPGs'. But, I'm not very strict really :)
Hey, I just wanted to say that I've been using my own homemade tabletop rpg, and this was incredibly helpful for...well everything, but I have one particular gamer who....he really enjoys complaining. Not a whole lot, but enough to occasionally make him irritating. Not about balance, so much, but about my decisions. I don't like pulling the 'I'm the GM' card as much as some. Now I have some other ways to shut him down! thanks! :)
@megakuriboh Some things I mentioned in this post actually worked for one of the local GMs I was sort of doing this for. As Onionkid99 mentions below, as soon as you make a penis reference it sort of shuts down the whingers. Funny, I only mentioned 'Penis Envy' because I'm reading some Jung (who mocks Freud for always thinking of it). There are many subtle ways to get people to 'chill'. I always think players should be thankful they have a GM :)
@Antiks72 I've an ongoing chat with a few of us in the community about the topic of people playing one game in so many different ways, the different approaches and perspectives about the same game, in name only. More on that later. For my part, I have no problem changing rules, adding or subtracting them. Some people don't want that at all. To each their own. I can only voice my opinions of my own experiences and hope someone takes it constructively to the betterment. Cheers :)
@23penguins32 When I was playing 1st and 2nd edition, we didn't whine about any of that stuff, we made it work for our gaming group. It never occurred to us to whine about it.
@Antiks72 Nor us. We didn't have any complaints with D&D3-3.5. Even with the bit odd Grappling, as it was written, we just calmly went through it the first time, changed it a bit and moved on with nary a complaint. We're just there for a great story in-the-making.
I think that being concerned about another players stats and the way that they are playing should only be a concern if the player in question has meta gamed the situation and made a stupid number crunched character. I think both balance Nazi's and power--gamers/munchkins/metagamers are a burden on a gaming experience. I agree with most of what you state here but think that power gamers can bring about situation that makes the game less enjoyable for the other players. Great video Brady!
@thestrollingbones Cheers, man. I think as long as everyone at the table is playing in the same 'broad style' (not talking about individualism) then it's fine. When one has one or a few metagamers or power-,etc. then it just becomes frustrating. I always say know your players...and know your GM. You have to all gel for it to work well. As you know well ! It should be enjoyable for all. It can be differently enjoyable, but LIFT the game, don't tear it down or detract. Thanks, man :)
I agree man if a game is bringing up those kind of issues maybe its time to play another game .its true a lot of games aren't balanced but as long as the core rules are sound that shouldn't be a problem. as you know im playing in Robs enemy within game ,we have players on 1st-4t careers and we have no problem.the human noble on his 1st career is as valued member of the party as much as our dwarf champion on his 4th.and even if he wasn't a noble it still wouldn't matter as his career was random.
@Brainleaf74 I'm with ya. I almost wish I'd used the longer version of this that included talking about how the people one plays with make the game, any game, much more than the system ever could. It's all perspective, like anything. I just tried here to show a different perspective: instead of saying nay, look at it a different way. If that doesn't work, move on. Yes, your game with Rob sounds ace. But then again, you're all quality - that's the best bit. You can make the story great. Cheers
thought: loads of the people I introduce to D&D have played a video game or two. In video games its a common trend to take out penalties these days. The races in skyrim for instance all have a bonus to an area, but none have any drawbacks. Some RPG's also went in that direction. Maybe the people that really compare the size of their...stats really live in that freudian universe you mention. That universe has been cultivated for quite some time actually.
@BattleBunny1979 I was wondering about that in Skyrim. I guess my response is I don't mind the absence of penalties in a RPG vidgame. I do use though in D&D. I know some don't like Racial Ability Scores Modifiers. I actually do. Some make more sense than others, I must say. You might be right, eliminating penalties is a way to make everything 'go up' as it were instead of presenting the possibilities that some have an inherent disadvantage. Interesting thought, BB.
From personal experience my only problem with differing levels of classes has been encounters feeling too easy because of their input. That's the biggy for me. I want to feel in danger. In reality of course our characters would enjoy having an easier time of it, unless they were dwarf slayers.
The above issue though is only the case I feel due to poor GM balancing/intervention on that player's choices. Perhaps it does indeed make a point about the GM.
@RobertJFreemantle In my mind and from my experience, I always think that is the GM's role - what you're mentioning. I don't ever see it as something 'wrong' or 'bad' or the like with the system itself (whatever the system). I've had different PCs at differing 'levels' a few times and it's never been a problem. Everyone does what they do the best they can do. I think that's where the GM has to both know the players well and their PCs too. Cheers
Do you think you might be available to private beta test Empirium at some point down the line? With you and your group? Look out for vids coming soon on it.
Yeah, that's a pretty good # of comments. You are currently at 91 comments. Your point about talking about the characters & what they bring is really important. You are talking about some sheet gazing there for sure. No reason for the other players to even know what you have on your sheet. I hate the wizard argument, the wizard is weaker as most games start at 1st (at least I hope they do).
@23penguins32 yes, I see. And now at 99 views. Matt might have to stop joking on you if you keep this up. Stop joking & start fearing. Fear of a Braid planet!
Balance is boring. Everyone should be subject to reasonably fair mechanics, but not total balance. Not to mention, a high degree of balance is nearly impossible to acheive without excessive rule bloat.
The disconnect you are experiencing with people who prefer balance, I think, is evident in the fact that they play the game mainly for mechanics, the gamey part of RPGs, and less for story. Some people just prefer their rpgs to be more like board games.
Some people love and/or require 'balance' in a game, an RPG. I'm just saying here that I don't. Also saying here I don't like the metagaming in any way, shape or form. I took a different tone to this one just for effect, so I hope no-one actually thinks I'm upset or iron-fisted :)
I think when the preferences get mixed together at a table and one party thinks their perspective, preference is the only way, there lies some trouble. But nothing communication can't handle
@thespiritcoyote I can see that. I'm just saying all those different types or levels of balance don't factor in much at all with the people I've played with, in my experiences. If they do so for others, that's fine. One has to play the game one wants to play :)
@23penguins32 yeah, I was just trying to get the terms straight in my head... consider it thinking out loud... XD
different people often approach the subject from different directions with different results in mind, the only balance you actually argued against was the initial and play - you said nothing of what I consider game balance... but most people don't really talk about that aspect of it.
@thespiritcoyote I wanted to try to keep it broad enough even when narrowing in on the Wizard - Fighter deal. It is all about perspective and none are wrong inherently. When they butt heads, that is time to reconsider group, etc. But it's all good. I just hope I sparked some thoughts and considerations.
I don't even understand what play balance is. I play, I have fun, I eat snacks, I play, I laugh and then I go home and reminisce about the old games I ran. There is balance in the game, 100%, if player A'scharacter is OMG UBER, then fucking copy it. GAME BALANCE. I agree with you on the RP stuff and meta gaming. I do see it quite a bit more so now that I play at a game store then I ever did in my homebrew games. I don't mind because, well, I am playing. Iwould rather A game then no game. Cheers!
no I do not think I expect fairness from an rpg game, there are traditional board-and-bead games where-in the point is a given in "set-up unbalance" and "mismatched stratagems" to still overcome the opponent... most traditional wargames are given to situations of "set-up unbalance" and "mismatched strategy" in this way... so it does not surprise me that an RPG being much more dynamic than say "chess" or "poker" is going to have a much more dynamic "set-up" and "strategy" conformity.
Yep Mr. Brady, I just started posting my experiences with tabletop RPGs and I do not plan stopping any time soon! Do you want to know why? Because I discovered that sharing experiences on youtube not only improves your gaming, but helps to put things in perspective as well, because you can hear so many different voices. And at the end you realize that it is not the game that really matters, but the people playing the game.
@MaccacarianGuy Buona avventura, il mio amico. That is true because it is truly the people we play with that make the experience. And yes I completely agree that all of these experiences we post of YouTube can be taken in such a greater context into out lives, our own gaming. The different voices are so wonderful. I do the same. I hear the tales and think of what I've done and what I can or might do. It is as beautiful, wonderful thing. Ciao bella :)
@Onionkid99 the effect generally focusing on penile-izing players who want to play "non-masculine" archetypes (i.e those not imbued with testosterone focus") - would that also be telling?
never-mind that I can create a "standard-fighter" that is capable of standing equal to a high-level mage in his own field... it is generally the non-fighter types that are called "unbalanced" - the rouge's special attacks, the priests divine interjection, the Dragon's large... er... tongue...
@thespiritcoyote Yes, one of my points here is to invoke the imagination that you can play beyond and more than what the 'rules page' shows, or 'dick-tates'. It's so often useful to take a step back and dream it all up to one's own design. Rules or system mechanics are wonderful, but they should never ever be seen as a hindrance to play. They should facilitate. Always.
And yes, I've seen the high-level Fighter go toe-to-toe with the high level Wizard. It's all in how it's played. As always.
I have seen a 3rd-lvl Wizard (as one of ~7 in a "not-real-coherently-organized-party") legitimately put the take-down on a D&D Dragon of some considerable age who was NOT pulling punches - it /IS/ all in how it's played!
Yes, the Wizard in question /almost/ died (saved by quick thinking on another PC who was in a position to risk his own life), but two other PC lives, and half the population of a manorial estate were lost - quick tip do NOT steal from or cheat a Dragon - EVER!
@Antiks72 actually no, it was 2e - [iirc] before the release of the 2.5 (-Options-) Line, after the release of the Draconomicon in FR, and an Old Red - recently woken from slumber (in the last couple centuries) makes him approximately 7,000-12,000 years old [iirc]
All of civilizations written history on Earth (as expressed by most historian/archeologist accounts) within that time frame, just to put a perspective on the age... older still than the presumed age given to many of the oldest ruins.
@23penguins32 My character jumped two whole levels in the encounter, just from presence and minor involvement, most of the other low levels gained only a single level from presence... the wizard gained the solo-kill reward, the player opted to gain one level per session and ignore all other XP gains until current bump-up resolved... the highest levels present were 8 and 10 and they were effectively unaffected by their presence-based XP gain.
@23penguins32 One of the three in the high level-party group (a 10th Lvl Paladin I think) was a little disturbed that a 3rd level Wizard did what they could not... but opinions were consistent upon a vote taken among around 12 people in game and spectating, no one could say it was unfair...
@23penguins32 The Wizard had come into possession of a Staff-of-the-magi and broke it in the Dragon's Mouth while hanging on it's whiskers around a half mile in the air.
A 7th-lvl thief who had recently ditched a stolen Staff-of-the-magi for fear of repercussions from the previous owner, grabbed a dagger with teleporting off another party member and saved the Wizard...
@23penguins32 The Dragon, who had recently lost a teleporting dagger as part of a quest item, and a staff-of-the-magi - the value loss of which drooped the hoard below it's current achievement tier - met the ground at terminal velocity.
(to the best recollection of past sung stories the bard in me has offered this accounting XD)
@Onionkid99 It does tell something about our psychology. I've had that a well. Well, whose sword is bigger and whose sword has done the most good deeds ?? On one level, we understand. On another we go : I can't possibly comment, it's frightening, it's too disturbing
Is 'giant brain' an euphemism ? Be honest
I am of the camp, with Jung in part, that Freud missed the boat by not miles, but planets. Poor guy, always thinking of penises :(
I do hope this video wasn't directed at me, Brady. I've been more than civil in this regard and you still see the need to violently disregard/condescend to those that like balance?
I fail to see how insults will remotely sway or even cogently express your opinion to others without a reaction of hostility. I had to walk away for a while and come back not to just react with obscenities, condescension, and unsubbing.
You seriously need to relax and let the people who like balance have it.
@azirk83 Like I said in the PM, no it's not about you or toward you or your views. I appreciate your views whether I agree with them or not or anywhere in-between. I respect your perspective. As I've said in comments on your posts I always learn&take something from what you have to say. If you don't respect my point of view or like the way I said it, that's ok. Doesn't affect my regard for you and your views.
I used a stronger tone here for effect. That's all. I don't normally do so, that's true
@azirk83 [cont] It was prompted by at the root of it another discussion with someone else that I should not have continued or gotten into. The let's say 'literalist' that insists D&D is unplayable because the 'Wizard at higher levels is more powerful than the Fighter' point of view. What I don't respect is the view that one absolutely cannot back up from that and take a different perspective where it can work well. I've seen it done :)
I'm not upset. I argue the point, not the person :)
@23penguins32 You proclaimed in the video that those worried about balance were whining crybabies who suffered from blah blah ad hominem attack.
Now I could systematically destroy everything you've said in a video response, calmly and without using logical fallacies. But you don't want to do a video arguing me, you want to do it about some crazy dickhole. Every group has crazy dickholes.
The next time you want an opponent on the position of balance, I'm your huckleberry.
@azirk83 Yes, I did Huck. Keep in mind I'm talking about my gaming experience and discussion I've had with people who are not you. If you want to take this personally, that is your choice. For my part, I do not.
If you think I'd be afraid of discussing, debating a topic with you, you'd be starting off from a misconception there.
I take it you didn't like anything at all about this post ?
@23penguins32 Considering your conversation with me after posting the comment I'm responding to, when reading your previous comments here I can't help but laugh out loud.
I think the whining comes from the expectation that a game will be designed to give all players an equal hand to play. For instance, if you play chess, both players get the same pieces with the same set-up to start. In D&D that expectation is violated and, depending on the style of campaign, that can lead to disillusionment and frustration. That said, it's not something I personally am bothered about.
@pridday88 very good point... "set-up balence" would be a discriptor if you want to play in a chess-like mode, and would be an issue in an rpg format... now what game do you know of that enforces such a "during-play balence" - perhaps poker?
@pridday88 You may have just answered my questions (as I work my way up thru the comments). I like your example. In chess and in D&D I always see that I'm playing with someone, people, who might do the expected sometimes & sometimes surprise me to no end with what they can do with what they have. That's why I mentioned 'be thankful they're there' because the 'tools' can used so brilliantly. Sometimes during a game I just want to applaud someone. I always think every PC is the best, integral part
In 30 years' of gaming I've only noticed any play balance issue in the more recent game I'm in, which is high-level (lvl 19-20). A few characters are clearly more powerful than the rest. Nobody's angry or upset, but everyone's noticed. We're almost done the plot and now need to vote on whether to "go epic" or start over with new 1st level characters. I'm interested to see if this "imbalance" will influence the vote. Thanks for a thoughtful vid!
@pridday88 Another person in the 30-years club. Good on ya ! &you play bass guitar too, right ? I always enjoy those differences between characters throughout their careers, not matter the 'levels' they're at. I know some don't. I've found it makes for a bit of a tighter bonding experience in that encourages even further RP in new aspects. If you don't mind me asking, what are your thoughts on this game you're playing ? In noticing differing 'power levels' ? Do you enjoy that or it's no bother?
... (continued) As you might imagine playing D&D in this way requires well enforced balance as the atmosphere is quite competitive weather it be between the players and the GM or just between the players. Problem being, if one of these competitive players plays with an RP focused group. You get a bit of trouble.
@WinstonBiggleswade Where I've taken exception to this topic is when I've been told by someone who's had a very different experience and indeed take on the game that I can't play the game the way I'm playing or the way I play can't-won't work. I can understand someone's perhaps more literal take, for sure. It's hard nut to crack in reverse though. So, this is certainly the last time I'll mention this topic. Thankfully. Enjoy your weekend, mate :)
I agree with you. Of course the big counter argument is that D&D can be played primarily in two ways. One being the heavy role play the other being about winning and getting “Phat l00tz” pwning the n00bs and such. And although you and I might agree that the latter is style of gaming is subpar. However we cannot objectively prove that some people will enjoy that style more. And who am I to tell them otherwise...
@WinstonBiggleswade I hope I wouldn't argue that it's subpar but rather say it's not for me. To be honest, there are likely more than two ways to play D&D or any game. None of them wrong. The 'wrong' part comes in when a player is playing a game that he's complaining more about than enjoying. That could be for many reasons. I had that experience with a GURPS game, so I politely excused myself from it. The GM understood. I didn't complain openly, it was an internal argument :)
a role playing game does not obviate the need for Coop play
a role playing game does not obviate the need for fairness
fairness does not obviate the need for Coop play
Coop play does not obviate the need for fairness
all true statements, there are times when it should be "unfair and unbalanced" to be "fair and balanced"
no universal statements apply, for diversity is not inconsistency, desire is necessary to keep life in motion, and when real wants are supplied those of fancy are admited.
Does a dog think it unfair that the cat can run up a tree faster than he, or the cat cry over the dog's more forceful intimidation that can cause a threat twice it's size to back-down?
...hmmz - maybe there are not enough people playing "Bunnies & Burrows" or "Warrior Cats!" to appreciate the simplicity of how very different animals are, yet how very uncomplaining when keeping to the same company for survival... and appreciative of the disparity in functional ability.
@thespiritcoyote I always enjoy the differences in characters, PC and NPCs alike, in a game. I like the differences in people in life as well. Such diverse styles, preferences, opinions, thoughts. It's always interesting to hear another's point of view. Mayhaps more so when it is very differing. I like your metaphor using animals. That does apply well, I think. The disparity you mention can really bring together, bond a party in strong ways. I've seen that happen over the years.
you gave me this awesome idea... a Orwellian Cult in D&D - specifically nether the "bad guys" or the "good guys" nor even "neutral" being the hardest part to conform with the D&D cosmology, but I am sure it can be worked-out... But everyone must be in those plain robes and chanting the mantra "WAR IS PEACE, SLAVERY IS FREEDOM, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"
...awesomeness...
the clincher is to find a way to have all the PCs come from such an environment, and need to enforce such "balance"... hmmz
@thespiritcoyote Blending with a bit of 'V for Vendetta'. That would be an interesting thematic setting to use in D&D. Not your stock and trade fantasy setting at all. I like that. I'm glad you mentioned this. Thank you :)
not that I have anything to go hate'n against my "diva-minded soul-kins" ... their skills at assessing disparity are quite useful to the global continuity and entertainingly enlightening in their place and due time... shalom y'all sum-n-all home-bodhi Sārā pūrṇa sampūrṇatā.
Yes, I have seen the "issue" come up, but not frequently enough for it to really be my focus in the term "game balance" game balance to me has to do with does the written-rules reflect the genre unwritten-rules...
@thespiritcoyote I'm definitely not hating on anyone. I'm just saying get on with it. I hope everyone's games are the best ones. From others here that game whom I do not game with have told me whenever 'balance' comes up in the conversations of their groups it always really means 'envy', 'jealousy' or 'greed'. Too bad.
The only time I ever had a discussion about "balance" was way back in the day when my co-DM (who was mentoring me) discussed how to get players who were less engaged more involved and not let the more engaged players dominate. Somtimes it meant giving them a special task or background or item. Nothing to do with stats, just game play.
@jrpipik Oh and that's a great topic. The 'wallflower' or the silent ones are not a problem in my book. They're just ones that need to be coaxed more than others. That is a beautiful task. The assholery are an issue because they're just disruptive, counter to whatever one is trying to experience with a group. Those are whom I warn against. The less-engaged are to be welcomed. Break them in and watch them grow. That is beautiful in and of itself.
@Bondanalloy Let us be happy if we never see the problem. Let us help those in need if we see their need before us. Cheers, man. I owe you a response soon. Be warned. Be very warned :)
Yes - I would compare in assessments of the person next to me, with their strengths and weaknesses in disparity, and consider how it all effects group survivability and motive, and enjoy that persons company.
All very good points, could not whined about the diva-minded assessments of balance myself.
thanks! you totally pointed out for me just how unbalanced my life really is... I never really thought to compare myself to other people in that perspective... now it is so much more obvious that the cosmos is an unfairly GM'd >_<
XD... seriously, when I saw the Animal Farm title that was not what came to mind... I was thinking "Should the chicken think it unfair that the cow is larger? or the cow consider the extra hidden weapons on the chicken unbalanced?"
I think balance is the same as special effects in movies:
1) Not all movies need special effects. Not all games need to be balanced.
2) When you do have special effects they should be invisible and fade into the background, and only be used for the purpose of telling the story. The same applies to RPGs, if balance is needed, it should fit the game naturally and not be forced in just for the sake of putting it there. (I'm looking at you D&D 4E)
@RudeAlert Thanks for putting that in the perspective of special effects in film or tv serial. I cannot agree more. You hit the nail on the head spot on in my experience. And yes, unnatural is as unnatural does. It forces an issue which is never something we (almost everyone enjoys). You sound like you're a great player and/or a great GM or both. Thank you :)
Bwahaha! I've had a few players in the past with RPG penis envy. They thought it was unfair that the other player should get more role-play XP than them. F$%&ing role-play then and earn it! In the words of Ander, "To the ground with you!"
@eweave20 As I knew before this, you are a GM I identify with. I do the same. I've had those conversations with some players about their lack of RP and then the next session they step up and really assume what they are. That's a beautiful thing to see. Truly. And it is no less a work of art for the not seeing it before it happened. Communication works great wonders. Cheers, man.
@inlife9 Im sorry but needed more room. This is added after the above comments. *With all that being said, having a balanced game out the box, is not at all a bad thing. Non-motor interested RPGers dont need to care either way, but those that do care can still be at a table. In theory that "should" bring more players to a DMs door. So while I do agree with your feelings on the subject 100% the motorgamers are out there, and sometimes one may need to include their likes into ones dming.
@inlife9 No worries. I'm saying 'balance' is in the eyes of the beholders. That's up to the people playing the game. What they decide, whatever it be, is great. As long as everyone is happy with what happens at the table, that's beautiful. It could be quite epic or tragic - or anywhere inbetween (it's all good). If everyone gives 100% then the outcome is nothing short of brilliant, I've found. Doesn't always turn out how you want it to do. That's life. But no less beautiful for it. Cheers
Right on. We have never ever spoke of balance. A wizard uses magic and a fighter uses weapons,its that simple. You should be happy a fellow character can contribute a more powerful action. Balance means everything is the same, and that is lame. As I told Ander, its these younger generation players that these problems come up.
@YourDungeonMaster I think "quality" balance (as opposed to "bad" balance) doesn't make everything "the same". Rather, the kind of balance that is worthwhile (and admirable) is the kind of balance that gives every option value (not "the same" value but equal value on separate terms). In other words, the object of "quality" game balance is to *encourage* diversity by making a rainbow of options equally viable in their own way, not discourage it by funnelling all roads to the same end. My 2 cents.
@Webhead123 It's so interesting how terms can mean such different things to different people. Or, applied differently. Very optimistic description here, J. Thanks for that. I like that point of view. Cheers
@YourDungeonMaster I've heard and read so much about the unbalancing of the Wizard v the Fighter that contradicts every experience I've had in-game that I just can't hear it anymore. I realized that people were just looking at their character sheets instead of imagining the world that their GMs were describing in front of them. That's sad. What does that say of us as a sum group ? We can't imagine the game we're playing in ? We want everyone to be the same stereotype ? Doesn't work for me either
Thank you for mentioning me, i feel welcome already. :-)
when i think of game balance i consider the GM perspective, like starting out a new group that has 1 or 2 new players in it.I think everybody should be somewhat equal at the start since the new ppl are the ones that can bitch about being lower lvl etc. once a few sessions are played and chars became more alive and the story develops; game balance is no longer any issue.
@BattleBunny1979 You should be welcome, Good Sir. Cheers on ya :)
I know. I did not include here situations, like Hammered so tragically details, about things that defy what I would think is good common sense. Here I was talking about what I think are relative differences in PCs. Those extremes are, I think, a problem with how the GM is running the game. I'll tackle that disaster in a different post. You are spot on in that though any beginning may be rocky, happily, clear water is found :)
Let's say we were going to play chess. Except you don't get anything but your pawns and king. I don't want hear any crying about how small your dick is now -- just play the fucking game! :D
@jrpipik 'Fair' is indeed a perspective that we need to get passed. What I don't say in this post is something I said in the 'extended version' is it's all down to the group we find ourselves in. What is 'fair' in that group is relative. I'm with you. It's a tough path to take but infinitely rewarding when you see the destination(s).
@boltorange Oh dear :D I've played chess like that. The variants can quite an educational experience. Mayhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Freud - I don't even like his theories :)
@boltorange Yeah, there may be some hate on. I really didn't and don't mean to be offencive or rude. That's not my point or style at all. Thanks. Say a prayer, mate :)
@felipe1gojira I do too. One of the things I noticed when I was a teacher was that everyone learns differently and at a different pace. I like in a game when people are vastly different and dynamic. It makes the believability and immersion seem to amp up. Sometimes I feel like some of the problems are actually comparing apples and oranges. But, to each their own. Cheers, man.
This is very much group-dependent. The D&D system is indeed a combat/encounter focused system. If the sessions for your group are centered around combat, imbalance between PC abilities can be an issue. I try to run a mix between combat and RP, and if there's a disparity between the PCs, some get to shine brighter than the others. As the DM I need to balance the sheen so all the players get some. Ideally you want players that don't care, but reality is that players do. I agree with you tho.
@micahhenry Entirely. As I said below here I had a longer version of this post that talked about the people one plays with being key. While I agree with you that D&D can be seen as a combat-encounter focused system, I don't see it or play it that way. I sort of look at it as a film or tv series where I wouldn't see battle after fight after battle over and over. My group are more on the narrative-RP side. But, the cool part is one can play in so many different ways :) I just voice mine. Cheers !
@micahhenry well said, it works like that for me as well. my players enjoy some big combat situations that can last for quite a bit and all should get a chance to shine a bit then. Thats where i try and balance it with monsters that, for instance, the lower lvl ranger in the group has as a favored enemy etc. give everybody their moment if possible. thats what i think about if i talk balance. getting everybody involved in equal amounts.
@BattleBunny1979 Yes. That's where I think the GM is involved most, perhaps the greatest role of the GM because it comes in when creating the story-plot then follows to the actual play of the narrative with everyone. Good definition. Thanks
@atari67 Maybe I finally grew a pair. Puberty had to happen eventually. I don't mean to be rude here. I just wanted to put my 2 bits in as I see it. Cheers, man.
Superb video and less of a ramble than usual! Who thought the two could go together...?
At any rate, I agree wholeheartedly. Arguing about stats and difficulty checks and whatnot is defeating the object of role-playing. You're playing a role. Play.
@clackclickbang Damn, I'm losing my touch. Must be a sign of the doom of our times.
I actually watched another play-through recently where there was so much OoC nonsense that it just made me switch it off. It didn't look like they were enjoying the game. Yet, it seems like it's only a few small steps toward the point they would actually enjoy it. Oh well, be thankful for what you've got.
I think the title to this video should be "Balance in a Game and Penis Envy!" Great post, I actually read the thread between you and the other guy. It's just a different type of game you and this guy play. Personally I think that's why 4th edition is a viable game because it caters to those that want this "balance" as paramount to anything else. I'll go on record however that I personally like your approach. :)
@SaudiLindsey4 Definitely it's a different game, completely different style. That's why I said 'you're playing the wrong game'. I'd be a bit of fish out of water in D&D4E. That's why I won't go on and on about that game because I don't have any right to complain. I have no problem with people wanting 'balance'. I just personally don't. Of course, Hammered below here had an extreme bad experience, poor guy.
I've been reading Jung recently, so Freud is mentioned often. Sadly. Cheers for that :)
@23penguins32 Yeah I read about that. That was the dumps. I'd REALLY have had to have liked the people I was playing with to have continued in that game.
@SaudiLindsey4 I would have had a good talk with the GM about that. That falls out of bounds of my parameters in this post. That's just so extreme it defies what I think of as common sense. I thought about that sort of thing before I recorded this one but I didn't include because I'd rather do a post on extremes or 'ridiculous' things in RPGs. Yikes. I love the Wil Wheaton mantra 'don't be a dick'. Not to be Freudian :) It's just great advice.
@Samwise7RPG I'm not sure how to take that :) Is it along the lines of the Tom Bombadil comparison...? :D Thanks, man. I just mean here to enjoy the game and play with good people, not dicks
@Samwise7RPG Oh dear ;) You're right though. Best to discuss it over Skype sometime together. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Well, that goes for anything. Cheers, man :)
So, would you say that balance relies on the GM/ players, not necessarily the system itself or are you simply more focused on the role playing rather than the "roll" playing?
@therealrpgguy Yes, I think the 'balance' relies on the GM&players all. I had a longer version of this where I talked about how it so depends on the group of people playing together and being responsible to each other and the narrative being created. I just wanted a shorter post here :) Also, TheVikingHill mentions that in his one, which was good. I always think the role playing is much more important than the dice rolling.
I always choose dolphin or porpoise :) But, penguins and owls are cool
@23penguins32 Well, I couldn't agree more! It's definitely about the player interaction the most and for a successful story-driven game, the role playing is most important.
In a game I was in once had PCs that were on super high levels and I had to start from level1 like they once had. That meant that my character who had dedicated his life to combat, got killed in every single fight. Because the challenge rateo was made with the greater level characters. So my character died on every first combat round and was resurrected for a huge money price by the other players. And I could not just say fuck this, because I was ordered to "protect them". It was not fun at all.
@hammeredshitsteak Yikes. Personally I think that's a GM issue. I would not start a PC off at 1st lvl in a game with everyone else being so much higher lvl where it doesn't make any sense at all. You know ? I know starting a PC at higher lvls has its own problems or issues too, but that wasn't fair to you in your example. That's extreme IMO. I didn't mention something like that because I've not personally seen it done nor would I do that. Sounds strange that a GM would allow that to happen
@23penguins32 Yeah well I agree with you on the level of the different classes or having like few levels of difference. But really, the gentleman was suggesting as well that what if an elder would be a part of a vampire coterie, how would that hurt. Well when he is given reasonable challenge, everybody else is getting killed, and when they get reasonable challenge the elder can just breeze through it.
@hammeredshitsteak With the example of the Elder, I'd look at like when I had my 26th lvl Wizard as an NPC with a 4-5th lvl party a little bit ago in my game. He acted as a mentor-teacher instead of a battle tank. The Elder's not doing his Coterie any favours by just taking everything out by himself. He's not letting the other members become stronger member and experience (un)life. Like having children, you have to let them experience things for themselves. Give advice, yes, but let them do.
@23penguins32 Yes that's why they should rather be NPCs than PCs. Because it's good to make the players shine and put the powerful NPC to some backround stuff that doesen't steal the spotlight from the PCs, but if a player is 60 times more powerful than others and he's shined, then it becomes him-show. This happens also when GMs take their own PC character and make stats for him and everything. It becomes "The NPC and friends show".
@hammeredshitsteak I had a longer version of this, about 5 minutes longer, where I talked about group responsibility to each other and the narrative, story. Maybe I should have uploaded that one ? :) I thought I'd just make another post on that one thing. There really is a lot of room to cover on this topic. I do think it comes down to the people playing the game. If you play with a dick you're going to get dicked. Sad but true. I'm glad I've never had any terrible experiences really. Sorry !
I've never understood the whole balance argument. But then again I played lots of AD&D 2nd Edition, remember that game? To get to 18th level the Druid needed, what, a MILLION more XP then the thief. Besides, in a fight the Fighter is better, when stealing the Thief is better, when healing the Cleric is better, etc. Whoever is in the spotlight is better! LOL
@Zarion13 I understand to a certain extent, but not when it actually involves nitpicking in gameplay. Which is what I'm trying to say in this post. Of course, Hammered just made a comment and he had a big problem with it though I think that's a GM issue he's talking about. I enjoyed the different class level progressions in D&D2E. I like that dynamic in a game. Let everyone be themselves. Everyone has their strengths, weaknesses, brilliance and flaws. Cheers.
After considering it a while, I must politely disagree with your use of Animal Farm in this video. Animal Farm is a morality tale about the evils of statements of equality in spite of an inequal, unfair, unchanged system in place. As such, it goes completely against your statements in the video of ignoring systemic inequality. So having an unequal system and pretending it's equal isn't a good thing, if utilizing the Animal Farm as a reference. The pigs say "some are more equal than others"
azirk83 2 weeks ago
have you ever played heroclix? i think that counts as a tabletop rpg.
ZeavoTown 2 weeks ago
@ZeavoTown Is that the superhero miniature game with the dials or what-nots on the bases ? If so, I've watched a full game in a gaming shop a few years ago. I thought it was pretty cool. I used to play and run a Marvel Super Heroes RPG in the '80s-early '90s. That was fun, made up our own superheroes. I always think one can role-play Heroclix or board games, like Diplomacy, Risk, Axis&Allies. Though, by strict definition Heroclix and board games are not 'RPGs'. But, I'm not very strict really :)
23penguins32 2 weeks ago
Hey, I just wanted to say that I've been using my own homemade tabletop rpg, and this was incredibly helpful for...well everything, but I have one particular gamer who....he really enjoys complaining. Not a whole lot, but enough to occasionally make him irritating. Not about balance, so much, but about my decisions. I don't like pulling the 'I'm the GM' card as much as some. Now I have some other ways to shut him down! thanks! :)
megakuriboh 1 month ago
@megakuriboh Some things I mentioned in this post actually worked for one of the local GMs I was sort of doing this for. As Onionkid99 mentions below, as soon as you make a penis reference it sort of shuts down the whingers. Funny, I only mentioned 'Penis Envy' because I'm reading some Jung (who mocks Freud for always thinking of it). There are many subtle ways to get people to 'chill'. I always think players should be thankful they have a GM :)
Cheers and thanks for the subscription !
23penguins32 1 month ago
Couldn't agree more with you 23penguins32. If you don't like the game, system, or DM, then make or run your own game and change the freakin' rules.
Antiks72 1 month ago
@Antiks72 I've an ongoing chat with a few of us in the community about the topic of people playing one game in so many different ways, the different approaches and perspectives about the same game, in name only. More on that later. For my part, I have no problem changing rules, adding or subtracting them. Some people don't want that at all. To each their own. I can only voice my opinions of my own experiences and hope someone takes it constructively to the betterment. Cheers :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 When I was playing 1st and 2nd edition, we didn't whine about any of that stuff, we made it work for our gaming group. It never occurred to us to whine about it.
Antiks72 1 month ago
@Antiks72 Nor us. We didn't have any complaints with D&D3-3.5. Even with the bit odd Grappling, as it was written, we just calmly went through it the first time, changed it a bit and moved on with nary a complaint. We're just there for a great story in-the-making.
23penguins32 1 month ago
I think that being concerned about another players stats and the way that they are playing should only be a concern if the player in question has meta gamed the situation and made a stupid number crunched character. I think both balance Nazi's and power--gamers/munchkins/metagamers are a burden on a gaming experience. I agree with most of what you state here but think that power gamers can bring about situation that makes the game less enjoyable for the other players. Great video Brady!
thestrollingbones 1 month ago
@thestrollingbones Cheers, man. I think as long as everyone at the table is playing in the same 'broad style' (not talking about individualism) then it's fine. When one has one or a few metagamers or power-,etc. then it just becomes frustrating. I always say know your players...and know your GM. You have to all gel for it to work well. As you know well ! It should be enjoyable for all. It can be differently enjoyable, but LIFT the game, don't tear it down or detract. Thanks, man :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
I agree man if a game is bringing up those kind of issues maybe its time to play another game .its true a lot of games aren't balanced but as long as the core rules are sound that shouldn't be a problem. as you know im playing in Robs enemy within game ,we have players on 1st-4t careers and we have no problem.the human noble on his 1st career is as valued member of the party as much as our dwarf champion on his 4th.and even if he wasn't a noble it still wouldn't matter as his career was random.
Brainleaf74 1 month ago
@Brainleaf74 I'm with ya. I almost wish I'd used the longer version of this that included talking about how the people one plays with make the game, any game, much more than the system ever could. It's all perspective, like anything. I just tried here to show a different perspective: instead of saying nay, look at it a different way. If that doesn't work, move on. Yes, your game with Rob sounds ace. But then again, you're all quality - that's the best bit. You can make the story great. Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
thought: loads of the people I introduce to D&D have played a video game or two. In video games its a common trend to take out penalties these days. The races in skyrim for instance all have a bonus to an area, but none have any drawbacks. Some RPG's also went in that direction. Maybe the people that really compare the size of their...stats really live in that freudian universe you mention. That universe has been cultivated for quite some time actually.
BattleBunny1979 1 month ago
@BattleBunny1979 I was wondering about that in Skyrim. I guess my response is I don't mind the absence of penalties in a RPG vidgame. I do use though in D&D. I know some don't like Racial Ability Scores Modifiers. I actually do. Some make more sense than others, I must say. You might be right, eliminating penalties is a way to make everything 'go up' as it were instead of presenting the possibilities that some have an inherent disadvantage. Interesting thought, BB.
23penguins32 1 month ago
From personal experience my only problem with differing levels of classes has been encounters feeling too easy because of their input. That's the biggy for me. I want to feel in danger. In reality of course our characters would enjoy having an easier time of it, unless they were dwarf slayers.
The above issue though is only the case I feel due to poor GM balancing/intervention on that player's choices. Perhaps it does indeed make a point about the GM.
RobertJFreemantle 1 month ago
@RobertJFreemantle In my mind and from my experience, I always think that is the GM's role - what you're mentioning. I don't ever see it as something 'wrong' or 'bad' or the like with the system itself (whatever the system). I've had different PCs at differing 'levels' a few times and it's never been a problem. Everyone does what they do the best they can do. I think that's where the GM has to both know the players well and their PCs too. Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
Do you think you might be available to private beta test Empirium at some point down the line? With you and your group? Look out for vids coming soon on it.
RobertJFreemantle 1 month ago
@RobertJFreemantle We might do. I'll have to ask the others, obviously. Thanks for asking. Cheers !
23penguins32 1 month ago
Yeah, that's a pretty good # of comments. You are currently at 91 comments. Your point about talking about the characters & what they bring is really important. You are talking about some sheet gazing there for sure. No reason for the other players to even know what you have on your sheet. I hate the wizard argument, the wizard is weaker as most games start at 1st (at least I hope they do).
woodwwad 1 month ago
@woodwwad I would think you are more powerful than Alex's character. From watching how combat's have gone.
woodwwad 1 month ago
@woodwwad I can rock the joint. Don't underestimate the contemplative types
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 yes, I see. And now at 99 views. Matt might have to stop joking on you if you keep this up. Stop joking & start fearing. Fear of a Braid planet!
woodwwad 1 month ago 2
@woodwwad This Brady's becoming a threat.. I suggest we take him out.
clackclickbang 1 month ago
@clackclickbang ...for some drinks !
23penguins32 1 month ago
You resemble a Jesuit priest. :D
Balance is boring. Everyone should be subject to reasonably fair mechanics, but not total balance. Not to mention, a high degree of balance is nearly impossible to acheive without excessive rule bloat.
The disconnect you are experiencing with people who prefer balance, I think, is evident in the fact that they play the game mainly for mechanics, the gamey part of RPGs, and less for story. Some people just prefer their rpgs to be more like board games.
DirtyBriefcase 1 month ago
@DirtyBriefcase Oh dear :D
Some people love and/or require 'balance' in a game, an RPG. I'm just saying here that I don't. Also saying here I don't like the metagaming in any way, shape or form. I took a different tone to this one just for effect, so I hope no-one actually thinks I'm upset or iron-fisted :)
I think when the preferences get mixed together at a table and one party thinks their perspective, preference is the only way, there lies some trouble. But nothing communication can't handle
23penguins32 1 month ago
ahh... that meets with some semantic requirement for me...
"initial balance" being about how fairly distributed the power is in set-up or character creation...
"play balance" being about how fairly distributed options are during play...
"game balance" being about how well the game reflects it's own purported internal physics - or the system/genre balance...
With that breakdown I can give more justification to the independent aspects, due where due, and not over-compensated.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote I can see that. I'm just saying all those different types or levels of balance don't factor in much at all with the people I've played with, in my experiences. If they do so for others, that's fine. One has to play the game one wants to play :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 yeah, I was just trying to get the terms straight in my head... consider it thinking out loud... XD
different people often approach the subject from different directions with different results in mind, the only balance you actually argued against was the initial and play - you said nothing of what I consider game balance... but most people don't really talk about that aspect of it.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote I wanted to try to keep it broad enough even when narrowing in on the Wizard - Fighter deal. It is all about perspective and none are wrong inherently. When they butt heads, that is time to reconsider group, etc. But it's all good. I just hope I sparked some thoughts and considerations.
23penguins32 1 month ago
I don't even understand what play balance is. I play, I have fun, I eat snacks, I play, I laugh and then I go home and reminisce about the old games I ran. There is balance in the game, 100%, if player A'scharacter is OMG UBER, then fucking copy it. GAME BALANCE. I agree with you on the RP stuff and meta gaming. I do see it quite a bit more so now that I play at a game store then I ever did in my homebrew games. I don't mind because, well, I am playing. Iwould rather A game then no game. Cheers!
masterofflowers 1 month ago
@masterofflowers I get you. Sometimes it's just better to play than to over-think it. I do the same quite often :) Cheers !
23penguins32 1 month ago
no I do not think I expect fairness from an rpg game, there are traditional board-and-bead games where-in the point is a given in "set-up unbalance" and "mismatched stratagems" to still overcome the opponent... most traditional wargames are given to situations of "set-up unbalance" and "mismatched strategy" in this way... so it does not surprise me that an RPG being much more dynamic than say "chess" or "poker" is going to have a much more dynamic "set-up" and "strategy" conformity.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
Yep Mr. Brady, I just started posting my experiences with tabletop RPGs and I do not plan stopping any time soon! Do you want to know why? Because I discovered that sharing experiences on youtube not only improves your gaming, but helps to put things in perspective as well, because you can hear so many different voices. And at the end you realize that it is not the game that really matters, but the people playing the game.
MaccacarianGuy 1 month ago
@MaccacarianGuy Buona avventura, il mio amico. That is true because it is truly the people we play with that make the experience. And yes I completely agree that all of these experiences we post of YouTube can be taken in such a greater context into out lives, our own gaming. The different voices are so wonderful. I do the same. I hear the tales and think of what I've done and what I can or might do. It is as beautiful, wonderful thing. Ciao bella :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
Hmm, isn't it telling that I've only seen this jealousy from male players, and only in terms of a character's combat effectiveness?
Never had anyone be envious of my Malkavian character's giant brain!
Penis envy indeed. Haha, I'm going to call it that from now on and I think that will quite literally shut the situation up.
Onionkid99 1 month ago
@Onionkid99 the effect generally focusing on penile-izing players who want to play "non-masculine" archetypes (i.e those not imbued with testosterone focus") - would that also be telling?
never-mind that I can create a "standard-fighter" that is capable of standing equal to a high-level mage in his own field... it is generally the non-fighter types that are called "unbalanced" - the rouge's special attacks, the priests divine interjection, the Dragon's large... er... tongue...
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote Yes, one of my points here is to invoke the imagination that you can play beyond and more than what the 'rules page' shows, or 'dick-tates'. It's so often useful to take a step back and dream it all up to one's own design. Rules or system mechanics are wonderful, but they should never ever be seen as a hindrance to play. They should facilitate. Always.
And yes, I've seen the high-level Fighter go toe-to-toe with the high level Wizard. It's all in how it's played. As always.
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 XD
I have seen a 3rd-lvl Wizard (as one of ~7 in a "not-real-coherently-organized-party") legitimately put the take-down on a D&D Dragon of some considerable age who was NOT pulling punches - it /IS/ all in how it's played!
Yes, the Wizard in question /almost/ died (saved by quick thinking on another PC who was in a position to risk his own life), but two other PC lives, and half the population of a manorial estate were lost - quick tip do NOT steal from or cheat a Dragon - EVER!
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote is this 4th edition?
Antiks72 1 month ago
@Antiks72 actually no, it was 2e - [iirc] before the release of the 2.5 (-Options-) Line, after the release of the Draconomicon in FR, and an Old Red - recently woken from slumber (in the last couple centuries) makes him approximately 7,000-12,000 years old [iirc]
All of civilizations written history on Earth (as expressed by most historian/archeologist accounts) within that time frame, just to put a perspective on the age... older still than the presumed age given to many of the oldest ruins.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@23penguins32 My character jumped two whole levels in the encounter, just from presence and minor involvement, most of the other low levels gained only a single level from presence... the wizard gained the solo-kill reward, the player opted to gain one level per session and ignore all other XP gains until current bump-up resolved... the highest levels present were 8 and 10 and they were effectively unaffected by their presence-based XP gain.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@23penguins32 One of the three in the high level-party group (a 10th Lvl Paladin I think) was a little disturbed that a 3rd level Wizard did what they could not... but opinions were consistent upon a vote taken among around 12 people in game and spectating, no one could say it was unfair...
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@23penguins32 The Wizard had come into possession of a Staff-of-the-magi and broke it in the Dragon's Mouth while hanging on it's whiskers around a half mile in the air.
A 7th-lvl thief who had recently ditched a stolen Staff-of-the-magi for fear of repercussions from the previous owner, grabbed a dagger with teleporting off another party member and saved the Wizard...
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@23penguins32 The Dragon, who had recently lost a teleporting dagger as part of a quest item, and a staff-of-the-magi - the value loss of which drooped the hoard below it's current achievement tier - met the ground at terminal velocity.
(to the best recollection of past sung stories the bard in me has offered this accounting XD)
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote I liked that story, enjoyed that. Must have been quite a good night and fun to have participated ! Thanks for sharing that :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 XD it was a good game, and worth the nostalgia to share it... kinda figured you (and a few others) would like that one.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote Yes, I did. Cheers for that. It was to the point and theme of this post :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@Onionkid99 It does tell something about our psychology. I've had that a well. Well, whose sword is bigger and whose sword has done the most good deeds ?? On one level, we understand. On another we go : I can't possibly comment, it's frightening, it's too disturbing
Is 'giant brain' an euphemism ? Be honest
I am of the camp, with Jung in part, that Freud missed the boat by not miles, but planets. Poor guy, always thinking of penises :(
23penguins32 1 month ago
@Onionkid99 Great comment :) Cheers for that. It's so funny you can shut the conversation by a certain call-sign. Do it. That's so cool :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
I do hope this video wasn't directed at me, Brady. I've been more than civil in this regard and you still see the need to violently disregard/condescend to those that like balance?
I fail to see how insults will remotely sway or even cogently express your opinion to others without a reaction of hostility. I had to walk away for a while and come back not to just react with obscenities, condescension, and unsubbing.
You seriously need to relax and let the people who like balance have it.
azirk83 1 month ago
@azirk83 Like I said in the PM, no it's not about you or toward you or your views. I appreciate your views whether I agree with them or not or anywhere in-between. I respect your perspective. As I've said in comments on your posts I always learn&take something from what you have to say. If you don't respect my point of view or like the way I said it, that's ok. Doesn't affect my regard for you and your views.
I used a stronger tone here for effect. That's all. I don't normally do so, that's true
23penguins32 1 month ago
@azirk83 [cont] It was prompted by at the root of it another discussion with someone else that I should not have continued or gotten into. The let's say 'literalist' that insists D&D is unplayable because the 'Wizard at higher levels is more powerful than the Fighter' point of view. What I don't respect is the view that one absolutely cannot back up from that and take a different perspective where it can work well. I've seen it done :)
I'm not upset. I argue the point, not the person :)
Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 You proclaimed in the video that those worried about balance were whining crybabies who suffered from blah blah ad hominem attack.
Now I could systematically destroy everything you've said in a video response, calmly and without using logical fallacies. But you don't want to do a video arguing me, you want to do it about some crazy dickhole. Every group has crazy dickholes.
The next time you want an opponent on the position of balance, I'm your huckleberry.
azirk83 1 month ago
@azirk83 Yes, I did Huck. Keep in mind I'm talking about my gaming experience and discussion I've had with people who are not you. If you want to take this personally, that is your choice. For my part, I do not.
If you think I'd be afraid of discussing, debating a topic with you, you'd be starting off from a misconception there.
I take it you didn't like anything at all about this post ?
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Considering your conversation with me after posting the comment I'm responding to, when reading your previous comments here I can't help but laugh out loud.
azirk83 4 weeks ago
@azirk83 Thank you for your comment.
23penguins32 4 weeks ago
I think the whining comes from the expectation that a game will be designed to give all players an equal hand to play. For instance, if you play chess, both players get the same pieces with the same set-up to start. In D&D that expectation is violated and, depending on the style of campaign, that can lead to disillusionment and frustration. That said, it's not something I personally am bothered about.
pridday88 1 month ago
@pridday88 very good point... "set-up balence" would be a discriptor if you want to play in a chess-like mode, and would be an issue in an rpg format... now what game do you know of that enforces such a "during-play balence" - perhaps poker?
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@pridday88 You may have just answered my questions (as I work my way up thru the comments). I like your example. In chess and in D&D I always see that I'm playing with someone, people, who might do the expected sometimes & sometimes surprise me to no end with what they can do with what they have. That's why I mentioned 'be thankful they're there' because the 'tools' can used so brilliantly. Sometimes during a game I just want to applaud someone. I always think every PC is the best, integral part
23penguins32 1 month ago
@pridday88 And thanks for the great comments. I appreciate that. As always. Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
O_O
Epic is as epic does.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote Does epic as is epic !
23penguins32 1 month ago
In 30 years' of gaming I've only noticed any play balance issue in the more recent game I'm in, which is high-level (lvl 19-20). A few characters are clearly more powerful than the rest. Nobody's angry or upset, but everyone's noticed. We're almost done the plot and now need to vote on whether to "go epic" or start over with new 1st level characters. I'm interested to see if this "imbalance" will influence the vote. Thanks for a thoughtful vid!
pridday88 1 month ago
@pridday88 Another person in the 30-years club. Good on ya ! &you play bass guitar too, right ? I always enjoy those differences between characters throughout their careers, not matter the 'levels' they're at. I know some don't. I've found it makes for a bit of a tighter bonding experience in that encourages even further RP in new aspects. If you don't mind me asking, what are your thoughts on this game you're playing ? In noticing differing 'power levels' ? Do you enjoy that or it's no bother?
23penguins32 1 month ago
... (continued) As you might imagine playing D&D in this way requires well enforced balance as the atmosphere is quite competitive weather it be between the players and the GM or just between the players. Problem being, if one of these competitive players plays with an RP focused group. You get a bit of trouble.
WinstonBiggleswade 1 month ago
@WinstonBiggleswade Where I've taken exception to this topic is when I've been told by someone who's had a very different experience and indeed take on the game that I can't play the game the way I'm playing or the way I play can't-won't work. I can understand someone's perhaps more literal take, for sure. It's hard nut to crack in reverse though. So, this is certainly the last time I'll mention this topic. Thankfully. Enjoy your weekend, mate :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
I agree with you. Of course the big counter argument is that D&D can be played primarily in two ways. One being the heavy role play the other being about winning and getting “Phat l00tz” pwning the n00bs and such. And although you and I might agree that the latter is style of gaming is subpar. However we cannot objectively prove that some people will enjoy that style more. And who am I to tell them otherwise...
WinstonBiggleswade 1 month ago
@WinstonBiggleswade I hope I wouldn't argue that it's subpar but rather say it's not for me. To be honest, there are likely more than two ways to play D&D or any game. None of them wrong. The 'wrong' part comes in when a player is playing a game that he's complaining more about than enjoying. That could be for many reasons. I had that experience with a GURPS game, so I politely excused myself from it. The GM understood. I didn't complain openly, it was an internal argument :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
a role playing game does not obviate the need for Coop play
a role playing game does not obviate the need for fairness
fairness does not obviate the need for Coop play
Coop play does not obviate the need for fairness
all true statements, there are times when it should be "unfair and unbalanced" to be "fair and balanced"
no universal statements apply, for diversity is not inconsistency, desire is necessary to keep life in motion, and when real wants are supplied those of fancy are admited.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
Does a dog think it unfair that the cat can run up a tree faster than he, or the cat cry over the dog's more forceful intimidation that can cause a threat twice it's size to back-down?
...hmmz - maybe there are not enough people playing "Bunnies & Burrows" or "Warrior Cats!" to appreciate the simplicity of how very different animals are, yet how very uncomplaining when keeping to the same company for survival... and appreciative of the disparity in functional ability.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote I always enjoy the differences in characters, PC and NPCs alike, in a game. I like the differences in people in life as well. Such diverse styles, preferences, opinions, thoughts. It's always interesting to hear another's point of view. Mayhaps more so when it is very differing. I like your metaphor using animals. That does apply well, I think. The disparity you mention can really bring together, bond a party in strong ways. I've seen that happen over the years.
23penguins32 1 month ago
you gave me this awesome idea... a Orwellian Cult in D&D - specifically nether the "bad guys" or the "good guys" nor even "neutral" being the hardest part to conform with the D&D cosmology, but I am sure it can be worked-out... But everyone must be in those plain robes and chanting the mantra "WAR IS PEACE, SLAVERY IS FREEDOM, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"
...awesomeness...
the clincher is to find a way to have all the PCs come from such an environment, and need to enforce such "balance"... hmmz
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote Blending with a bit of 'V for Vendetta'. That would be an interesting thematic setting to use in D&D. Not your stock and trade fantasy setting at all. I like that. I'm glad you mentioned this. Thank you :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
not that I have anything to go hate'n against my "diva-minded soul-kins" ... their skills at assessing disparity are quite useful to the global continuity and entertainingly enlightening in their place and due time... shalom y'all sum-n-all home-bodhi Sārā pūrṇa sampūrṇatā.
Yes, I have seen the "issue" come up, but not frequently enough for it to really be my focus in the term "game balance" game balance to me has to do with does the written-rules reflect the genre unwritten-rules...
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote I'm definitely not hating on anyone. I'm just saying get on with it. I hope everyone's games are the best ones. From others here that game whom I do not game with have told me whenever 'balance' comes up in the conversations of their groups it always really means 'envy', 'jealousy' or 'greed'. Too bad.
23penguins32 1 month ago
The only time I ever had a discussion about "balance" was way back in the day when my co-DM (who was mentoring me) discussed how to get players who were less engaged more involved and not let the more engaged players dominate. Somtimes it meant giving them a special task or background or item. Nothing to do with stats, just game play.
jrpipik 1 month ago
@jrpipik Oh and that's a great topic. The 'wallflower' or the silent ones are not a problem in my book. They're just ones that need to be coaxed more than others. That is a beautiful task. The assholery are an issue because they're just disruptive, counter to whatever one is trying to experience with a group. Those are whom I warn against. The less-engaged are to be welcomed. Break them in and watch them grow. That is beautiful in and of itself.
23penguins32 1 month ago
Well said sir! F*%$ those whiny prats.
Bondanalloy 1 month ago
@Bondanalloy Let us be happy if we never see the problem. Let us help those in need if we see their need before us. Cheers, man. I owe you a response soon. Be warned. Be very warned :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
Yes - I would compare in assessments of the person next to me, with their strengths and weaknesses in disparity, and consider how it all effects group survivability and motive, and enjoy that persons company.
All very good points, could not whined about the diva-minded assessments of balance myself.
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote We are all great, given the opportunity. I always think so.
23penguins32 1 month ago
thanks! you totally pointed out for me just how unbalanced my life really is... I never really thought to compare myself to other people in that perspective... now it is so much more obvious that the cosmos is an unfairly GM'd >_<
XD... seriously, when I saw the Animal Farm title that was not what came to mind... I was thinking "Should the chicken think it unfair that the cow is larger? or the cow consider the extra hidden weapons on the chicken unbalanced?"
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
@thespiritcoyote Ask what came first, the chicken or the calf ? And it is fair or unfair ?
23penguins32 1 month ago
I think balance is the same as special effects in movies:
1) Not all movies need special effects. Not all games need to be balanced.
2) When you do have special effects they should be invisible and fade into the background, and only be used for the purpose of telling the story. The same applies to RPGs, if balance is needed, it should fit the game naturally and not be forced in just for the sake of putting it there. (I'm looking at you D&D 4E)
RudeAlert 1 month ago
@RudeAlert Thanks for putting that in the perspective of special effects in film or tv serial. I cannot agree more. You hit the nail on the head spot on in my experience. And yes, unnatural is as unnatural does. It forces an issue which is never something we (almost everyone enjoys). You sound like you're a great player and/or a great GM or both. Thank you :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
Brady makes better videos than me, that's not fair! Another great vid, we agree again. Rated!
blackbarnz 1 month ago
@blackbarnz When did this happen ? I did not hear the sirens ! Thanks, man. Much appreciated. Truly. I'm not surprised we agree again.
23penguins32 1 month ago
Bwahaha! I've had a few players in the past with RPG penis envy. They thought it was unfair that the other player should get more role-play XP than them. F$%&ing role-play then and earn it! In the words of Ander, "To the ground with you!"
eweave20 1 month ago
@eweave20 As I knew before this, you are a GM I identify with. I do the same. I've had those conversations with some players about their lack of RP and then the next session they step up and really assume what they are. That's a beautiful thing to see. Truly. And it is no less a work of art for the not seeing it before it happened. Communication works great wonders. Cheers, man.
23penguins32 1 month ago
@inlife9 Im sorry but needed more room. This is added after the above comments. *With all that being said, having a balanced game out the box, is not at all a bad thing. Non-motor interested RPGers dont need to care either way, but those that do care can still be at a table. In theory that "should" bring more players to a DMs door. So while I do agree with your feelings on the subject 100% the motorgamers are out there, and sometimes one may need to include their likes into ones dming.
inlife9 1 month ago
@inlife9 No worries. I'm saying 'balance' is in the eyes of the beholders. That's up to the people playing the game. What they decide, whatever it be, is great. As long as everyone is happy with what happens at the table, that's beautiful. It could be quite epic or tragic - or anywhere inbetween (it's all good). If everyone gives 100% then the outcome is nothing short of brilliant, I've found. Doesn't always turn out how you want it to do. That's life. But no less beautiful for it. Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
Right on. We have never ever spoke of balance. A wizard uses magic and a fighter uses weapons,its that simple. You should be happy a fellow character can contribute a more powerful action. Balance means everything is the same, and that is lame. As I told Ander, its these younger generation players that these problems come up.
YourDungeonMaster 1 month ago
@YourDungeonMaster I think "quality" balance (as opposed to "bad" balance) doesn't make everything "the same". Rather, the kind of balance that is worthwhile (and admirable) is the kind of balance that gives every option value (not "the same" value but equal value on separate terms). In other words, the object of "quality" game balance is to *encourage* diversity by making a rainbow of options equally viable in their own way, not discourage it by funnelling all roads to the same end. My 2 cents.
Webhead123 1 month ago
@Webhead123 It's so interesting how terms can mean such different things to different people. Or, applied differently. Very optimistic description here, J. Thanks for that. I like that point of view. Cheers
23penguins32 1 month ago
@YourDungeonMaster I've heard and read so much about the unbalancing of the Wizard v the Fighter that contradicts every experience I've had in-game that I just can't hear it anymore. I realized that people were just looking at their character sheets instead of imagining the world that their GMs were describing in front of them. That's sad. What does that say of us as a sum group ? We can't imagine the game we're playing in ? We want everyone to be the same stereotype ? Doesn't work for me either
23penguins32 1 month ago
Thank you for mentioning me, i feel welcome already. :-)
when i think of game balance i consider the GM perspective, like starting out a new group that has 1 or 2 new players in it.I think everybody should be somewhat equal at the start since the new ppl are the ones that can bitch about being lower lvl etc. once a few sessions are played and chars became more alive and the story develops; game balance is no longer any issue.
then ppl just play.
BattleBunny1979 1 month ago
@BattleBunny1979 You should be welcome, Good Sir. Cheers on ya :)
I know. I did not include here situations, like Hammered so tragically details, about things that defy what I would think is good common sense. Here I was talking about what I think are relative differences in PCs. Those extremes are, I think, a problem with how the GM is running the game. I'll tackle that disaster in a different post. You are spot on in that though any beginning may be rocky, happily, clear water is found :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
Exactly! : )
TheVikingHill 1 month ago
@TheVikingHill Well, as I said, you did it in one minute. Good on you, Sir :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
Let's say we were going to play chess. Except you don't get anything but your pawns and king. I don't want hear any crying about how small your dick is now -- just play the fucking game! :D
boltorange 1 month ago
@boltorange Sound good, as long as we're not playing against each other but with each other. You know, like a role playing game.
jrpipik 1 month ago
@jrpipik Coop play does not obviate the need for fairness.
boltorange 1 month ago
@boltorange Because of the random factor built into their design, role play games are no more inherently fair than life.
jrpipik 1 month ago
@jrpipik The presence of chance does not make a game unfair.
boltorange 1 month ago in playlist Liked videos
@boltorange Fair's got nothing to do with it.
jrpipik 1 month ago
@jrpipik 'Fair' is indeed a perspective that we need to get passed. What I don't say in this post is something I said in the 'extended version' is it's all down to the group we find ourselves in. What is 'fair' in that group is relative. I'm with you. It's a tough path to take but infinitely rewarding when you see the destination(s).
23penguins32 1 month ago
@boltorange Oh dear :D I've played chess like that. The variants can quite an educational experience. Mayhaps I shouldn't have mentioned Freud - I don't even like his theories :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Me either, bleh. Good luck with the comments on this one, my friend.
boltorange 1 month ago
@boltorange Yeah, there may be some hate on. I really didn't and don't mean to be offencive or rude. That's not my point or style at all. Thanks. Say a prayer, mate :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Brady, you know I always do.
boltorange 1 month ago
@boltorange I admire you for that, Good Sir.
23penguins32 1 month ago
Excellent point, just play the game and stop whining. I like the fact that the classes are different it makes them fun and challenging.
felipe1gojira 1 month ago
@felipe1gojira I do too. One of the things I noticed when I was a teacher was that everyone learns differently and at a different pace. I like in a game when people are vastly different and dynamic. It makes the believability and immersion seem to amp up. Sometimes I feel like some of the problems are actually comparing apples and oranges. But, to each their own. Cheers, man.
23penguins32 1 month ago
This is very much group-dependent. The D&D system is indeed a combat/encounter focused system. If the sessions for your group are centered around combat, imbalance between PC abilities can be an issue. I try to run a mix between combat and RP, and if there's a disparity between the PCs, some get to shine brighter than the others. As the DM I need to balance the sheen so all the players get some. Ideally you want players that don't care, but reality is that players do. I agree with you tho.
micahhenry 1 month ago
@micahhenry Entirely. As I said below here I had a longer version of this post that talked about the people one plays with being key. While I agree with you that D&D can be seen as a combat-encounter focused system, I don't see it or play it that way. I sort of look at it as a film or tv series where I wouldn't see battle after fight after battle over and over. My group are more on the narrative-RP side. But, the cool part is one can play in so many different ways :) I just voice mine. Cheers !
23penguins32 1 month ago
@micahhenry well said, it works like that for me as well. my players enjoy some big combat situations that can last for quite a bit and all should get a chance to shine a bit then. Thats where i try and balance it with monsters that, for instance, the lower lvl ranger in the group has as a favored enemy etc. give everybody their moment if possible. thats what i think about if i talk balance. getting everybody involved in equal amounts.
BattleBunny1979 1 month ago
@BattleBunny1979 Yes. That's where I think the GM is involved most, perhaps the greatest role of the GM because it comes in when creating the story-plot then follows to the actual play of the narrative with everyone. Good definition. Thanks
23penguins32 1 month ago
I'm glad someone had the balls to actually say this out loud.
atari67 1 month ago
@atari67 Maybe I finally grew a pair. Puberty had to happen eventually. I don't mean to be rude here. I just wanted to put my 2 bits in as I see it. Cheers, man.
23penguins32 1 month ago
Superb video and less of a ramble than usual! Who thought the two could go together...?
At any rate, I agree wholeheartedly. Arguing about stats and difficulty checks and whatnot is defeating the object of role-playing. You're playing a role. Play.
clackclickbang 1 month ago
@clackclickbang Damn, I'm losing my touch. Must be a sign of the doom of our times.
I actually watched another play-through recently where there was so much OoC nonsense that it just made me switch it off. It didn't look like they were enjoying the game. Yet, it seems like it's only a few small steps toward the point they would actually enjoy it. Oh well, be thankful for what you've got.
23penguins32 1 month ago
I think the title to this video should be "Balance in a Game and Penis Envy!" Great post, I actually read the thread between you and the other guy. It's just a different type of game you and this guy play. Personally I think that's why 4th edition is a viable game because it caters to those that want this "balance" as paramount to anything else. I'll go on record however that I personally like your approach. :)
SaudiLindsey4 1 month ago
@SaudiLindsey4 Definitely it's a different game, completely different style. That's why I said 'you're playing the wrong game'. I'd be a bit of fish out of water in D&D4E. That's why I won't go on and on about that game because I don't have any right to complain. I have no problem with people wanting 'balance'. I just personally don't. Of course, Hammered below here had an extreme bad experience, poor guy.
I've been reading Jung recently, so Freud is mentioned often. Sadly. Cheers for that :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Yeah I read about that. That was the dumps. I'd REALLY have had to have liked the people I was playing with to have continued in that game.
SaudiLindsey4 1 month ago
@SaudiLindsey4 I would have had a good talk with the GM about that. That falls out of bounds of my parameters in this post. That's just so extreme it defies what I think of as common sense. I thought about that sort of thing before I recorded this one but I didn't include because I'd rather do a post on extremes or 'ridiculous' things in RPGs. Yikes. I love the Wil Wheaton mantra 'don't be a dick'. Not to be Freudian :) It's just great advice.
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 I agree it is a great life motto.This just seems to be the thread for phallic type word play. :D
SaudiLindsey4 1 month ago
@SaudiLindsey4 That's part of why I mentioned it here. Found it too funny not to say :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Indeed good sir. Pun well received!
SaudiLindsey4 1 month ago
You are a class act Brady. I think I will just leave it at that. Great video. :)
Samwise7RPG 1 month ago
@Samwise7RPG I'm not sure how to take that :) Is it along the lines of the Tom Bombadil comparison...? :D Thanks, man. I just mean here to enjoy the game and play with good people, not dicks
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 I just don't want to get into an argument about balance in the comments. haha. :)
Samwise7RPG 1 month ago
@Samwise7RPG Oh dear ;) You're right though. Best to discuss it over Skype sometime together. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Well, that goes for anything. Cheers, man :)
23penguins32 1 month ago
And butter flies... have wings! :-)
So, would you say that balance relies on the GM/ players, not necessarily the system itself or are you simply more focused on the role playing rather than the "roll" playing?
What animal would you be? :-P
therealrpgguy 1 month ago
@therealrpgguy Yes, I think the 'balance' relies on the GM&players all. I had a longer version of this where I talked about how it so depends on the group of people playing together and being responsible to each other and the narrative being created. I just wanted a shorter post here :) Also, TheVikingHill mentions that in his one, which was good. I always think the role playing is much more important than the dice rolling.
I always choose dolphin or porpoise :) But, penguins and owls are cool
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Well, I couldn't agree more! It's definitely about the player interaction the most and for a successful story-driven game, the role playing is most important.
Cool choice(s)! :-)
therealrpgguy 1 month ago
In a game I was in once had PCs that were on super high levels and I had to start from level1 like they once had. That meant that my character who had dedicated his life to combat, got killed in every single fight. Because the challenge rateo was made with the greater level characters. So my character died on every first combat round and was resurrected for a huge money price by the other players. And I could not just say fuck this, because I was ordered to "protect them". It was not fun at all.
hammeredshitsteak 1 month ago
@hammeredshitsteak Yikes. Personally I think that's a GM issue. I would not start a PC off at 1st lvl in a game with everyone else being so much higher lvl where it doesn't make any sense at all. You know ? I know starting a PC at higher lvls has its own problems or issues too, but that wasn't fair to you in your example. That's extreme IMO. I didn't mention something like that because I've not personally seen it done nor would I do that. Sounds strange that a GM would allow that to happen
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Yeah well I agree with you on the level of the different classes or having like few levels of difference. But really, the gentleman was suggesting as well that what if an elder would be a part of a vampire coterie, how would that hurt. Well when he is given reasonable challenge, everybody else is getting killed, and when they get reasonable challenge the elder can just breeze through it.
hammeredshitsteak 1 month ago
@hammeredshitsteak With the example of the Elder, I'd look at like when I had my 26th lvl Wizard as an NPC with a 4-5th lvl party a little bit ago in my game. He acted as a mentor-teacher instead of a battle tank. The Elder's not doing his Coterie any favours by just taking everything out by himself. He's not letting the other members become stronger member and experience (un)life. Like having children, you have to let them experience things for themselves. Give advice, yes, but let them do.
23penguins32 1 month ago
@23penguins32 Yes that's why they should rather be NPCs than PCs. Because it's good to make the players shine and put the powerful NPC to some backround stuff that doesen't steal the spotlight from the PCs, but if a player is 60 times more powerful than others and he's shined, then it becomes him-show. This happens also when GMs take their own PC character and make stats for him and everything. It becomes "The NPC and friends show".
hammeredshitsteak 1 month ago
@hammeredshitsteak I had a longer version of this, about 5 minutes longer, where I talked about group responsibility to each other and the narrative, story. Maybe I should have uploaded that one ? :) I thought I'd just make another post on that one thing. There really is a lot of room to cover on this topic. I do think it comes down to the people playing the game. If you play with a dick you're going to get dicked. Sad but true. I'm glad I've never had any terrible experiences really. Sorry !
23penguins32 1 month ago
I've never understood the whole balance argument. But then again I played lots of AD&D 2nd Edition, remember that game? To get to 18th level the Druid needed, what, a MILLION more XP then the thief. Besides, in a fight the Fighter is better, when stealing the Thief is better, when healing the Cleric is better, etc. Whoever is in the spotlight is better! LOL
Zarion13 1 month ago
@Zarion13 I understand to a certain extent, but not when it actually involves nitpicking in gameplay. Which is what I'm trying to say in this post. Of course, Hammered just made a comment and he had a big problem with it though I think that's a GM issue he's talking about. I enjoyed the different class level progressions in D&D2E. I like that dynamic in a game. Let everyone be themselves. Everyone has their strengths, weaknesses, brilliance and flaws. Cheers.
23penguins32 1 month ago