• Pyro@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    Depends on the game the group likes. More narrative driven game it can conflict and have issues

    However, there is something nice about knowing a balanced way to do x or y across the board and at different tables.

    A good gm should be able to make a note of something or make a quick call especially in pf2e case were generic difficulty dc per level is given

    • Square Singer@feddit.de
      0·
      1 year ago

      However, there is something nice about knowing a balanced way to do x or y across the board and at different tables.

      I don’t agree with this argument. Balancing is the job of the GM. Unless the GM acts as a glorified screenreader who only reads a pre-made adventure to the players with no influence what happens. But if the GM decides what monsters you run into, the GM has more influence over the balancing than the game framework. So why not lean into it fully and make the GM responsible for the whole balancing?

      I mean, pen&paper RPGs aren’t a players vs GM game, but instead the GM plays together with the players to create an interesting experience where everyone has fun. No need for the framework to do balancing, because a good GM will do that.

      • PoTayToes@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        1 year ago

        So why not lean into it fully and make the GM responsible for the whole balancing?

        Because having things balanced properly in regard to the myriad options that are possible in people imaginations is hard, especially related to combat. Improper balacing leads to people having a bad time, while having an established, fair ruleset lets the DM and the players focus on other things.

        No need for the framework to do balancing, because a good GM will do that.

        But at this point why even have rules? A “good GM” can just entirely improvise a system.

        • TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.networkOP
          0·
          1 year ago

          But at this point why even have rules? A “good GM” can just entirely improvise a system. On the other hand,. if you’re the slave to rules, are you even still the GM or just a refferee? It’s a sliding scale people fall on, honestly. 5e tried to have it cake and eat it too, insert itself in the middle. You could argue it succeeded, but that makes people naturally drift away from it in either direction. I just think we tend to forget the scale goes both ways and there are more options than Pathfinder with rules for everything.

          • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
            01·
            1 year ago

            You sound like you’re trying to say that GMs who run modules by the book aren’t real GMs, and that’s some gatekeepy bullshit.

    • Veraticus@lib.lgbtEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      Keep balance for computer games. If I’m playing an RPG I want to be able to do crazy things if I plan and execute it properly. And rules for stumble attacks of opportunity for holy clerics of the sun just get in the way of the good stuff.

      • Dice@ttrpg.network
        0·
        1 year ago

        This is entirely correct. Balance does not matter in most games, because most games have resources that are depleted over a long term. You don’t need balance when healing takes weeks or difficult to replace resources.

        For games like 5e and pf2, where characters constantly are at full health, spells and equipment, combat needs to almost kill the party every time to be worth rolling dice.

        • Veraticus@lib.lgbtEnglish
          01·
          1 year ago

          Yes; or be an incredibly long boring slog because it needs to divorce the party from so many resources.