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

[Marshall]

Funny how you define heroism with mechanics.

You define power level with mechanics. You can be a hero at 1st level, but once you go beyond that point its the mechanics that define what the difference is.

 

[Marshall]

I've played non combat wizards who only supported other characters. You will not find a single class in all of 4th edition that can do this. Yes you have classes that support, but it all has to do with combat.

You never actually read 4e did you?

I really hope Next keeps combat and noncombat at an equal or almost equal level.

No edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at an equal level as combat. In fact, no edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at the level 4e supports it.

 

[Ahnehnois]

See, this is where you go off the tracks. Every Cleric is a combat character. If its not a combat character, its probably not a Cleric. The generic NPC clergyman is most likely not even a spellcaster.

Virtually every meaningful representation of a D&D world, from setting books to the example characters throughout the rules supplements to D&D-related media is littered with examples of non-combatant spellcasters, especially clerics. They make magic items, sell spells, and run temples.

Furthermore a lot of the cleric spell list is things that have non-combat applications like divinations and conjurations.

PCs are already the exceptions. Worldwide, I would expect that the average member of the cleric class has never participated in a battle. Most of them certainly don't do it for a living. Certainly not the image that comes to mind when I think of the word "cleric".

There is no such thing as a non-combat class. Once you're an adventurer you turn from Q into Bond, from Marcus Brody into Indiana Jones or you turn into comic relief.

Are you really suggesting there are no examples of non-combat adventurers?

Yeah, thats the point. Swashbuckling Rogues ARE Elite Warriors(too may caps).

I see a partial overlap between the two concepts. That's it.

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

You never actually read 4e did you?



No edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at an equal level as combat. In fact, no edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at the level 4e supports it.

Actually I have all the books. Care to give me some examples where I am wrong and I will pop out the books and take a look myself.

Ready when you are.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You never actually read 4e did you?

I am a big supporter of 4e (well d&d any edition really) even being lumped in with the 4vengers back when the wotc board was doing that... and I agree with 3/4 of what he is saying here...

you get 5 attack powers at level 1 and 1 more at 3rd and one more at 5th... so my wizard at level 5 has a handful of cantrips, 2 at will attacks 2 encounter attacks 2 daily attacks... and a utility from level 2 that could be atwill encounter or daily...
I couldn't make a wizard (and I think I do pretty good with this) and have half my powers not cause damage on a bet...

No edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at an equal level as combat. In fact, no edition of D&D has ever supported non-combat at the level 4e supports it.

100% true... and for all the flack for skill challenges get... hey they tried... they really tried

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Are you really suggesting there are no examples of non-combat adventurers?

I will throw some out...

the bookish expert of a rare knowledge... AKA Daniel Jackson now he grew as a character "What end do the bullets go in?" but he didn't start there... AKA the droids from star wars, and others

The joke... AKA jockser the mighty and aka NiteWing

 

[Ahnehnois]

100% true... and for all the flack for skill challenges get... hey they tried... they really tried

Well, they did try something, I'll give you that. However, what we have is something that in its best iteration wasn't as robust as a few pages of complex skill checks in Unearthed Arcana. And it's only a method of action resolution.

As to the ability to create a character with nuanced non-combat functions, or the spread of non-combat skills available, 4e is more limited than 3e is (which itself could use some broadening).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well, they did try something, I'll give you that. However, what we have is something that in its best iteration wasn't as robust as a few pages of complex skill checks in Unearthed Arcana. And it's only a method of action resolution.

As to the ability to create a character with nuanced non-combat functions, or the spread of non-combat skills available, 4e is more limited than 3e is (which itself could use some broadening).

wouldn't it be really cool if they put as much effort into cool things you could do if you want to make ocean's elven or the Leverage team or even half the A team, as opposed to the expendables...

skill challenges are basicly complex skill checks, with a fresh coat of paint... but imagine if they had rules for OTHER then skill checks...

 

[Remathilis]

Yes, the thief used to be completely incompetent both in and out of combat, but the fact that he had both medium THAC0/BAB and Backstab means he was designed as a combat class. Not a toe-to-toe, stand up combatant, but a combatant none the less.

Gonna stop ya right there...

The THIEF class (as Basic/AD&D defined him) wasn't really what I'd call a combat class as much as a class that does combat. They had the third worst Thac0 chart (1:2 levels, better than a wizards 1:3, worse than a cleric's 2:3), third worst HD (d6, though BD&D thieves roll 1d4). They worse leather armor, fought with one-handed weapons and bows, and generally were squishy as all heck.

We also forget Backstab wasn't sneak-attack; it could only be used when the foe was unaware of the thief. (No flank, useless if the thief is seen/heard) It granted a +4 to hit and x2-x5 (based on level) Base Weapon Damage. That isn't much against most foes; it might take out a goblin, a weakened ogre, or a guard. Its not taking out most monsters of appropriate challenge. As stated, its also only a one-time per encounter. Additionally, the thief doesn't have weapon finesse, evasion, uncanny dodge, or other rogue-tricks.

To be honest, the thief's best trick was to get a bow and archer it up (taking advantage of that dex score). They were not a combat class until sneak attack became somewhat-reliable in 3.0.

 

[Marshall]

I will throw some out...

the bookish expert of a rare knowledge... AKA Daniel Jackson now he grew as a character "What end do the bullets go in?" but he didn't start there... AKA the droids from star wars, and others

The joke... AKA jockser the mighty and aka NiteWing

...and that proves the point. There is no such thing as a non-combat adventurer. Bookish expert of rare knowledge is Indiana Jones they dont stay just bookish experts of rare knowledge if they do any kind of adventuring. Once you get character growth, you get combat competence.

C3-P0 is comic relief. R2-D2 is a henchman in the Star Wars movies and IS a combat character when he gets the spotlight in supplementary fiction.