From: mfterman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Mutant for Hire)
Subject: Point Balance
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 06:20:12 GMT

I'm going straight to advocacy, since this seems to be more akin to a
religious issues rather than an informative one. The basic argument is
in the cost of various statistics and skills and the goal of point
balance, where one can have a compensatory weakness in one area
balanced by a corresponding strength elsewhere.

GURPS and HERO seem to take slightly different stances. In HERO, skill
costs seem to be proportional to their use in the genre, that is,
science skills are cheap despite the time in takes in real life to
master them, while GURPS ranks some sciences as very hard to learn and
charges their cost appropriately.

My opinion is that point balance is a mythical creature anyway. If one
character is more powerful than another, it shouldn't make any
difference in how well they are roleplayed, which is what the goal
really should be anyway. Especially if the GM awards experience, the
weaker character who is a colorful and complex entity may in fact earn
more points than Captain Squarehead, a strong tough hero with the
personality of a deck chair.

Also, if two characters are equal in point value, does this mean that
they are equal in utility? Depends on the campaign system. If one is
going for a very specific genre, then that might be possible, but for
a generic roleplaying system, you're probably better off trying to go
for a more realistic cost system based on the time it takes to learn
and master a skill. (in the case of magic this has to be taken
somewhat with a grain of salt) It especially helps in making skill
advancement more real.

Of course, with stats one has to assign some cost system for
purchasing agility, health, strength and so on. One idea is to assign
the cost of a stat inversely proportional to the commoness of its
appearance in the real world, which is roughly the GURPS idea. Makes
it hard to have a character extremely good in all areas. Or you can go
for genre utility like the HERO system. Depends on what one values.

My position on all of this? Beats me, the realism idea works well if
one is emphacizing a realistic world. The ultility system works nicely
enough if you are working within a genre for which the balancing has
been designed. Essentially the realism/rarity cost system enforces a
specific genre.

Or you can just give a character concept to the GM and let hir work
out the point balance as sie likes, allocating points according to the
amount of work that has been placed in defining the character outside
the stats and skills.

Having the stats, skills and whatever powers secret is an interesting
idea for a campaign. ("I shoot a fireball at the door, full power"
"You just vaporized the front wall" "guess I don't know my own
strength") I mean, your character may think they are charismatic, but
is this really the case? Or a character could be underestimating
skills and abilities. Then you don't have to worry about point balance
at all. :)

All sorts of interesting ideas.....

-- 
    Martin Terman, Mutant for Hire, Mean Ol' Top, Priest of Shub-Internet
    Disclaimer: Nobody else takes me seriously, why should you be the first?
mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu mfterman@pucc.bitnet terman@pupgga.princeton.edu
"Sig quotes are like bumper stickers, only without the same sense of relevance"