D&D 5E Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)

[GMforPowergamers]

Wait, "allows"? You mean that it should not be possible for players with different skill levels or different intentions to produce characters of radically different levels of combat (or overall) effectiveness?

I don't know where that postulate comes from but I certainly reject it.

My rule of thumb is if things are done with common sense they need to work...

A rouge with weapon finesse and a Rapier should make a swashbuckler that can go toe to toe with monsters.

A fighter with a longsword and shield should rule at combat...

when both of those can be one uped by the cleric self buffing there is a problem...
when both of those get one uped by the animal compainion of the druid because it shares self buffs... I call BS

 

[Ahnehnois]

My rule of thumb is if things are done with common sense they need to work...

In principle, I agree.

In practice, I see a fair amount of players who have very different approaches that often convey very unequal notions of common sense. For example, it does not follow to me that if said swashbuckler puts his highest ability score in Charisma and skimps on the physical scores, he should be able to do daring stunts because charisma makes you cool. But some people might disagree. To me, such a character is and should be somewhat suboptimal.

None of which means that a player shouldn't play such a character.

when both of those can be one uped by the cleric self buffing there is a problem...
when both of those get one uped by the animal compainion of the druid because it shares self buffs... I call BS

Again, I agree in principle. However, I find those are corner cases. Most animal companions are modestly effective compared to martial characters, even with full buffs, and clerics tend not to spend the resources to be effective fighters.

I've never been on record as defending, say Divine Power as an appropriate spell. I'd revise it. However, I think in general the 3e cleric as a whole is about right balance-wise.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In principle, I agree.

In practice, I see a fair amount of players who have very different approaches that often convey very unequal notions of common sense. For example, it does not follow to me that if said swashbuckler puts his highest ability score in Charisma and skimps on the physical scores, he should be able to do daring stunts because charisma makes you cool. But some people might disagree. To me, such a character is and should be somewhat suboptimal.

None of which means that a player shouldn't play such a character.

Here is the thing, lets take the (IMO) way you say shouldn't work. I don't see them ditching all physicals, but lets say they go 10 Str, 14 Dex, 13 Con 15 Int, 14 Wis 18 Cha... and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
He is a 1st level rogue, he is human so he gets 2 feats and says "Weapon finesse is awesome... I'll take that, and weapon prof in the rapier..." then he puts skill ranks in bluff and diplomacy and jump and tumble and cross class in know arct and engineer. He has +2 to hit for 1d6 damage with an 18+/x2 crit. he can with combat advantage deal +1d6 He has 7hp His AC is 13 or 14


The druid of the game takes a wolf... it has 13hp, +3 to hit 1d6+1 damage and trip, and an AC 14
that isn't the druid... it is one class feature...

Again, I agree in principle. However, I find those are corner cases. Most animal companions are modestly effective compared to martial characters, even with full buffs, and clerics tend not to spend the resources to be effective fighters.

I've never been on record as defending, say Divine Power as an appropriate spell. I'd revise it. However, I think in general the 3e cleric as a whole is about right balance-wise.

OK, lets go to a 5th level fighter...

He gets a +1 to a stat and it will be str, but he starts with 15 str 15 dex 14 con 11 Int 12 wis 10 cha
he isn't human, so he has 5 feats, we will take weapon focus and specialization longsword, Dodge, mobility, power attack

+9 to hit 1d8+5 damage 19+x2 crit. He has a 19-20AC and 40hp
he can power attack up to +4 1d8+10 average damage no PA is 9-10 w/full PA 14-15

the 4th level druid has a bear...claw/claw/bite +6/+6/+1 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d6+1 with 13 AC and 19hp (next level is +1 str +2hd and +2 AC)
BUT... if the druid puts any buff up he shares it... so lets cast 1 spell... Bull str and remember he himself can be a bear helping... but we are just talking the companion here
+8/+8/+3 1d4+4/1d4+4/1d6+2 Average damage not buffed 13-14 or w/buff 18-19...

the fighter has to full power attack to get average damage up to the bear... and can't hit the buffed amount on a bet.

tell me why 1 class feature of the druid is 3/4 as good as a combat focus fighter?

 

[Sage Genesis]

Here is the thing, lets take the (IMO) way you say shouldn't work. I don't see them ditching all physicals, but lets say they go 10 Str, 14 Dex, 13 Con 15 Int, 14 Wis 18 Cha... and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
He is a 1st level rogue, he is human so he gets 2 feats and says "Weapon finesse is awesome... I'll take that, and weapon prof in the rapier..." then he puts skill ranks in bluff and diplomacy and jump and tumble and cross class in know arct and engineer. He has +2 to hit for 1d6 damage with an 18+/x2 crit. he can with combat advantage deal +1d6 He has 7hp His AC is 13 or 14

Minor nitpick: Rogues are by default already proficient with rapiers and unless we're talking PF, he can't even take Weapon Finesse at this level due to his lack of BAB.

This ought to lead to your Rogue being even weaker than you thought, as there's not really that many good feats for him to take (unless we draw deeply from the supplement well). Maybe Improved Initiative to exploit flat-footed enemies, but that's hardly a reliable or persistent benefit.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Minor nitpick: Rogues are by default already proficient with rapiers and unless we're talking PF, he can't even take Weapon Finesse at this level due to his lack of BAB.

This ought to lead to your Rogue being even weaker than you thought, as there's not really that many good feats for him to take (unless we draw deeply from the supplement well). Maybe Improved Initiative to exploit flat-footed enemies, but that's hardly a reliable or persistent benefit.

wow... well that's what happens when you go by memory... it isn't even possible to make my swashbuckler... damn the system was WORSE then I thought.


again, we are stuck with strange things like rogues are the best rogues... and fighters aren't the best fighters... and druids get a class feature better then some classes...



the worst part is I don't even want to redo 4e... I want to learn from 4e to make 5e better...

 

[Ahnehnois]

Here is the thing, lets take the (IMO) way you say shouldn't work. I don't see them ditching all physicals, but lets say they go 10 Str, 14 Dex, 13 Con 15 Int, 14 Wis 18 Cha... and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
He is a 1st level rogue, he is human so he gets 2 feats and says "Weapon finesse is awesome... I'll take that, and weapon prof in the rapier..." then he puts skill ranks in bluff and diplomacy and jump and tumble and cross class in know arct and engineer. He has +2 to hit for 1d6 damage with an 18+/x2 crit. he can with combat advantage deal +1d6 He has 7hp His AC is 13 or 14


The druid of the game takes a wolf... it has 13hp, +3 to hit 1d6+1 damage and trip, and an AC 14
that isn't the druid... it is one class feature...

Sounds fine to me. The player built a dilettante, not a warrior, so that's what he got. If a level 1 character whose physical stats aren't much better than a commoner can beat a wolf, then the game is broken. Have you ever seen a wolf? They're quite intimidating.

Of course, there's then the question of whether the druid should have the wolf, but in practice it works out fine. Like most spellcasters, a low-level druid is not much more than a glorified commoner. He doesn't have wild shape, and only a few trivial spells a day and no BAB. The wolf simply makes him less underpowered than, say, a level 1 wizard, who as you probably know is much inferior to either.

Which again is fine. He's a wizard. He's still learning.

OK, lets go to a 5th level fighter...

The 5th level fighter should also have a bunch of magic items, and probably some spellcaster friend to buff him as well.

tell me why 1 class feature of the druid is 3/4 as good as a combat focus fighter?

The way d20 math scales, anything less than that and the bear is worthless. Even as it is, the bear is kind of a weak point that the druid probably has to spend a lot of time protecting and healing because he's always about to die. I doubt the bear is much better than what you'd get from the Leadership feat, which is kind of a joke.

A character whose attack bonus is 3/4 of another character is not 75% percent as useful; that's not how d20 math works. He's probably not even 50% as useful. And that's what plays out a lot with druids, you have two mediocre combatants instead of one good one, who can share spells but have to split items and who struggle to hit on-level ACs or beat DR. I mean, I do really like them, and I'd even argue that they're the most powerful class, but not by enough to render the others worthless by any means.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Sounds fine to me. The player built a dilettante, not a warrior, so that's what he got. If a level 1 character whose physical stats aren't much better than a commoner can beat a wolf, then the game is broken. Have you ever seen a wolf? They're quite intimidating.

So it's OK because he didn't roll 5 18's???

he has an above average in 2 out of 3 physical stats AND an 18 cha... how is that not much better then a commoner?

and I have seen wolves, none of witch I would bet on one on one with a trained warrior...

Of course, there's then the question of whether the druid should have the wolf, but in practice it works out fine. Like most spellcasters, a low-level druid is not much more than a glorified commoner.

wtf? he has not only the wolf but class features and spells and only 2hp less then an equal fighter... if you think he is a commoner what is a rogue or fighter?

He doesn't have wild shape, and only a few trivial spells a day and no BAB. The wolf simply makes him less underpowered than, say, a level 1 wizard, who as you probably know is much inferior to either.

so the wizard that can sleep an encounter is weak??? what are you talking about am I in bizaro world?

The 5th level fighter should also have a bunch of magic items, and probably some spellcaster friend to buff him as well.

the druid will also have a bunch of magic items, and doesn't need someone else to buff them...
Yes the fighter can be cool if he has the right build and some team support... but then he is about as awesome as an average druid... give the druid a good build and team support and you don't need a fighter... 5th level druids can be bears with bear companions and summon more bears...

The way d20 math scales, anything less than that and the bear is worthless.

why can one class feature be gain a feat and that's it well another one can be get a second set of combat stats that gets better as you level? why isn't the 1st level feature of the druid equal to a 1st level bonus feat at 1st level?

Even as it is, the bear is kind of a weak point that the druid probably has to spend a lot of time protecting and healing because he's always about to die. I doubt the bear is much better than what you'd get from the Leadership feat, which is kind of a joke.

Leadership is one of the 10 most powerful feats in the game... and the druid can take it too...

A character whose attack bonus is 3/4 of another character is not 75% percent as useful; that's not how d20 math works. He's probably not even 50% as useful. And that's what plays out a lot with druids, you have two mediocre combatants instead of one good one, who can share spells but have to split items and who struggle to hit on-level ACs or beat DR. I mean, I do really like them, and I'd even argue that they're the most powerful class, but not by enough to render the others worthless by any means.

yes the fighter has a to hit bonus over the bear, but the bear gets 3x the attacks and on average does much more damage... your right if all else was equal AND the bear was 3/4 the fighter to hit that might work... but the druid's 1st level class feature has 3 attacks at level 5 when the fighter would need to two weapon fight and throw a weapon with a -4 to all attacks to pull that off... and that is 2 feats (two weapon fighting and rapid shot)


I'm not even saying "Hey this one time this fighter wasn't as good" or as a poster here said "Snap shoting" I am talking about 12 years of patterns...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Just for the sake of argument MY idea of a 3.5 commoner is:

8 in one stat 10 in 3 stats 11 in two stats...

so 1st level pig farmer:

11 Str 10 dex 11 Con 8 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 4hp AC 10

I would even expand that to warrior, adept, and expert, but replace 1 10 with a 13 (there good stat)

so a 1st level warrior would be:

13 str 10 dex 11 con 10 Int 11 Wis 8 CHa 8hp AC 12-15

so an 8th level warrior would be

14 str 10 dex 12 con 10 Int 11 Wis 8 CHa 47 hp AC 16-20

so no one not even a 1st level druid is like a commoner...

 

[Stormonu]

Here is the thing, lets take the (IMO) way you say shouldn't work. I don't see them ditching all physicals, but lets say they go 10 Str, 14 Dex, 13 Con 15 Int, 14 Wis 18 Cha... and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
He is a 1st level rogue, he is human so he gets 2 feats and says "Weapon finesse is awesome... I'll take that, and weapon prof in the rapier..." then he puts skill ranks in bluff and diplomacy and jump and tumble and cross class in know arct and engineer. He has +2 to hit for 1d6 damage with an 18+/x2 crit. he can with combat advantage deal +1d6 He has 7hp His AC is 13 or 14


The druid of the game takes a wolf... it has 13hp, +3 to hit 1d6+1 damage and trip, and an AC 14
that isn't the druid... it is one class feature...




OK, lets go to a 5th level fighter...

He gets a +1 to a stat and it will be str, but he starts with 15 str 15 dex 14 con 11 Int 12 wis 10 cha
he isn't human, so he has 5 feats, we will take weapon focus and specialization longsword, Dodge, mobility, power attack

+9 to hit 1d8+5 damage 19+x2 crit. He has a 19-20AC and 40hp
he can power attack up to +4 1d8+10 average damage no PA is 9-10 w/full PA 14-15

the 4th level druid has a bear...claw/claw/bite +6/+6/+1 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d6+1 with 13 AC and 19hp (next level is +1 str +2hd and +2 AC)
BUT... if the druid puts any buff up he shares it... so lets cast 1 spell... Bull str and remember he himself can be a bear helping... but we are just talking the companion here
+8/+8/+3 1d4+4/1d4+4/1d6+2 Average damage not buffed 13-14 or w/buff 18-19...

the fighter has to full power attack to get average damage up to the bear... and can't hit the buffed amount on a bet.

tell me why 1 class feature of the druid is 3/4 as good as a combat focus fighter?

Hey, the bear is AC 13. The fighter, at 5th level as a sword & board has somewhere on average AC 20. The fighter is going to hit the Bear on a 4 or better, whereas the bear is going to need better-than-average (14/19 without buffs) to hit. Even if they're not fighting each other, the fighter is more likely to connect and they're both going to do about 9-10 damage a round (that +1 to hit bite isn't likely to hit often). Then the fighter's got over twice the HP on the bear. In actual play, I'd expect the fighter to both destroy opponents faster and last longer.

 

[Incenjucar]

Hey, the bear is AC 13. The fighter, at 5th level as a sword & board has somewhere on average AC 20. The fighter is going to hit the Bear on a 4 or better, whereas the bear is going to need better-than-average (14/19 without buffs) to hit. Even if they're not fighting each other, the fighter is more likely to connect and they're both going to do about 9-10 damage a round (that +1 to hit bite isn't likely to hit often). Then the fighter's got over twice the HP on the bear. In actual play, I'd expect the fighter to both destroy opponents faster and last longer.

If a monster is targeting the bear's AC, it's likely not attacking the druid which is also mauling things.