Dear Amia... what is 'balance'?

Can some one help make this intangible concept a little more tangible? Thanks!

_________________

Elaborate?
Weapon balance, class balance, natural balance, balance beam, Jack Palance?

_________________

Dear Kudark,

Yes.

_________________

Let me be more specific by not being specific.

I'm trying to open up a discussion for any one to talk about anything that falls under the umbrella category of balance be if Gear, Builds, Special Spells, custom scrips you name it pick a section and tell me your thoughts on what balance means when it comes to that category of stuff. I'd like to hear a wide variety of views from the server.

_________________

Basically, it comes from the idea, that the game should be somewhat fair. Therefore, the people (in Amia's case DMs and Devs) try to have most different play styles on similar footing, and not one vastly superior.

Let's say a dual kukri WM, with NWN DevCrit. Due to the way saves work, it would mean, that they crit quite a lot, and every single crit is a save versus intant death. This isn't really balanced because they have high AB and crit chance. So the idea was instead to make it something that is good, but doesn't instanly mean one-hit-kill. This put is (somewhat) on par with most other builds, because it wasn't overly powerful, but still did stuff (and still forces people to gear a lot of fort)

I hope I explained it somewhat well. I think it's a bit difficult to explain, because we want balance, but a perfect balance would be really difficult to achieve.

But I see it essentially as: The aspects of the server (RP, PvE, Eventd, PvP; basically everything) Should depend much more on player skill than, for example, build.

Balance is essentially a state of equilibrium between all facets of the game to ensure fairness. It is not possible to achieve perfect equilibrium, but "server balance" is the constant pursuit of trying to achieve equilibrium, and why it is an evolving thing that has changed over the server's lifespan.

Example 1:
Class balancing
This means classes should be useful or worth taking compared to others, or fullfill a specific role that makes them viable. For instance, mage vs fighter archetypes. Mages often appear far more potent, but that is because their focus is being able to dish out damage or provide utility in the form of buffs, typically. A fighter is similar in that they can dish out damage, but they can usually take a lot more punishment.. AND unlike mages, they stand to gain FAR more from having allies with spells or buffs to assist them and therein lies the counterbalance. Mages do better on their own but chuck a bard into a group of fighters and you're going to abolish anything in your path.

Note 1: This isn't always achievable, and in some aspects some builds will usually exceed others, either because the class isn't being used to it's full potential or something mechanical is holding them back. This is where people sometimes try to balance it, and give the class more oomph. (See: Assassin, SD, Blackguard, PM buffs as an example)
HOWEVER this is tricky, because if you buff a class to improve the strength of common builds around it, it also means you're buffing the powerbuilds that already fall above the median PC level of "power". As such, what seems like a no-brainer buff to a class can be discarded as it'd give too much power to already powerful builds. This is the primary reason why divine might/shield was capped to class level or cha mod,whichever is lower and why monk wis AC was capped to wismod or monk level, whichever one is lower. It gave too much power for 1 or 2 levels and made certain builds broken.. so This was done to help ensure it stays useful and a cornerstone of the class, but negates the ability to exploit it for extreme power on builds. The same has been done with other classes, such as the shadowdancer as well. An example of the race thing is the half-elf discussion. Currently they don't get "enough" to justify going half-elf over human or elf or any other race, buildwise..so after discussion it's getting a slight facelift to help bring it more in line with other races. +1 Dex might not seem as much, but it means that if you start off with uneven dex on a build (say you're making an AA and start with 18 base dex, now you get +1 to make it 19). You get a total of 7 free points to put into an ability.. So now you can get an even amount of dex without using an epic feat for great dex on it.. And thus get an extra epic feat to play with.. OR you can drop your dex from base 18 to 17 (19 to 18 adjusted) and get 3 extra ability points to distribute.. maybe that bumps up a stat from 9 to 12 and you get an extra 2 modifier in it base.. This can be huge as well (if it's con for instance, that's a 60 HP difference). Suddenly that +1 extra dex gets extremely useful and might help make half-elves more appealing as a race.


Example 2:
Item balancing
Item balance revolves around how potent any item in particular is, when compared to all other open options. Items are balanced around other items, NOT the classes that commonly use them, to help ensure no one build will run rampant with any one item in particular. This is why bad builds or "RP" builds don't get more powerful items than any powerbuild or other build on the server. Any item given tend to be balanced around the item balance in general, and it's how DC items seem to be balanced as well. Have a bard that sucks and want to get a more powerful sword with more damage than the norm? You won't get it, because in the hands of a dex-fighter it would help negate the biggest drawback of the build and thus make the build even more powerful. This also speaks to fairness; No one player should be able to get an item that any other player can get. You should in theory be able to request the exact same item on a wizard as you could a bard. It might not be AS useful on the wizard as the bard, but you can still get it. IF someone was given an item that goes far above the norm when it comes to item balance to offset a build impairment, then others without it would try to request it or cry foul if they couldn't get something similar for their character's build. By ensuring everyone has access to the same stuff, either across builds or on the same class (etc: monk gloves are more powerful than other items, so you can't get them on nonmonk chars, but you can on other monk builds) you ensure fairness. This was also one of the most common arguments against DC requested custom spells.

Note 2: This isn't always possible to achieve either, because there are a large number of requests and what is considered balanced or not tends to change over long periods of time, and as such some people have gotten grandfathered items that today would never be allowed or even considered. This is true of all aspects of DC requests, from items to characters to abilities. It is a thing in constant motion that changes based on other changes. IF one thing is made more powerful or nerfed, then it in turn affects other aspects. A good example of item balancing is the current discussion with dualwielding and two handers. It initially started out with ideas that would break server balance, and trough discussion slowly climbed towards a more balanced outcome that won't be too powerful or too weak to have an impact. When such changes are implemented, they might seem too weak or powerful at first, but over time the balance adapts to it, and it gets changed again if it needs to.

Example 3:
Race balancing
Make a race too powerful and it will snowball with certain builds, and it's why most get little to nothing, or gets restricted in other ways to help ensure certain builds on that race wouldn't be too op. By trying to make races stay distinctive, but also appeal to certain builds OR give minor bonuses to all builds, you allow for some races to be specialized towards certain builds compared to others, or for one to be a decent "all around" base race. The ECL thing is a way of limiting some races that have extreme bonuses, from taking those and running rampant with certain builds. An example of the race balancing is the half-elf discussion. Currently they don't get "enough" to justify going half-elf over human or elf or any other race, buildwise. So after discussion it looks like it's getting a slight facelift to help bring it more in line with other races. +1 Dex might not seem as much, but it means that if you start off with uneven dex on a build (say you're making an AA and start with 18 base dex, now you get +1 to make it 19). You get a total of 7 free points to put into an ability.. So now you can get an even amount of dex without using an epic feat for great dex on it.. And thus get an extra epic feat to play with.. OR you can drop your dex from base 18 to 17 (19 to 18 adjusted) and get 3 extra ability points to distribute.. maybe that bumps up a stat from 9 to 12 and you get an extra 2 modifier in it base.. This can be huge as well (if it's con for instance, that's a 60 HP difference). Suddenly that +1 extra dex gets extremely useful and might help make half-elves more appealing as a race.

Note 3: Again.. Not always possible and something that has changed over time, some races got removed because they were broken, others were changed to make them more in line with everyone else.


Hope that clears it up for you.

_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer

I think a less loaded way of going about this would be telling us what the complaint here is?

_________________
Jace Fenneril: Cleric of Sharess.

Michael Harcourte: Painter, Scribe.

Sebastian Mayartte: Gambler, MercenaryDeceased

I do not know but I have a feeling it may be related to us saying the bladesinger feat is not balanced for bard or assassin?

_________________

Alright, since most of the other stuff was elaborated on, this is a balance beam. If you can walk across it, without falling off, you have decent balance. If you can do tricks on it, you have good balance... or you're a cat.



And this is Jack Palance, a well balanced actor.

_________________

No compliant I'm just looking for good examples of balance, and a friendly discussion about 'balance'.

Gravemaskin and robbi320 get the idea and have offered over some excellent examples in depth; it's just a friendly discussion / examples so folks can talk about something.

Here I'll add some questions that can be considered.

Do number crunching go in to deciding what is balanced? Isn't kinda hard to compare one thing to another for balance purposes when they aren't the same?

When talking about classes for example what do you think makes them balanced? Do we have it in a hierarchical ladder of what classes should be above or below others or does that not calculate in to balance?

For example Magic classes should be strong than others because magic is considered an all powerful thing or power incarnate.

Or better yet should Clerics or druids be stronger than Mages because they service gods and gods are a big important role in FR and hold a deal of power.

Or would/ should mages / weave user be about the same as clerics and druids to keep them on the same power scale?? How is this calculated or considered? Is it based on average dmg out put ability to heal ones self and other neat things or is it based on estimations or ideals of how 'strong' they are?

As for what Amarice brought up; sure why not? That would be a good topic to discuss in elaborated detail.

My guess is Assassin has a higher Bab than Wizard, Sorc or maybe Bard? I'm not sure I think Bard may have it higher than Assassin. or would you base it off something else?

Imo Wizard Sorc ect get a lot more outta magic ability.

_________________

Sometimes, probably. Others not.


There's no hierarchical ladder afaik. It is based on what role the class fills, and how it does that.


In some cases, yes. In others, no. It depends what you mean by the term "power". Characters that rely on preparing with spells or magic tend to be stronger after, and weaker before. It's part of what makes it balanced. If you fight a more prepared character, be it a mage, a fighter or a rogue with 9000 traps, except to loose. If you catch them unprepared, you can expect to win. (assuming both players are equally skilled)


In some cases they are, in others not. I'd refer you to the lore/source books on that one. Changing this would mean changing a lot about the setting itself and the setting. How spells are divided among classes and how potent they are is as much a part of the setting as the races, regions, religions etc. Some classes have spells that are extremely potent in one area, some have a lot of variety.. Generally sorc,wiz,druid,clerics all have access to very potent spells that work in different ways. Think of it as the weapon choices you have, some are more potent than others for one thing, some are better for another. It all depends on what you want to use it or and how you use it.


Everything factors in. Generally arcane magic users tend to focus on utility and direct damage spells, HOWEVER divine users have this as well.. Their spells, be it damage or utility generally aren't as potent as arcane users, but they generally also have access to stronger summons and can buff themselves up as well without negating their ability to cast spells. (Make a sling focused cleric with zen archery sometime, it gives you potent damage spells and you can buff yourself or a summon/ally up pretty damn well.. and because of how clerics buff their damage, the sling does reliable damage as well, and your AC should be in the high 60's)


BAB is a game mechanic thing and not something set or determined on Amia. As such, it's a mechanic that's already supposed to be balanced but there are some tricks to working around with it. If you build a 3bab/4level progression build right and give them 4 full AB progression class levels pre-epic (1bab/1level), then you will end up with 21 BAB at 30, compared to a pure 1/1 bab build's 25. Some classes have a higher bab progression than others, for balance reasons that exist from the pnp game. More here on how it works in NWN (Though it is exactly the same as in base 3.0 or 3.5 ed pnp). Also changing this would likely require a HAK update, AND would cause major upheaval to class balance as it is now, with no real benefit that merit the work in 99% of cases.


In some ways they do, in others they don't. Go over the spell lists (both of the spells in game, and those from pnp on the classes) and judge for yourself. This isn't something specific to Amia but also fleshed out and determined by the 3.0 and 3.5ed game mechanics, setting and lore. How spells are divided among classes and how potent they are is as much a part of the setting as the races, regions, religions etc. Look at the spell selection for all the classes and you'll see each and every one of them have extremely powerful spells in their selection, that might be powerful in different ways or situations, or effectively do the exact same thing.. As an example: a mage might threaten the life of a person, turn them into their slave trough spells such as domination or other ways or trap/otherwise mess with their soul(something clerics also can do), but a powerful cleric or druid can straight up permanently sever a fellow faithful from their god, with no save. I'll leave it up to you to decide which would be more "powerful".

_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer

I am of the opinion that they should be equally strong at different things. Druids have their companions and summons, wizards have their buffs and damage and control spells, clerics should be a caster/melee character with strong healing abilities. (These are just examples).

The melee classes have a similar balance. I don't know about the dex-builds though.

Generally NWN is horribly balanced. Amia has done a lot of work to fix this, but it's like putting band-aids on a sinking ship.

_________________
I am not weird, I am limited edition

There are many ways to go about balancing stuff and to view balance.. I can think of four for now, but they will vary depending on the game rules and context:


Rock-Paper-Scissor method:

A "good" example of a possible way of balancing would be Rock Paper Scissor. In this, all three options are specialized into doing something really well (beating one of the two others), and fail at doing something else (gets beat by the remaining one!). In this format, all three options are "balanced" against each others - they have a clear weakness, and a clear strength. In nwn, we can see that concept with sneak attack vs undead creatures, for example, as rogues will deal LOTS of damage on living things, and usually fail against undead. On the other hand, clerics and paladins will most definately shine against undead.


The weighting Scale:

This way of balancing is a bit different. The idea is that when weighting two (or more) objects, the scale should not tip one way or another. Everything is given a figurative weight (crit range, crit damage, base dmg, average dmg, etc.), be it a strength or a downside, and hopefully when all are measured against each others, all should have the same "weight". Something that could be seen as a good example of that in Nwn would be, for example, the Greataxe VS the Greatsword (both slashing weapons, both two-handed, can deal 12 dmg base, but greatsword deals more average dmg, as opposed to the axe that can deal much higher dmg at the cost of odds.)


Early Against Late:

This is a concept that applies a little to NWN, but is not exactly core to the system either. This here is the idea that some classes / characters are going to be amazing early on, at the cost of not being as good later on (or vice-versa). This kind of balancing is supposed to be prevalent in games such as Dota, or League of Legend, with some characters able to single-handedly destroy an entire team if they "farm" long enough to reach the point where they get to shine (whether that balance was achieved is very debatable though.... some characters being strong all game long and near unstoppable late..). This kind of balancing is visible on servers where the level cap is much lower than 30. For example, on a server that limits leveling to 5, the feat "Dirty Fighting" is one of the best feats your melee character can have. Also, on such a server, wizards and sorcerers are not as dominating as they are here (not at all, even). An important factor here is "what classifies as early" and "what classifies as late".


Risk VS Reward:

What is the risk of using something versus the effect it will produce if it goes your way or is well executed? This sort of balancing is well represented in games like (again) Dota. Some characters will have abilities that are very hard to execute, but will give you incredible advantages if properly executed. Those abilities are often referred to as "Skill shots" and are often game changers. They can single handedly turn the tide of a game in your favor.. at the risk of being harmful to you and your team (aka, losing you the game) if not well performed. NWN does not have that much of that, but it still does.. to a very minimal extend (knockdown can win you the fight, but does so at the cost of AB, disarm can give you an edge (ha ha ha) but at the cost of receiving an attack of opportunity, power attack can give you dmg, but at the cost of hitting less often, etc.)


In a perfect balance, everything and everyone is able to achieve the exact same result, through different means, as well as everyone else can (or will be in a situation where they will shine equally as how much they will pale in others) OR everyone has their very own specialty that nobody is able to reproduce that will make them valuable.

The thing with D&D (and nwn) is that it has a LOT of variables and things weighting in. More than one way of balancing is involved in the formula here. Moreover, the figurative value given to intangible variables can often be skewed / overvalued / undervalued / hard to keep track of, etc.

I believe it is clear that at the core Dungeons and Dragons wanted to have a more "Rock Paper Scissor" approach to their balancing system. Each class was meant to be good at something, and complementary to each others. The point was so that the classes were going to cooperate together to cover their weaknesses and make use of their strengths to overcome the DM and the dungeon. The fighter was on the front line, taking abuse and dishing some back, while the mage would help with magic to take out groups faster (or to buff teamates), the cleric would heal and support, the rogues would deal with hazards (traps, locks, etc.) and serve as a damage dealer, for as long as they are not the target of enemies' fire. However, the game became more and more complex with each version of the game. Each expansion that came out muddled that semi rock/paper/scissor idea...

... and then came NWN. We are playing an adaptation of a system that was not well balanced (because too complex to be rock paper scissor, and too many variables to keep in check), and some of the things that keep some elements of the game in check are not well represented (or oversimplified) in NWN.


Examining what Mushidoz's been fighting against before:

I have pointed out two things that I really have a gripe with in the past - casters and shields. Now that I've laid out this wall of text, for those interested, here's an analysis of both of those things. I will put them in spoilers since they are not the subject of this thread, and only serve as an exercise / example of how I view things and evaluate them.

_________________
Account Name: Karnak_71
Character Name: Hanamori Saya
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=68657&p=1134526#p1134526

Ultimately, you can't take concepts such as divine favor and apply that to "strength". NwN, Amia and D&D as a whole is based upon mechanics, plain and simple. It's at the guy or gal who's running the table's discretion what flies. Long ago skill dumping became a convention, thusly pulling away from some core class's sexiness and gave rise to some power builds and whatnot. That is simply how it is. A Cleric Shadowdancer with some earthquakes can destroy most of the server in PvP, unless of course you decide to trash it with an extra flavor class, such as taking Wizard for a familiar. People do this kind of thing all the time and complain that they can't keep up. Well. It would suck tabletop too. This isn't indicative of a balance issue, it's indicative of role-playing concepts taking precedence over power, which I support. My voice on balancing is that we are constantly getting little bumps here and there, and we do a fairly good job with it. If you have genuine questions about "balance" than I would be super happy to give you a lesson on AB progression by class, viable skill dumping and stat synergy.

*Not to be offensive, D&D isn't rock, paper, scissor...at all.*

_________________
Jace Fenneril: Cleric of Sharess.

Michael Harcourte: Painter, Scribe.

Sebastian Mayartte: Gambler, MercenaryDeceased