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

[Ahnehnois]

A Majority?

This is personal experience of course. Most didn't even have an 18 at first, at least naturally rolled. Later on after finding things like Manuals and other items...those scores could increase.

I don't think I ever saw a 2e character without at least an 18 in their primary ability, if not in something else as well. Individual DMs do have a lot of latitude with things like ability generation so I'm sure this will vary.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't think I ever saw a 2e character without at least an 18 in their primary ability, if not in something else as well. Individual DMs do have a lot of latitude with things like ability generation so I'm sure this will vary.

I saw a few 17s and 16s, but I don't think in 7 years of 2e that I ever saw a PC who didn't qualify for his 10% xp bonus.
Though I only ever saw one 18/100. I saw more 19s than double aughts (stupid half-orcs)

 

[Guest 85555]

over powered at all.

But on the 18 Str thing. Sure, we probably cheated. But, honestly, of the characters you saw played in 2e, how many didn't have an 18 in their prime stat, compared to the number who did? I'm going to say that most did. Probably because people cheated. I seem to recall a house rule, borrowed from Basic D&D which allowed 2:1 trading of stats too. That would do it.

In my experience, we saw lots of18s in 7th and 8th grade. But after that things were pretty by the book with very few 18s in primary. I mean i am sure people did cheat, but if you play by the rules and do not cheat, random stats can be a very important balancer in a game like 2E (again i undertsand it. Isvt the kind of balance you probably enjoy, but it definitely made a difference in my games).

 

[Hussar]

In my experience, we saw lots of18s in 7th and 8th grade. But after that things were pretty by the book with very few 18s in primary. I mean i am sure people did cheat, but if you play by the rules and do not cheat, random stats can be a very important balancer in a game like 2E (again i undertsand it. Isvt the kind of balance you probably enjoy, but it definitely made a difference in my games).

Yeah, well, you're probably right there. Multiple points of imbalance doesn't mean that the game is balanced, it just means that it is never actually balanced. Weak at the beginning, strong at the end wizards just means you're baggage for the first half of the campaign, and a god for the second.

Totally random stat generation was never part of my D&D experience (I started with Basic/Expert D&D where 2:1 stat trades were part of the rules, and every group I ever played with had something similar), so, maybe it's a blind spot in my experience. To me, all it means is that the guy who rolled lucky is so far ahead of everyone else, that it's going to ruin my experience, regardless if I'm that guy or not.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Totally random stat generation was never part of my D&D experience (I started with Basic/Expert D&D where 2:1 stat trades were part of the rules, and every group I ever played with had something similar), so, maybe it's a blind spot in my experience. To me, all it means is that the guy who rolled lucky is so far ahead of everyone else, that it's going to ruin my experience, regardless if I'm that guy or not.

After talking to 2 other players we can remember mor 9-12 str fighters then 18str fighters

We counted (by memory) 3 18 str 1 19str 1 20 str and 6 with no attack mod...

We also remeber only 2 wizards with18 int and no clerics with 18 wis at all

We also got a good laugh out of the time I played a paliden with a 18 cha... what awaste of a good roll

 

[Hussar]

I'd point out that from your memory half of the fighters had 18 or better Str. Well a bit under half.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'd point out that from your memory half of the fighters had 18 or better Str. Well a bit under half.

no just the ones I talked about we decided that most our fighters had 16 str scores...

 

[Guest 85555]

Yeah, well, you're probably right there. Multiple points of imbalance doesn't mean that the game is balanced, it just means that it is never actually balanced. Weak at the beginning, strong at the end wizards just means you're baggage for the first half of the campaign, and a god for the second.

Totally random stat generation was never part of my D&D experience (I started with Basic/Expert D&D where 2:1 stat trades were part of the rules, and every group I ever played with had something similar), so, maybe it's a blind spot in my experience. To me, all it means is that the guy who rolled lucky is so far ahead of everyone else, that it's going to ruin my experience, regardless if I'm that guy or not.

Obviousy we disagree. I get that you don't like balance over the campaign. But works as a balancer for many. That is what the different XP charts were all about. It is the same thing with random stats. You are taking the long view of balance, where yes you may roll a cruddy guy today, but tomorrow you might roll a guy who is out of the park. It is fair. Everybody is subject to the same random rolls. The guy who wants to be a powerful wizard chooses to be weak in the beginning and patience and luck are rewarded with a highly effective character at the upper levels. I can see how this wouldn't work for every gamer. But trust me when i tell you,as a balancer, this approach works better for me than what came after. What i wouldn't do is take my balance preference and then use it as a universal metric for balance in all cases.

 

[Hussar]

Whereas for me balance over campaign led to a level of homogenization of characters that made Basic DnD look positively diverse.

 

[Guest 85555]

Whereas for me balance over campaign led to a level of homogenization of characters that made Basic DnD look positively diverse.

Okay.