Hello,
Brad Thompson wrote:
> It is
> also no surprise that many skill-based systems suffer from balance problems,
> because designing a game is MUCH harder to do than running one and by its
> very nature a balanced skill-based system is harder to design than a
> level-based one (though an unbalanced one is much easier to design than an
> unbalanced level-based one).
Really? I've always found it easier to balance a skill based system, than a
level based system. In a skill based system, to keep it balanced all you have to
do is make sure all your skills have the same scope, and that everyone starts
out with the same amount of skill levels to divide up as they choose. With a
level based system, you have to check out each level and compare it with every
other level in the game, which normally includes classes and the bonuses they
receive.
Of course I've also found it makes a better game if you intentionally unbalance
a skill based system, by assigning initial skill points based on you stats.
Assuming that stats are random, you could have more or less starting skill
points to assign to your skills. Makes it more "realistic", which is what I
prefer.
> I think the d20
> system is an object lesson in exactly this, and based on my experience so
> far it's balance mechanics are outstanding.
Really? When you break it down, I found it incredibly unbalanced. It always
seemed to me that they just put in so much character power that one couldn't
tell if it was balanced or not, with the human still getting the short end of
the stick.
Now granted, the combat power is more balanced between the classes, but there is
more to game balance than just combat, and not every class has to be a great
fighter.
Have Fun,
Darren
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
