D&D 5E Balance of Power Problems in 5e: Self created?

[Corwin]

I'm a bit confused by the confusion.

I have no doubt.

If you were suggesting that the players, upon discovering their PCs lack some necessary skill set, should go out and recruit another player, so that the PCs can recruit another PC; or were suggesting that the PCs recruit another PC by eg having one player run 2 PCs, or having one player retire his/her current PC and bring in a new one with the needed expertise; then I don't think these suggestions will be universally popular solutions either.

...at *your* table. At this point I would just caution against trying to speak to the norm. But since you are favoring anecdotal evidence yourself, I can say with certainty that I have seen groups bring in new players all the time. That you don't, IMHO, is the real anomaly.

 

[Corwin]

Fundamentally with the right players and the right DM, you can run any system and have fun.

Many moons ago, back in the late 80's, I moved out-of-state for school. Alone in the world, it didn't take long before I missed gaming with my friends. I eventually stumbled onto a local game store and started talking with the owner. Great guy. We hit it off and he even invited me to attend his ongoing campaign the next evening. Then I found out he was running Tunnels & Trolls. Why did he have to say Tunnels & Trolls?! I couldn't stand that system. But I was desperate to meet fellow gamers and get my fix, so I took him up on his offer anyway. Couldn't have had more fun. Seriously. To this day still one of the most memorable gaming experiences of my life. Taught me that night that it isn't the system that makes the fun. It's the people you are sharing it with. True story.

 

[Tony Vargas]

.
I don't know if taking high-level examples is the best way to test for balance among classes.

It does have a major problem: what if the game is broken at low level?
The best way would be to test at each level.

mean, if we're going to do that, then balance over all levels has to be a consideration, no?

No. If you have balance at each level, you have balance over all levels, trivially. If you don't, at best, you kludge together some fairness contingent upon constraining play to 1- 20 campaigns, only. Though even that would be problematic if there were any way to change characters or revise choices...

 

[hawkeyefan]

It does have a major problem: what if the game is broken at low level?
The best way would be to test at each level.

Sure, that's true. However, I would say that balance at low levels is much easier to achieve because of the relatively limited abilities granted by classes. Magic missile being comparable to a fighter's attack, or a monk's flurry, and so on.

High level play does lend itself more to imbalance because high level spells and abilities tend to be much more potent.

So, high level play is not the best test of overall system balance.

If you don't, at best, you kludge together some fairness contingent upon constraining play to 1- 20 campaigns, only. Though even that would be problematic if there were any way to change characters or revise choices...

I don't know if I agree with this. I don't know if I see the game design assuming you will play from levels 1 to 20 as being constraining. I think the system assumes that's what you will be doing. I think an individual gaming group that decides to end their campaign at level 12 is self constraint, so to speak.

I had in mind the earlier editions of the game where Magic Users were incredibly vulnerable at the earliest levels, especially compared to other classes, but that paid off at higher levels where they gained access to the game's most powerful abilities.

Do you not see a form of balance in that kind of design?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't know if I agree with this. I don't know if I see the game design assuming you will play from levels 1 to 20 as being constraining.

It's only constraining if players might want to play at a different range of levels, like 1-15, which is, for instance, most of the APs, or skipping Apprentice Tier, or whatever. That doesn't sound improbable to me, at all. So, yeah, constraining.

Do you not see a form of balance in that kind of design?

I do not, I see a form of imbalance that is less unfair, the more play tends towards 1-20 campaigns in which changing characters (even in instances of character death) and re-training are disallowed. I doubt there's a lot of folks who play that way...
...though I suppose it could be argued that the original game, with it's imbalances swinging with level so dramatically in that way, was meant to be played something like that (not that I am nor would want to try to argue that!).

 

[hawkeyefan]

It's only constraining if players might want to play at a different range of levels, like 1-15, which is, for instance, most of the APs, or skipping Apprentice Tier, or whatever. That doesn't sound improbable to me, at all. So, yeah, constraining.

Well, there's no need for games to end with an AP, but that's a fair point. Over levels 1 to 15 there is a pretty drastic swing in power level....significant enough to get a decent gauge on whether there is a sense of balance at each level, or if there is one that appears over time.

Just to understand your view a little better.....do you actually feel that 5E is very imbalanced in this way? If so, do you mind giving some specific examples of why? Perhaps I missed it, but what I've seen has mostly been in broad terms.

I do not, I see a form of imbalance that is less unfair, the more play tends towards 1-20 campaigns in which changing characters (even in instances of character death) and re-training are disallowed. I doubt there's a lot of folks who play that way...
...though I suppose it could be argued that the original game, with it's imbalances swinging with level so dramatically in that way, was meant to be played something like that (not that I am nor would want to try to argue that!).

Fair enough. I guess this just demonstrates that balance can be viewed differently by different people. Or that there's more than one form of balance.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Just to understand your view a little better.....do you actually feel that 5E is very imbalanced in this way?

Of course it's imbalanced in that way (also imbalanced a bit in the way 3e was imbalanced, since it does have a lot of player choice, even if subordinated to DM Empowerment in a lot of ways).
'Very' is, of course, relative. 5e's not so imbalanced as 3.5, for instance, it's not so balanced as 4e - I wouldn't say it's exactly between the two, either.
I'd rate 5e more like the classic game, which it consciously emulates, though for different reasons: The early game attempted to design in a lot of balancing factors, but those mostly didn't work well, so the game was imbalance and DMs handled it/players put up with it, as best they could, because it was all new and exciting and the imitators weren't any better. 5e sought to emulate the classic feel and encourage DM Empowerment, it prioritized balance below that (and not only that), so the game is imbalanced, and it's up to the DM what to do about it - fix it up in the model of 4e or non-D&D games that are intentionally balanced, or run it like the classic game and find ways to compensate for and even leverage imbalance.

Fair enough. I guess this just demonstrates that balance can be viewed differently by different people. Or that there's more than one form of balance.

Balance is a real thing, we can quibble over definitions and opinions about how important or even desirable it is, but that doesn't excuse imbalance...

...In the case of D&D, what excuses imbalance is the long-time fans who absolutely demand it be imbalanced. ;P

 

[pemerton]

If you were suggesting that the players, upon discovering their PCs lack some necessary skill set, should go out and recruit another player, so that the PCs can recruit another PC; or were suggesting that the PCs recruit another PC by eg having one player run 2 PCs, or having one player retire his/her current PC and bring in a new one with the needed expertise; then I don't think these suggestions will be universally popular solutions either.

...at *your* table. At this point I would just caution against trying to speak to the norm. But since you are favoring anecdotal evidence yourself, I can say with certainty that I have seen groups bring in new players all the time. That you don't, IMHO, is the real anomaly.

Well, I did use the phrase "not universally popular solution".

But just to be clear - are you suggesting that the best typical solution to the problem of an "imbalanced" or "expertise-gap" build of PCs by the players is to recruit another player? Perhaps on condition the player play a PC of a certain class (eg burglar)?

 

[pemerton]

High level play does lend itself more to imbalance because high level spells and abilities tend to be much more potent.

I think this is true only as a feature of a certain sort of D&D design. (Where high level casters have spell abilities framed in a certain way). It's not true of high-level classic D&D fighter-types, whose abilities generally are no different form their low level ones, except with bigger numbers.

It won't generally be true of a sytem that uses rated descriptors, either - eg if high level fighters had Commander of the Realm X and high level wizards had Magical Sage X, where X was the same number that plugged into a common resolution system, there would be no particular degree of imbalance in the game, even though the ablities themselves were much broader than low-level ones.

 

[Corwin]

Well, I did use the phrase "not universally popular solution".

Good luck finding that unicorn.

But just to be clear - are you suggesting that the best typical solution to the problem of an "imbalanced" or "expertise-gap" build of PCs by the players is to recruit another player? Perhaps on condition the player play a PC of a certain class (eg burglar)?

Let me answer with a question of my own: Just to be clear - are you suggesting that there is ever something that can be even remotely identified as a "universally popular solution" to typical problems found at RPG tables?