Editorial Josh Sawyer Explains: How to Balance an RPG

[Tigranes]

Because the harder you can thrust those muscles the more forcefully you can eject them projectiles

 

[Roguey]

Sorcerers have to be super-charismatic to learn the best arcane spells cause, uh....

And wizards have to be super-muscular to have high damage spells cause, uh...

Might clearly isn't just physical.

Also I don't care at all about near-accurate simulations and support anything that results in the best balance.

 

[HiddenX]

Sorcerers have to be super-charismatic to learn the best arcane spells cause, uh....

And wizards have to be super-muscular to have high damage spells cause, uh...

Might clearly isn't just physical.

Also I don't care at all about near-accurate simulations and support anything that results in the best balance.

Maybe we should simply call all stats after Roman numbers then (to avoid the sim-part)

I
II
III
IV
V
VI

you need 6 points in V to cast fireball...


or maybe we should go for the absolute minimum (and balanced) two-stats-system

Health
Damage

everything else is simulation nonsense anyway...

 

[Roguey]

Might as it exists now is perfectly fine to use in combat and in dialogue menus that warrant a mighty reaction.

 

[Zeriel]

I'm developing a mighty reaction to this thread.

 

[HiddenX]

2 years later...

PoE might have been a good game if they only had used strength...

 

[Roguey]

It would have been a worse game, like all pseudo-sims.

 

[Johannes]

Sawyer talks all the time about supporting different character concepts. "If someone wants to play a muscular wizard, they should be worth it!", and such. But that's p. much in opposition to how the stat currently works - the wizard isn't useful because he's got good physique, but because the physical and spiritual might somehow correlate 1:1 in this gameworld. So yes you can build a muscular wizard but he doesn't actually feel like one, cause his utility has everything to do with his spiritual might while the muscles only matter when he's shooting his arquebus. So basically you cannot do a wizard who's encouraged by his stats to go in and bash people's heads.

 

[tuluse]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

 

[Johannes]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

Has nothing to do with his Might stat.

 

[tuluse]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

Has nothing to do with his Might stat.

Might determines how hard he hits things with a sword.

 

[SuicideBunny]

Still here after 40 years for a reason

that reason being that gamers actually are against change or stepping even a bit out of their comfort zones, just like those shitty game journalists claim. strength is in itself especially stupid as an attribute, considering how damn easy it is to change in both directions in real life.

 

[Johannes]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

Has nothing to do with his Might stat.

Might determines how hard he hits things with a sword.

Of course, so what? But it never encourages him to pick the sword over another mode of attack, since those are aided by it in equal measure.

 

[tuluse]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

Has nothing to do with his Might stat.

Might determines how hard he hits things with a sword.

Of course, so what? But it never encourages him to pick the sword over another mode of attack, since those are aided by it in equal measure.

Is that a problem? Are melee wizards not supported because they're not incentivized? Are those two concepts identical now?

 

[Johannes]

You can put a wizard in armor and send him into the breach. He won't be as good there as a fighter, but he won't be useless.

Has nothing to do with his Might stat.

Might determines how hard he hits things with a sword.

Of course, so what? But it never encourages him to pick the sword over another mode of attack, since those are aided by it in equal measure.

Is that a problem? Are melee wizards not supported because they're not incentivized? Are those two concepts identical now?

If someone specifically wants to make a muscle-wizard, it would make sense that it's a different specialization than a wizard with high-damage spells. You know, that concept of character concepts Sawyer keeps talking about.

 

[Jasede]

 

[DragoFireheart]

Sorcerers have to be super-charismatic to learn the best arcane spells cause, uh....

And wizards have to be super-muscular to have high damage spells cause, uh...

I'd imagine even a wizard needs to be physically fit to be able to tolerate the strain of spellcasting on their bodies. Casting powerful illusions or fireballs Id' imaging would strain their bodies.

Course I'm talking more about stamina, but still.

 

[Lhynn]

Fun thread. But i just rather directly attack sawyers half assed mechanics and systems over his philosophies, its easier as they are visibly shit.

 

[SuicideBunny]

Sorcerers have to be super-charismatic to learn the best arcane spells cause, uh....

And wizards have to be super-muscular to have high damage spells cause, uh...

I'd imagine even a wizard needs to be physically fit to be able to tolerate the strain of spellcasting on their bodies. Casting powerful illusions or fireballs Id' imaging would strain their bodies.

Course I'm talking more about stamina, but still.

and it's not like we tend to call people who endure through all kinds of shit "strong" because of their muscles...

 

[Ninjerk]

Fun thread. But i just rather directly attack sawyers half assed mechanics and systems over his philosophies, its easier as they are visibly shit.

The ol' proof-in-the-pudding

 

[Delterius]

Sorcerers have to be super-charismatic to learn the best arcane spells cause, uh....

And wizards have to be super-muscular to have high damage spells cause, uh...

Might clearly isn't just physical.

Also I don't care at all about near-accurate simulations and support anything that results in the best balance.

Is there some way to make a wizard with high might but without the benefits of being physically strong?

 

[serch]

All classes seems to derive their powers from 'soul magic'. What makes the fire you cast burn hotter also make your muscle fibres twitch stronger. All classes are somewhat magical, that's why a fighter can take an axe to the face. Sawyer took the step d&d designers didn't dare because their bullied fanbase wants martial characters to be inferior and intellectually challenged compared to arcane ones, as some kind of revenge of the nerds. If fighter = Goku, then no problem with might increasing spell damage. Change might to soul might if you must.

 

[tuluse]

All classes seems to derive their powers from 'soul magic'. What makes the fire you cast burn hotter also make your muscle fibres twitch stronger. All classes are somewhat magical, that's why a fighter can take an axe to the face. Sawyer took the step d&d designers didn't dare because their bullied fanbase wants martial characters to be inferior and intellectually challenged compared to arcane ones, as some kind of revenge of the nerds. If fighter = Goku, then no problem with might increasing spell damage. Change might to soul might if you must.

In the attribute description it's made clear that might is both physical and soul might.

 

[mastroego]

In the attribute description it's made clear that might is both physical and soul might.

Dear Lord

 

[DefJam101]

Sawyer took the step d&d designers didn't dare because their bullied fanbase wants martial characters to be inferior and intellectually challenged compared to arcane ones, as some kind of revenge of the nerds.

bros surely there must be a way we can hate dungeons and dragons without stooping to grade school kickball field argumentation