Quote from: James McMurrayI can name it: balance.

See my EDIT.

Don't get the reference, blakkie...but the paragraph is sort of amusing.

Quote from: CalithenaDon't get the reference, blakkie...but the paragraph is sort of amusing.

The last name is roughly speaking German for "kid fight".

I got that...I thought maybe Gygax had referenced someone of that name or something like that...or maybe it was an in-joke around here...carry on!

Mentzer knew Balance, as did Moldvay.

They used to mow Balances lawn, and he would take them out to the ballgame once in a while, cause he had a lifetime pass.
Master Sgt. Balance saved the club owners life during D-Day, lost two arms in the process.

That´s why he couldn´t mow his lawn.

See James, Germans do have a sense of humour.

Quote from: SettembriniMentzer knew Balance, as did Moldvay.

They used to mow Balances lawn, and he would take them out to the ballgame once in a while, cause he had a lifetime pass.
Master Sgt. Balance saved the club owners life during D-Day, lost two arms in the process.

That´s why he couldn´t mow his lawn.

:huhsign:

Christ, can somebody just post a definition?

Balance
1. Ensuring that all character types are roughly equivalent in combat.
2. Ensuring that each player has an equal amount of chance to affect the game.
3. Ensuring that each player gets an equal amount of screen time.

You could do all or none of the above. Have we got any others?

Ensuring that certain monsters are appropriate challenges for certain skill levels. You don't really need this one, but if the game gives XP for overcoming challenges (including fighting monsters) then it makes the XP system a lot easier to use.

5. Between different types of actions any single given a character can attempt.
6. Between different choices of character generation and ingame 'purchased' abilities (skills, stats, feats, powers, social contacts, NPC staff, gear, etc.).

Could be more (EDIT: there is, one more just occured to me) and more than one of these reasonably could apply to D&D. But the really important part of it all is why. What choices do you want to confront the players (including the GMs) with? What options do you want to see possible? What types of situations do you want to encourage to occur? What what sort of mood do you want invoked at the table? That's the point of the balancing. If you aren't looking to answer those questions first to determine the criteria for the balancing then the balancing is just pointless busy-work.  Pointless busy-work which can satisfy the itch of some people that are very mathematically orientated but which only by chance will provide a positive effect (and more easily and likely a negative effect) for the people that are attempting to play the game.

IMO.