Re: Re: Magical Augments - A little extreme?

From: David Cake <dave_at_...>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 03:03:59 +0800

At 5:37 PM +0100 10/4/02, Benedict Adamson scribbled:
>David Cake wrote:
>> Hero Wars game balance is among the simples to maintain of
>> any game - make abilities of roughly equal value, and the game is
>> balanced. Its that simple. Affinities and such have a high value
>> because they are more useful, so people will tend to put more points
>> into them - the end effect is to maintain affinities at roughly equal
>> to other abilities.
>> This multiple augments thing throws that for an utter loop.
>> Its a distortion in the wrong way.
>It does not.

> In fact, the affinities are arguably too expensive, not
>too cheap, if used only for augmenting (unfortunately the case for
>many of the Combat affinities, especially the Humakt ones).

        It unbalances the relative abilities of two characters based on one of the least interesting variables in a contest.

        I agree that affinities are arguably too expensive (and don't get me started on Grimoires), but its not what is at issue. Its not whether this is the best way to become a superpowerful character - thats trivial in HW, become unbalanced and put all your points into one thing. What is it issue is that the relative efficiencies of characters, and the relative strengths in a confrontation, no longer hang together. An extra round of prep becomes more important than a big advantage in points - and how exactly does that make the game any better? Some players effectively get more bang for the buck when they spend HP, which just messes around with the basic game balance to no particular end.

> As my
>analysis showed, the cost of increasing the affinities of the Humakti
>in question was about five times the cost of increasing his/her Close
>Combat. A more power gaming cost effective method of being a combat
>monster would have been to have spent those points on Close Combat.

        Absolutely - but this isn't the problem in this case. The problem is that if you do set up your campaign to be properly balanced, it all falls apart based on a relatively uninteresting variable. When you want your characters to face a challenging opponent, you may find them to be way outclassed based on a round of two of surprise. If two characters duel, it may all come down to one more HP spent on augmentation feats.

>> Put it this way - when heroes clash, do you really think the
>> contest should be determined by which one gets an extra round of
>> augmentation?
>Why not, if its done in an interesting way?

        If the clash always comes down to which one gets an extra round (and a +10 is certainly enough to determine contest outcome), its going to be real hard to make that interesting after, say, the third or fourth time.


Powered by hypermail