Balance and D&D

[EinarMal]

Without balance and trade offs there is no game. All options get reduced to just a few, most classes become useless, and the game dies....the end.

[Angelus_dead]

I would argue that balance is irrelevant, sometimes. The fun factor is what's actually important in a commercial application. And, I believe that's already happened multiple times in DDO since the start.

Balance is just for the rules-lawyers.

Balance is a prerequisite for fun in every large-scale game.

[Borror0]

Balance is a prerequisite for fun in every large-scale game.

Only if it's intended for there to be diversity.

Take Sonic-like or Mario-like characters where there is nothing to choose, but only one single character with no customization within itself.

Obviously, this is irrelevant to DDO.

[Draccus]

You're never going to achieve perfect balance and sometimes it's ok to let an imbalance slide.

Here's the problem with letting even a TINY imbalance slide: the players will exploit that imbalance to the extreme. MMO players, for the most part are like moths to the flame when it comes to gaining an advantage of any size.

They WILL find it and they WILL exploit it and you WILL have a game full of cloned characters exploiting that one advantage. If you fix (nerf) that imbalance, the players will simply find the next imbalance and exploit that.

I've said many times that I can tell you the most powerful class or skill in any MMO ever made without playing it once. Just give me a database that shows the class distribution among the player base and I'll tell you which class is more powerful. MOST players don't give a rats arse about balance or style or roleplaying or appearance. They care solely about power.

If chaotic neutral half orc female palemaster bards wearing pink tutus and paisley leotards wielding seaweed slings launching marshmellows were proven to do 0.01% more DPS than any other class, you'd have a game full of chaotic neutral half orc female palemaster bards wearing pink tutus and paisley leotards wielding seaweed slings launching marshmellows. MMO players are sadly predictable in class and skill selection. Their favorite class is "Whichever is most powerful."

Balance is critical to prevent the game from being dominated by one class, one skill, one ability, or one item.

I'm personally the opposite. I like one class and have liked one class since I started playing RPGs 30 years ago. If you asked me my favorite class, I'd immediately answer "Rogue." However, if you asked me what class I liked the least, I'd answer, just as quickly, "Whichever is most powerful." In all my years, I found one game where that was a conflict (rogues were most powerful)...and I quit.

[Deathseeker]

Put me in the "balance is good" camp.

What's funny is the assumption that all "nerfs" are bad for the game. That would assume that the dev's either get everything perfect every time, or if they do make a mistake in design its always in making the player too weak vs the content, or they should always correct everything by elevating everything besides the offending item/skill/ability/issue.

As we all know none of that is ture, the premise that all "nerfs" are bad for the game is silly.

Its a balance between the negative effect of the nerf (ie breaking builds or equipment or otherwise invalidating time spent by a player) vs the positive effect it will have on maintaining balance AND diversity (those two go together, they are not opposed).

It is fair to think a nerf goes to far to the negative for the benefit...that's rational. To say any nerf is bad for the game is just ridiculous.

[Impaqt]

I want to touch on this whole balance debate that some seem to hang on in these forums.

1) D&D was never meant to be balanced! Mages dominate the world of D&D and all characters play a role in a party adventure. It is not and has never been a balanced game, plain and simple...

2) Tolkien was the original, D&D made it a game add all others (Warhammer, WoW, etc) are all benefactors. DDO does not need to mimic them to be succesful.

3) Nerfing weapons, rules, NPC's and gameplay will only lead to this games demise because you will be re-inventing the game set that so many know intimately and love just the way it is.

With all that said I like DDO. There are those that want to see it made more like WoW but I say no! There are those that say it needs balance, I again say no! There are those that say it's too easy, I say you've been smoking crack!

The game does need some tweeking, guild stuff, content, PvP or GvG oriented gameplay in my "opinion" but all is good. It does not need balance!

All in all this is a demanding game platform and I beleive the Dev's have done well. There is a huge amount that can be done as this game has unlimited flexibility.

Ok, read through al the responses.. I think 1 has been address enough.. Needless to say, I agree that PnP D&D is certainly intended to be balacned and its up to the individual DM;s to make sure the game is fun for everyone playing. WHo would play if one guy inthe group had a W/P like we have here in DDO and just mowed down every monster before anyone had a chance to do aything? Or one Arcane was able to burn every mob to the groud that the group came up against?

2: Tolkien was the original what? Inventor of Fantasy settings? WHile I agree he may have popualized it, there are storys of Dragons and Knights far before Tolkien was ever born.

3:What leads to the Demise for some will lead to the rebirth for others. many many D&D PnP Fans adamantly shun this game because it deviates from PnP on so many levels. Many more peple shun this game because it Deviates from the WoW standard so much. Making changes that appeal to the masses rather than the power gamer is GOOD for Turbine. There will always be Power Gamers no matter what the game looks like. Getting fresh blod into the game allows turbine to continue to develope more and better content.

THe biggest problem that Faces DDO IMO is the lack of things to do other than Kill THings. With each mod we get 5 or 10 dungeons or areas to Kill stuff in. Then what? We did it... We killed everything..... Now what? Maybe I'll build a house... Nope... Work on my crafting? Nope.... Challeeng another guild to a war of some sort? Nope... Rerun the content we just got Over and Over? Hey! Theres a Great Idea!!!! Its getting old.......

[Beherit_Baphomar]

Diversity is much easier to enable in PnP than it is in an MMO.

With PnP there are only roleplayers.

If we only had roleplayers in DDO then we wouldn't need to worry about balancing the game...all classes would be played and all builds would be viable.

Forget PnP when yer talking about DDO...its irrelevant.

[Angelus_dead]

Only if it's intended for there to be diversity.

That statement makes no sense.

Balance is a lot more important than diversity; it's easy to list examples of games which are fun without diversity, but fun imbalanced games are much rarer (and upon closer examination might not have really been imbalanced at all).

Take Sonic-like or Mario-like characters where there is nothing to choose, but only one single character with no customization within itself.

Is that supposed to be a joke? I guess not, and you instead used an example that doesn't really support your point. (The example might have been valid in 1985, but was solidly outdated by 1988)

Sonic and Mario are not the only characters in the games in which they appear, and the differences are more than just cosmetic. In fact, amoung game designers Mario is used as an exemplar of a certain kind of class balance: "Mario choice" is one that provides above-average capabilities in every field, but who is the best at nothing.

[Borror0]

What's funny is the assumption that all "nerfs" are bad for the game.

Continuing on what you said, nerfing can be there preferred for multiple reasons.

The most obvious one is the amount of work required. That nearly always the major reasons behind it. In some case it's obvious, like class vs class imbalance because toning down one class is easier than improving nine classes. It's even truer when the imbalanced is caused by one ability, but improving the other classes would require the greater of multiple abilities for each class.

In other cases, the amount of work required is less obvious, like restoring value to random loot but further upon analysis you are to face a serious dilemma: breaking the continuity or nerf. In the current game, I think we will all agree that random loot is nearly worthless and that Green Steel is to blame for this. From that point, either random loot suddenly becomes more powerful or you tone down the guilty pieces of equipment to soften the curve. There is also the option to improve the current loot tables in a manner that progression will remain smooth by improving the quality of loot in lower levels. However, the amount of work required could be greater if the loot becomes so good that quests become too easy, as quests would need balancing, and the idea is discarded.

The biggest problem by not softening the curve would be the negative impact on new players and the more casual players, as under equipped players would lack behind and enjoy less their adventuring. That would be how nerfing could be preferred in this instance.

If balance would be the only issue each time, nerfing wouldn't be preferred but there are other constraints.

This should have been more concise and brief, but there is a lot to say on that topic...

[Angelus_dead]

In the current game, I think we will all agree that random loot is nearly worthless and that Green Steel is to blame for this.

Nope. For one thing, you are creating a false distinction between Shroud crafting and named items. Since module 1, random-dropped two-hand weapons had been worthless compared to the Sword of Shadows, and similar things happened with other powerful named weapons (Deathnip etc).

But even once that inaccuracy is corrected, you still can't really put the blame on custom drops from a specific quest. Shroud crafting cemented the situation, but didn't create it. The real cause of the problem is DDO's inconsistency in acceleration of magic-item availability. This created a plateau where by about level 7-10 characters could use weapons close to the best-possible random drops, with little prospective to gain random upgrades until level 21 chests.

[Borror0]

Sonic and Mario are not the only characters in the games in which they appear, and the differences are more than just cosmetic.

I was scared there would be that kind of confusion.

I meant to assume a game where everyone is "stuck" at plating the Mario and the only factor affecting performance is skills, but I guess you could call this game balanced after all, since we all are playing the same character and thus there is no imbalance.

Shroud crafting cemented the situation, but didn't create it.

That's more what I meant.

[Angelus_dead]

I meant to assume a game where everyone is "stuck" at plating the Mario and the only factor affecting performance is skills, but I guess you could call this game balanced after all, since we all are playing the same character and thus there is no imbalance.

"Balance" doesn't only apply between multiple choices for characters- it also applies between the player character and the rest of the world. In the case of a platform game where you can only choose exactly one character to play, imbalance is still possible, and is still bad: for example, it might exhibit as a level whose difficulty is out of place compared to its position in the game.

[Mhykke]

Every night I see plenty of LFMs looking for a wide range of classes.

I only put up LFMs for TWF'ing warforges with exactly 73 haste pots and 86 repair serious pots.

[Borror0]

"Balance" doesn't only apply between multiple choices for characters- it also applies between the player character and the rest of the world. In the case of a platform game where you can only choose exactly one character to play, imbalance is still possible, and is still bad: for example, it might exhibit as a level whose difficulty is out of place compared to its position in the game.

Fine point.

[Oreg]

Small elements may be unbalanced within classes but the game isn't unbalanced. Every night I see plenty of LFMs looking for a wide range of classes.
I have never once seen one that says TWF with evasion only. I have seen quests completed with every conceivable combination. Look at the "Who" panel. Ever seen a class with less than 5% representation? NOpe. Because all classes are played here. Try doing that in just about any other mmorpg.

An unbalanced game is DAoC in the summer of 2002 with Smite clerics, EQI with the Holy Trinity ( no groups ever formed without an enchanter), and so on.

Ask for improvements and changes if you want but to state that the game is unbalanced is an exaggeration.

[Angelus_dead]

Small elements may be unbalanced within classes but the game isn't unbalanced. Every night I see plenty of LFMs looking for a wide range of classes.
I have never once seen one that says TWF with evasion only.

Anti-Nirvana fallacy.

[Oreg]

Anti-Nirvana fallacy.

Wouldn't there need to be a visible imbalance in order to call the game unbalanced?

Not to mention the fact that I specifically said that it is worthy to fight to change small imbalances. But you didn't quote that part.

[Borror0]

Here's the problem with letting even a TINY imbalance slide: the players will exploit that imbalance to the extreme.

While that is true to an extent, there's two types of imbalance:

• Imbalance we care about.
• Imbalance we don't care about.

We view imbalance and balance subjectively. Neither can be quantified, even though it can be obvious very often, it is still subjectively bothersome.

For this reason, imbalance may or may not be worth addressing. Fighting against imbalance is a good thing, when it's good for the game and for diversity, but at one point it becomes more of a moral fight against imbalance than an attempt at improving the game. Imbalance impedes fun, but it does not prevent it so there is no need to eradicate it totally if it's a the cost of fun.

There is a range between which imbalance does not really matter and most of the decision is done with preferences rather than powergaming arguments.

[frugal_gourmet]

Here's the problem with letting even a TINY imbalance slide: the players will exploit that imbalance to the extreme. MMO players, for the most part are like moths to the flame when it comes to gaining an advantage of any size.

While I generally agree with your position on the subject, I was just noting how unlikely it is that all choices in the game are made equally compelling, and how it is probably useful for our psychological well-being to move past this expectation. It was a casual observation. I'm not opposed to balancing as much as humanly possible wheresoever it is achievable and makes the game fun.

[Angelus_dead]

We view imbalance and balance subjectively. Neither can be quantified, even though it can be obvious very often

They can be quantified; it's usually difficult and probably imprecise, but it's possible.