Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5985044" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>Who is saying that PCs can't have weaknesses? If you've got 4e in mind, PCs have weaknesses. The fighter is weak at ranged combat and socially. But probably fit. The wizard is weak in melee and mediocre socially. But probably learned. The ranger is strong at either melee or ranged, but typically not both, and is weak socially. But probably strong in exploration.</p><p></p><p>If by "weaknesses" you mean "inability to effectively/meaningfully contribute", that's a different matter. D&D has some distinctive features - its very strong emphasis on party play, and its typical stakes being "win or die" - that I think make an inability to meaningfully contribute tricky for any major field of activity. And because D&D has always, mechanically, prioritised combat as a site of conflict resolution, non-combat PCs will tend to "break the system". Of course, if you play the game ignoring the bulk of the action resolution mechanics, then a non-combat PC might be viable (and 4e offers a novel, metagaming take on the non-combat PC via the "princess warlord" build).</p><p></p><p>But personally, if I wanted to run a game which wasn't focused on combat as a primary site of combat resolution, I wouldn't run D&D. I'd look for a game which doesn't place so much emphasis on combat in PC build and action resolution.</p><p></p><p>Mechanical effectiveness can extend beyond combat, though. Assuming there are non-combat action resolution mechanics.</p><p></p><p>I agree with this. "Balancing across pillars" requires, at a minimum, that each of the pillars be meaningfully present in the default mode of play. To date, what they have said about this (in L&L, in the playtest documents) has been a bit disappointing.</p><p></p><p>Given that 4e is expressly designed so that PCs have quite different damage outputs, I don't think this is true: the fighter in my 4e game does 1d8+13 on an at-will hit; the sorcerer's at-will burst 2 does 1d4+27, or nearly twice the damage against mltiple targets. The difference is that the fighter exercises a huge amount of battlefield control, whereas the sorcerer has comparatively little.</p><p></p><p>More generally, who upthread from the "4e/balance" camp has defined balance in terms of combat effectiveness? People talk about mechanical effectiveness; why assume that that is limited to combat? The invoker in my 4e game has two skill training feats, Linguist and Arcane Familiar to get a Book Imp: none of those are combat abilities. They're about making the PC the preeminent scholar in the party, and probably in the gameworld also.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think HeroWars/Quest is vulnerable to abuse, or being broken by hordes. RuneQuest and Traveller are both fairly resilient, also.</p><p></p><p>Part of the issue is how far you have to drift the game to break it. One of the issues with 3E is that some players break the game without trying, just because they try out the stuff that a druid, wizard or cleric can do, under the (as it turns out, mistaken) apprehension that they're playing the class as written. Heck, in the second session of 3E that I ever GMed we discovered that Summon Monster was broken - with a 3rd level spell the PC could either summon a Thoqqua, or summon a Triton that could then use its own Summon Nature's Ally to summon a Thoqqua. And that wasn't even trying - that was just a player looking at his PC's spell list and the corresponding monster stats.</p><p></p><p>At a minimum, if the game is going to break that easily I want (i) the designers to tell me where the break points are, and (ii) to show me where they think the viable game can be played without hitting those points. Burning Wheel does a pretty good job of this, so it's not like WotC have to come up with the idea all on their own.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5985044, member: 42582"] Who is saying that PCs can't have weaknesses? If you've got 4e in mind, PCs have weaknesses. The fighter is weak at ranged combat and socially. But probably fit. The wizard is weak in melee and mediocre socially. But probably learned. The ranger is strong at either melee or ranged, but typically not both, and is weak socially. But probably strong in exploration. If by "weaknesses" you mean "inability to effectively/meaningfully contribute", that's a different matter. D&D has some distinctive features - its very strong emphasis on party play, and its typical stakes being "win or die" - that I think make an inability to meaningfully contribute tricky for any major field of activity. And because D&D has always, mechanically, prioritised combat as a site of conflict resolution, non-combat PCs will tend to "break the system". Of course, if you play the game ignoring the bulk of the action resolution mechanics, then a non-combat PC might be viable (and 4e offers a novel, metagaming take on the non-combat PC via the "princess warlord" build). But personally, if I wanted to run a game which wasn't focused on combat as a primary site of combat resolution, I wouldn't run D&D. I'd look for a game which doesn't place so much emphasis on combat in PC build and action resolution. Mechanical effectiveness can extend beyond combat, though. Assuming there are non-combat action resolution mechanics. I agree with this. "Balancing across pillars" requires, at a minimum, that each of the pillars be meaningfully present in the default mode of play. To date, what they have said about this (in L&L, in the playtest documents) has been a bit disappointing. Given that 4e is expressly designed so that PCs have quite different damage outputs, I don't think this is true: the fighter in my 4e game does 1d8+13 on an at-will hit; the sorcerer's at-will burst 2 does 1d4+27, or nearly twice the damage against mltiple targets. The difference is that the fighter exercises a huge amount of battlefield control, whereas the sorcerer has comparatively little. More generally, who upthread from the "4e/balance" camp has defined balance in terms of combat effectiveness? People talk about mechanical effectiveness; why assume that that is limited to combat? The invoker in my 4e game has two skill training feats, Linguist and Arcane Familiar to get a Book Imp: none of those are combat abilities. They're about making the PC the preeminent scholar in the party, and probably in the gameworld also. I don't think HeroWars/Quest is vulnerable to abuse, or being broken by hordes. RuneQuest and Traveller are both fairly resilient, also. Part of the issue is how far you have to drift the game to break it. One of the issues with 3E is that some players break the game without trying, just because they try out the stuff that a druid, wizard or cleric can do, under the (as it turns out, mistaken) apprehension that they're playing the class as written. Heck, in the second session of 3E that I ever GMed we discovered that Summon Monster was broken - with a 3rd level spell the PC could either summon a Thoqqua, or summon a Triton that could then use its own Summon Nature's Ally to summon a Thoqqua. And that wasn't even trying - that was just a player looking at his PC's spell list and the corresponding monster stats. At a minimum, if the game is going to break that easily I want (i) the designers to tell me where the break points are, and (ii) to show me where they think the viable game can be played without hitting those points. Burning Wheel does a pretty good job of this, so it's not like WotC have to come up with the idea all on their own. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
Top