Power vs Balance, which do you prefer...

[R Arceneaux]

First definitions....

Power Play...Power Play is the concept and principle of selecting the most powerful dominating character/personna/etc at the start of the game and spending all available resources to build that character into a dominating character based on one or a few outstanding traits or abilities.

For example in Bab 5 power play would dumping all skill options into a telepath to design the most powerful telepath from the start of the game and then work your way higher from that point.

LOL in D & D Terms making a largish barbarian, making him strong as all Jell and dumb as a post. Not meaning to imply that telepaths are dumb of course.



OR Bananced Player

Balance player is a player that is as the name implies is a player that is balanced in a large number or aspects focusing on no particular skill or talent. A Balance player has a broad number of skills usually low in bonus. BUT that diversity also means they are more than likely than not always have some ranks in a required skill.

The Power Player lives long because he can either dominate or beat the heck out of the other guy. The Balanced player lives long by outthinking and being smarter than the other guy.

Other than survival, the two philosophies are diametricly opposed. Both work (allegedly).

So which would you perfer for your characters where the goal is to live a long and prosperous life?

 

[Gabriel_Luna]

Personally speaking, neither. I decide on what personality and goals I have, and build the character accordingly. Role playing is paramount for me, so I don't bother to plan a power PC or balanced PC in advance, I just put the points where they will compliment my character concept, and nevermind whether it's the most powerful build or not.

 

[Vortex]

I'm right with Gabriel_Luna on this one.

That said, I still consider balance vs power when making characters. I tend to play with a small number of characters (3 or 4) so we can't all overspecialise because we'll end up lacking crucial skills in the group. On the other hand, character that are all average often end up with pretty much the same abilities. Yes, role play is more important than that but it's still fun to feel useful. So I guess my choice would be somewhere in between: characters with one or two areas of "specialisation" but keeping some abilities diversified to be sure to always have something appropriate.

A super cranked up soldier may be able to kill everyone in a fight but making him slightly less of a killing machine and giving him something like a little command, medical or technical ability will make him more interesting when fighting is not an option while remaining special because he still is much better than other characters in combat.

 

[Gabriel_Luna]

A good point and I think I'll clarify what I meant there: character concepts often include an idea of what the character is good at, so there are some skills or feats that make the most sense. In that spirit, I guess I'd tend toward a focused character, but focused on concept, not on raw rolling power. So yeah, a good point, and I try to make them useful, but not solely for the purpose of being "best" at certain things.

 

[Polaris]

Everyone,

I agree with Gabriel_Luna that you should build your character to your character conception. That said, most people tend to specialize, and the OGL/d20 system greatly encourages specialization over generalization. Thus to answer the orginal question, I think it's better in a four person party (for example), for each character to be exceptional at a certain class of things (telepathy for example), with a small degree of overlap in case things go wrong. No one can do everything, and so IMX four people can do more better if they somewhat specialize than if they don't (and get in each other's way).

-Polaris

 

[R Arceneaux]

Re V...

I reply to your statement...

"A super cranked up soldier may be able to kill everyone in a fight but making him slightly less of a killing machine "

I am kind of confused here, that is to say I dont know what exactly it is you are attempting to state...

If a cranked up soldier, as you called it, can kill everyone could you site an example or two of being able to kill everyone and how such an ability would make them less a killing maching--given of course that it is the job of a soldier/common grunt to kill not lead/command. Could not someone else assume the mantle of leadership?

Please clarify your thoughts on this.

 

[Vortex]

What I mean is simply this: Yes blasting people in combat is the soldier's main role and he can be made especially good at it. But if you do that, chances are he'll be pretty much good for nothing in a situation where fighting won't help.

Yes, another player could assume command (or be the medic or whatever) and it would work. However, it would be quite boring for the soldier who has absolutely nothing to contribute and that's the problem.

All I'm saying is you must avoid having a character who is useful in only a very limited number of situations. If your character is specialized by nature, find one or two things everyone in the party is bad at and learn just a little of it. Your character may then turn out to be surprisingly useful in cases others wouldn't expect.

The soldier is just an example. It can be true of any class:
-A very specialized telepath in a situation involving no other living beings like being stuck on a deserted planet or derelict spaceship (just a few ranks in technical, knowledge or athletics could make him useful)
-A very specialized diplomat in the middle of a ground based shooting war (just a few ranks in stealth, intrigue[for disguise] or drive could make him useful)

And so on…

 

[Polaris]

Vortex,

I would counter by saying that somewhat specialized party members help the GM divvy up "spotlight" time. If you have multiple characters that can do the same thing, then they are directly competing for the same spotlight time in the game and IMX and IMHO that's not a good thing.

That point should be considered in addition to the simple fact that specializing characters over a four character party actually leads to a stronger and more generalized party than a four character party composed of four generalists.

-Polaris

 

[Mick]

I aim at 70% in the character specialled and other 30% in skills and area to help cover for the other characters. (Basically good in one area, and 2nd or 3rd rate in a number of areas)

 

[R Arceneaux]

Re Vortex....

No problem here at all. Everyone kows that every space ship has a beacon and that all the escape pods have portable beacons on them. Now you might want to make him find the battery or something such as that. There is probably even instructions printed on the side of the beacon with an arrow pointing to a big red button "Press This".

Its a simple matter to have at some point an old grizzled space prospector type of NPC in a ship fallin appart to hear the beacon and come snoopin around.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


So far not to bad guys, keep it up.

 

[Giavonn]

I aim at 70% in the character specialled and other 30% in skills and area to help cover for the other characters. (Basically good in one area, and 2nd or 3rd rate in a number of areas)

I've tended to make sure I'm good at my role, and also to allot some assets into finding party holes and plugging them. My namesake's fellow party members (Hi, Polaris!), for example, all have great skills for running a small ship. He, far less so. On the other hand, he managed to wrangle the ship out of some very tight spots with no damage, and got handed the captaincy-- which works. He ended up doing some things with his level advancement in order to be a more effective captain, because that plugged the hole and because, in normal space ops, telepathy doesn't do a whole lot to an enemy vessel. He's certainly no combat monster, but if it's time to throw down, he'll be on the front lines, because that's where he's needed. His main weapon is likely to be Daze(tm), but ya gotta plug them holes wherever they pop up.

Even if it means Aiding Another ignobly for a moment to get the job done.

So for me, it's Balance, but the Balance I mean is between (a) being a Star and (b) helping the Party meet its goals. For me, that meant spending that L6 feat on Veteran Commander, so that our Officer didn't have to leave the gunnery console where he was far more effective just to get us our 3 orders a turn.

 

[Polaris]

Giavonn,

Hello! I thought I recognized your handle. To everyone else, Giavonn is selling himself a bit short since he is one of two characters in the party that can give three orders per turn in spaceship combat.

Nevertheless, Javon (his character in the B5 group I am with) is an excellent example of what I am talking about. While it's true his shipboard skills may be less than the others, his other abilities (esp Telepathy and Social ones) make him invaluable to the team. In short, Javon makes an excellent party face. Jake (my character) would rather tinker with that new artifact we found.....

-Polaris