An age old game balance question - overpowered vs. 'gimped' PCs, and the goldilocks zone (Spoilers!)
Lemernis
Member, Moderator Posts: 4,318
Let me preface this discussion by saying that, imvho, there is no "right" or "wrong" playstyle for this game regarding "powergaming" versus "roleplaying." It's each individual's game to enjoy as he or she sees fit. Some folks feel a need to "roleplay" more than others. And some peeps appreciate the game more squarely from a mechanics standpoint, and are not terribly interested in trying to imagine this or that when engaging with a game engine. One approach isn't "better" or more "valid" than the other.
But that said, I'm curious as to what you all think or feel about arriving at some sort of ideal game balance... with respect to the Player-Character's ability scores.
Do you think it harms game balance to have an astonishingly powerful PC? (We don't need to spoil newbies, but suffice it to say there's a good reason why the PC would or should be uber powerful.) Especially if this involves some heavy min-maxing, such that ability scores that aren't crucial to the class are waaaay low?
And if so, do you ever "roleplay" the character according to low stats? Eg, a Wisdom 5 character actually shows incredibly bad judgment all the time? My guess is that most min-maxers aren't likely to do that, but just curious if anyone does...
Or do you feel that having, say, just a couple maximum ability scores... and maybe one or two 'high normal'... with the rest average (perhaps even low average)... actually produces a better game balance in terms of difficulty overall? This isn't necessarily 'gimped', but not every vital stat is maxed. This is a somewhat more in line with the rest of the population in the gameworld.
Do you seek some sort of ideal balance in your PC's stats for the best possible balance of difficulty? Or just create a balls out, sheerly devastating character purely for pleasure of it? (Even if that means he or she has massive deficits that don't show up meaningfully in the game. Eg, an IQ of 40.)
And remember, "it's your world,"
But that said, I'm curious as to what you all think or feel about arriving at some sort of ideal game balance... with respect to the Player-Character's ability scores.
Do you think it harms game balance to have an astonishingly powerful PC? (We don't need to spoil newbies, but suffice it to say there's a good reason why the PC would or should be uber powerful.) Especially if this involves some heavy min-maxing, such that ability scores that aren't crucial to the class are waaaay low?
And if so, do you ever "roleplay" the character according to low stats? Eg, a Wisdom 5 character actually shows incredibly bad judgment all the time? My guess is that most min-maxers aren't likely to do that, but just curious if anyone does...
Or do you feel that having, say, just a couple maximum ability scores... and maybe one or two 'high normal'... with the rest average (perhaps even low average)... actually produces a better game balance in terms of difficulty overall? This isn't necessarily 'gimped', but not every vital stat is maxed. This is a somewhat more in line with the rest of the population in the gameworld.
Do you seek some sort of ideal balance in your PC's stats for the best possible balance of difficulty? Or just create a balls out, sheerly devastating character purely for pleasure of it? (Even if that means he or she has massive deficits that don't show up meaningfully in the game. Eg, an IQ of 40.)
And remember, "it's your world,"
Post edited by Lemernis on
3
Comments
I don't want to play a sorcerer who feels much weaker then some party members, that's not how I imagine him and that is why I'm going my to play him a few times to collect enough tomes to make him have the power he is meant to have! Yeah spent rolling for 3 hours aswell..
But when I play a neutral or good non-mage character then the stats and all that aren't as importand. I guess it's just how I rollplay.
I do not think BG(2) has any, or should have any, balance in the first place. So having good stats on your character cannot destroy that which is not there. Magic is powerful against most things. Most things are powerful against non-armoured casters. A full party of adventurers is powerful against lesser-equipped monsters and bosses. The end boss and all his goons, assuming I remember correctly, is powerful against the protagonist and their party. And you know... that's fine. Stuff can kill you, you can kill stuff. Sometimes the odds are skewed in the favour of one side, but that's how the world(s) work! Life isn't fair, why should death be.
I haven't actually played a character with low stats. Baldur's Gate is hard, imo, especially since I play a caster, so I try to play with a certain minimum; no stats below 10 and ideally the primary stat as well as 2 others (doesn't have to be the physical ones actually) maxed. With my strength of 12 I do try smashing enemies from the back line with my quarterstaff though! The watchers in Candlekeep did teach me a thing or two after all!
Rolling for hours on end isn't my thing. So I'll settle for just a couple maxed stats with the rest being average (10) if I don't get a good roll in a few minutes... depends how patient I'm feeling. I don't want the "increased" difficulty of having low stats, but I don't need it to become much easier by having high ones either.
End of the day people should play this game the way they like, but the game should not be nerfed based on what only some people like. There's mods for that, keep it there.
So I rarely settle for low stats
And when I do use a dump stat, it tends to be wisdom. If I go under 8 wisdom I just consider my character to have ADHD
And of course, BG2 can be beaten with 161,000 xp characters. Solo for certain classes, or with a 161,000 party if you really want too as any class. Which merely reenforces that gear and tactics are WAY more important then your level is.
If I'm playing an evil character, I'll often make what are probably tactically inferior choices, but consistent with the screw-you approach of his personality.
On subsequent playthroughs, I go for efficiency. Super-high stats (though I can never bring myself to keep hitting reroll for more than 10 minutes max). I also meta-game in the sense that I know where all the choice loot is and beeline for it as soon as I'm able. I'll do smaller party or solo runs, etc.
But yeah I was rather underawed with NWN2 maybe it was the rough interface/controls or rail ride story... so I never did buy the expansions to it and stopped playing it after I won it...
I dont reroll for hours but I do always max critical stats for whatever class i am playing and im comfortable with 10+ in the other stats. For example my current swashbuckler has 19dex. Wiz will always have 18int 18 wis. If I ever play a fighter I always ensure 18str/18dex/15+con But I wont reroll for hours to get 18/00 str.
Even if I play a half orc barbarian or whatever I do have a weird hangup where I wont play a character with below 10int/wis, I feel if you spend your entire childhood in a library you have to at least be literate :P And there are few dialogue options that go "uhn hurr derr me smash"
As somebody else in this thread mentioned there is so much uber equipment that puts your stats through the stratosphere it really doesn't matter much if you roll with average stats, you will eventually become fairly overpowered unless you choose not to use all the awesome items in this game.
Sorcerers are probably the class that benefits least from stats. They have no prime stat, Int is useless to them. You could roll a 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10 Sorcerer and play through with little more trouble than with straight 18s. This is sort of due to the way they were implemented, being as they're a 3E class and never really existed in 2nd edition.
The classes that need ridiculous rolls are often the most "overpowered", with Fighter-to-druid dual classes needing utterly crazy stats but being killing machines once they get their fighter levels back. That said, Paladins are not much more powerful than fighters but their high minimums for wisdom and charisma mean they demand a high roll to function well.
PnP 2nd Ed was an age of fear. It was glorious.
Very true. Game balance back then had not been influenced by MMOs. You just could not do certain things with certain characters, but that was fine because you always had a group to fill in the gaps. It ultimately comes much more down to a balanced party than a balanced character.
Personally, I think the game is easy enough (and this version is even easier, with greatly reduced monster spawns) that not maxing out ability scores or taking advantage of easter eggs is essential to keeping the challenge level meaningful for an experienced player. I also find that letting the dice dictate my character means I will play a wider variety of characters and explore more of the game than if I just kept creating the same handful of standard characters. Taking the first roll of the dice as-is (no re-rolling or redistributing points) produces more interesting results than coming up with your stats ahead of time.
Personally, I find that if you are a Bhaalspawn then your stats are probably above average, and you may have a couple of 18s floating around. I am of two minds about this though. For a game like BG, I generally shoot for high stats to be heroic, in actual roleplaying I make do with whatever crappy roll the dice gave me (I love point buy systems, btw, since dice hate me with mediocrity at best) and I manage to find some way to get the character I wanted even if they are a bit average. As I have mentioned elsewhere, I dislike roleplaying dumb characters so I strive to go no lower than 10 with Int, Wis or Cha (once in a while I will RP an uncharismatic character for a game or even an unwise one, but I hate low Int).
I certainly approve of whomever painted all these happy things!
Some playthroughs, I roleplay more than others. There are times, for example, when I have been conscious of my fighter's low int and wis and tried to react according in dialogues. Other times I simply won't bother.
I instantly replied, "Average characters!"
I very often find myself hitting ctrl-8 because one way or the other I want a certain set of stats. With that said however, I don't typically do all 18's or eve 18's in every important stat. My stat allocations are typically based on my vision for the character.
Examples:
My half-elf sorcerer was "ctrl-8'd" and I started him with Str:12 Dex: 16 Con: 15 Int: 15 Wis: 15 Cha: 16
Yes there was metagaming involved in the planning. I wanted to end up with certain stats by the end of the series via the various stat increases you could get (tomes in bg1, trials in bg2, machine of lum in watcher's keep, deck of many things, etc). I could have just 18'd all the way but I didn't. And with enough time spent rolling I could make such a character legit. The ctrl-8 just saves me time
My human dual-class warrior to thief was legit rolled to have Str:17 Dex: 17 Con: 18 Int: 12 Wis: 10 Cha: 14
Again I planned him to take advantage of tome's and such but still wanted him to have some stats for the vision I had for him (higher than minimum int and cha)
Ultimately I need to feel happy with the character to enjoy playing it. Therefore I will do what I need to do to be happy with the character. I think everyone should play in whatever way is most enjoyable for them.
STR: 15
DEX: 17
CON: 15
INT: 13
WIS: 9
CHA: 17
So, powerful but not ridiculous. A Blade certainly could make use of eighteens in Strength and Intelligence, but she doesn't need them.
Second, as had been pointed out there is more to life than stats. You can be a level 20 fighter, but unless you have a sword +1, you're never going to be able to hurt those golems. So progressing through the land and gathering the right items is just as important.
L.
In 2nd Ed (PnP at least), character power in a rule based game corresponds to advantages in die rolls. Any little bonus is a big deal. Very high stats give just that. In late game, character power relies mostly on high level spells and magic items.
Games that were based more in roleplaying and less in rules worked a little differently. Character "power" had more to do with his ability to make good choices and, failing that, deal with the consequences. A clever character could get away with things that higher level characters wouldn't well survive.
However, I'm not good at personifying my PC well at all. They are just a guy. I can't role-play personality into them, I just can't. I can't role-play a single player game, and I have no idea how anyone does.
I go for powerful stats for sure then, but I try not to drop anything super low if at all possible. I believe that dump stat-ing things to ludicrously low levels is pretty darn lame. The lowest I ever go is 8, and I prefer to keep them at 10, that being average and all.
First, there's the obvious "Playing a min-maxed character".
That makes the character powerful, not overpowered.
I dislike things beeing overpowered, because, honestly, a game where there's absolutely no challenge isn't that fun to begin with. So I'm quite fine with some fine tuning of obvious imbalances that make some abilities way, way too strong.
Now, it's impossible to have a perfect balance, especially with the 2nd edition ruleset, so there need to be a clear line draw between "Powerful" and "Overpowered".
Powerful makes the game easier.
Overpowered makes the game a cakewalk. Algernon's cloak, Carsomyr or the robe of vecna are some of the items that somehow turn the game to this state to me, that's why I like the rebalancing made by SCSII in this regard.
Carsomyr is an ok weapon (would be better if Holy Swords were implemented properly, just saying), but not great (FoA and CF (if you have better luck then I) are FAR more powerful (and the resistance stacking is an engine exploit rather then proper mechanics), hell there's a bunch of weapons that are stronger at the end of the day. And the robe of V is only OP if you're epic level (you know, that point where Mages are physical gods regardless even if they're buck naked).....it doesn't give you any extra spells per day, nor does it allow you to break the 1 cast per round. The only reason it might be construed as OP is not having rest limits in place, but that makes ALL magic overpowered by removing one of the major checks it should have.