Master of all trades, but jack of none?
Posted: 13 Jul 2020 09:15
Rules in Genesis have a tendency to appear set in stone; “It’s always been the rule, so.. can’t do nothing about it!” is the jist of how it feels sometimes. This applies to many subjects and categories like limitations to hit/pen on weapons in regards to how many hands are used to manipulate it, how much experience can be focused on a single stat and probably many more that I fail to conjure up from memory right now.
These rules are at best arbitrary, because they’re not results of causality, but merely decided upon, by someone, at some point in time. Rules that are decided differ from the former in the way that they can be changed. Yes, we/you/someone can just decide on a new set of rules for any given circumstance.
Which leads me to the topic I wish to shine a light on; Guild balance – the disharmony between specialized and versatile guilds.
Now take a guild like the two Dragonarmies. Highly specialized in how to inflict a maximum amount of damage, leaving little to nothing to defensives. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! It’s good at one thing, bad at another. Logically, it makes complete sense.
Now take a guild like the Neidar Clan. Highly specialized in how to basically turn into combatant rocks, absorbing hit after hit, leaving little to nothing to offensives. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! It’s good at one thing, bad at another. All good with the logic here as well.
Moving on to the Army of Angmar, not highly specialized in either offensives nor defensives. It’s pretty good at both, but not as good offensively as the dragonarmies and not as good defensively as the neidar clan. A true ‘Jack of all trades’. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! Logic checks out.
Calians are exceedingly good offensively and the more calians in a team, the better they become defensively too. Their drawback is that they excel at nothing alone and need at least one team mate to even matter. We know this, accept it and it’s fine. Logic kinda checks out.
Then along come the magic guilds who completely break with this pattern. They can choose to deliver the same, and sometimes (much?) more, damage than the dragonarmies one day, and absorb hits better than the neidar clan the other. In rare cases both simultaneously! Additionally, they can boost their teams, teleport them in some cases, debuff enemies, send messages and items through the air, summon beasts of burden to carry their spoils and the list goes on.
This isn’t even unique to the magic users, newer melee guilds also show this tendency of “switching between modes” and be on par with the specialists in either direction. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see something is awry.
There are systems in place that are supposed to keep things in check, and in a way they do. In most cases both magic guilds and new melee guilds are restrained by their “combat aid” in either mode. Anything else would be unbalanced. But that’s also the very core of the problem; the fact that they have the ability to switch around as they see fit. Now the creators of the guilds and even the Arch of Balance will say something like “Yes, but they pay a higher tax for that versatility”, and logically this makes sense too.
Reality, though, is a little different. The amount of tax you pay don’t defeat mobs or win duels. The amount of tax you pay don’t exclude or include you in a team or decide whether you live or die in battle. The amount of tax you pay hardly impacts your growth, as you just make up the increased tax with higher income (killing speed).
We pick our guilds/classes for various reasons, and in most games the options presented at character creation all come with pros and cons. If you pick versatility as a pro, the con is that those specialized in either direction does their thing better than you. Logically, it follows that a guild that can switch between one mode or the other in a heartbeat should never be as good as one that is ‘locked’ to one specialization, no?
Do we simply accept that versatile guilds in Genesis are specialists in several/all fields and turn a blind eye? Or should there be more drawbacks to versatility than an unknown, but elevated, percentage of tax that has no real impact on a day to day basis?
There are rules concerning combat aid and taxation; the amount of abilities are governed by taxation, and the abilities utilized at any given point are governed by a set amount of combat aid.
Is it time to re-write the rules, or even write new rules, regarding how versatility is - in lack of a better word - penalized?
What I dislike about any discourse is the pointing at a problem, screaming about its’ existence and throwing criticism left and right at whoever looks the most responsible for it, without even attempting to suggest a remedy, so here’s mine:
Replace taxation as grounds for versatility itself with a relative subtraction of total available combat aid. Basically, the more versatile you are, the relatively worse you are at whatever it is you’re attempting, defined by a reduction of combat aid available. The more ‘modes’, the less total combat aid available at any given time.
The manipulation of a system/min-maxing within a set of rules must come to an end. While clever design is admirable in isolation, it doesn't always result in good overall game design. You can’t be a master of all trades and jack of none while simultaneously calling it balanced!
Nils’ player.
These rules are at best arbitrary, because they’re not results of causality, but merely decided upon, by someone, at some point in time. Rules that are decided differ from the former in the way that they can be changed. Yes, we/you/someone can just decide on a new set of rules for any given circumstance.
Which leads me to the topic I wish to shine a light on; Guild balance – the disharmony between specialized and versatile guilds.
Now take a guild like the two Dragonarmies. Highly specialized in how to inflict a maximum amount of damage, leaving little to nothing to defensives. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! It’s good at one thing, bad at another. Logically, it makes complete sense.
Now take a guild like the Neidar Clan. Highly specialized in how to basically turn into combatant rocks, absorbing hit after hit, leaving little to nothing to offensives. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! It’s good at one thing, bad at another. All good with the logic here as well.
Moving on to the Army of Angmar, not highly specialized in either offensives nor defensives. It’s pretty good at both, but not as good offensively as the dragonarmies and not as good defensively as the neidar clan. A true ‘Jack of all trades’. We all know this, and we all accept this. It’s fine! Logic checks out.
Calians are exceedingly good offensively and the more calians in a team, the better they become defensively too. Their drawback is that they excel at nothing alone and need at least one team mate to even matter. We know this, accept it and it’s fine. Logic kinda checks out.
Then along come the magic guilds who completely break with this pattern. They can choose to deliver the same, and sometimes (much?) more, damage than the dragonarmies one day, and absorb hits better than the neidar clan the other. In rare cases both simultaneously! Additionally, they can boost their teams, teleport them in some cases, debuff enemies, send messages and items through the air, summon beasts of burden to carry their spoils and the list goes on.
This isn’t even unique to the magic users, newer melee guilds also show this tendency of “switching between modes” and be on par with the specialists in either direction. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see something is awry.
There are systems in place that are supposed to keep things in check, and in a way they do. In most cases both magic guilds and new melee guilds are restrained by their “combat aid” in either mode. Anything else would be unbalanced. But that’s also the very core of the problem; the fact that they have the ability to switch around as they see fit. Now the creators of the guilds and even the Arch of Balance will say something like “Yes, but they pay a higher tax for that versatility”, and logically this makes sense too.
Reality, though, is a little different. The amount of tax you pay don’t defeat mobs or win duels. The amount of tax you pay don’t exclude or include you in a team or decide whether you live or die in battle. The amount of tax you pay hardly impacts your growth, as you just make up the increased tax with higher income (killing speed).
We pick our guilds/classes for various reasons, and in most games the options presented at character creation all come with pros and cons. If you pick versatility as a pro, the con is that those specialized in either direction does their thing better than you. Logically, it follows that a guild that can switch between one mode or the other in a heartbeat should never be as good as one that is ‘locked’ to one specialization, no?
Do we simply accept that versatile guilds in Genesis are specialists in several/all fields and turn a blind eye? Or should there be more drawbacks to versatility than an unknown, but elevated, percentage of tax that has no real impact on a day to day basis?
There are rules concerning combat aid and taxation; the amount of abilities are governed by taxation, and the abilities utilized at any given point are governed by a set amount of combat aid.
Is it time to re-write the rules, or even write new rules, regarding how versatility is - in lack of a better word - penalized?
What I dislike about any discourse is the pointing at a problem, screaming about its’ existence and throwing criticism left and right at whoever looks the most responsible for it, without even attempting to suggest a remedy, so here’s mine:
Replace taxation as grounds for versatility itself with a relative subtraction of total available combat aid. Basically, the more versatile you are, the relatively worse you are at whatever it is you’re attempting, defined by a reduction of combat aid available. The more ‘modes’, the less total combat aid available at any given time.
The manipulation of a system/min-maxing within a set of rules must come to an end. While clever design is admirable in isolation, it doesn't always result in good overall game design. You can’t be a master of all trades and jack of none while simultaneously calling it balanced!
Nils’ player.