Sacrosanct
Legend
And what is the final final final word? Attaining balance in a game like D&D is impossible because in the context of a game like D&D, balance is subjective.
What I mean by that, is that what is considered good balance varies from person to person, and playstyle to playstyle. Some people want every PC to be mechanically balanced every round of combat. Some want every encounter to be balanced. All the way up to people who actually want large variations from encounter to encounter (niche protection), where if balance happens over the course of a campaign, then it's a balanced game. Think of like in AD&D where magic users were weak until higher levels, then became the more powerful. Over the course of the campaign, it balanced out. Therefore, it's possible to have two preferences that conflict with each other. If you have PCs balanced every round or encounter, it's impossible to also achieve niche protection.
Can we agree on this?
Therefore, it is my final final final ruling that any thread that laments or tries to fix balance in D&D as an objective truth is inherently incorrect. Every one of those threads are only applicable to the person's personal tastes, and thus the game is not necessarily inherently imbalanced by default. The designer's considerations of what the scope was and what the game wanted to achieve should always be taken into account. And as we all know, my opinion matters more than anyone else's
What I mean by that, is that what is considered good balance varies from person to person, and playstyle to playstyle. Some people want every PC to be mechanically balanced every round of combat. Some want every encounter to be balanced. All the way up to people who actually want large variations from encounter to encounter (niche protection), where if balance happens over the course of a campaign, then it's a balanced game. Think of like in AD&D where magic users were weak until higher levels, then became the more powerful. Over the course of the campaign, it balanced out. Therefore, it's possible to have two preferences that conflict with each other. If you have PCs balanced every round or encounter, it's impossible to also achieve niche protection.
Can we agree on this?
Therefore, it is my final final final ruling that any thread that laments or tries to fix balance in D&D as an objective truth is inherently incorrect. Every one of those threads are only applicable to the person's personal tastes, and thus the game is not necessarily inherently imbalanced by default. The designer's considerations of what the scope was and what the game wanted to achieve should always be taken into account. And as we all know, my opinion matters more than anyone else's