D&D 5E Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll

[Maxperson]

An appeal to authority is only inappropriate if the authority is not relevant. The man who led the design team is a relevant authority, for exactly the same reason that (say) one would expect Lin-Manuel Miranda's opinion on the weak points of Hamilton to be relevant.

His opinion on that matter is not one of authority. It's his opinion about the class. He thinks he should have given it more flavor. That doesn't make it a fact that it needs it or that an authority has spoken. It was just his personal opinion on the matter.

Who on EARTH said that two things have to be identical to be balance? And who on earth ever said 4e "failed miserably at balance"? Even its most ardent detractors, the people willing to completely invent random crap about it, recognized 4e's balance. I am completely baffled by these assertions. I emphatically, absolutely reject the idea that "balance" means being identical. People tout StarCraft, for example, as an excellent demonstration of "asymmetrical balance."

4e has classes that are in fact better at combat than other classes. Those classes are not balanced in combat. And it's just hubris to think that you can perfectly balance ability in combat with ability out of combat. Those two things are apples and oranges.

Rock paper scissors is partially asymmetrical ("x wins against y" is a non-transitive relation on the set of moves, but each player engages in the same gameplay loop), yet (by definition) perfectly balanced. No two moves are identical, yet each is perfectly balanced with every other, such that the only way to gain an advantage is to exploit player psychology and long-run behavior, because the rules themselves (again, by definition) prevent any such exploitation.

This is not equivalent to what happens with classes or with what 4e did. The 4e classes were torn down mathematically and some are just better than others at combat.

Ooooooor...you could just use the actual, accepted definition of "balance," which is that "balance" includes the idea of acceptable ranges, because we're talking about statistics, rather than about precise equalities and perfect, diamond rules. And, as I said, I've run those numbers on things like the Champion, and they are not acceptable for it, for something specifically geared for doing damage and almost nothing else. The Champion does not even get up to 80% of the Battlemaster's damage output until you've had at least five reasonably-sized fights a day, and it takes 7-8 to actually be in the same ballpark. This is why it--in some restricted sense--is "bad." It has a clear purpose, dealing damage, and it is demonstrably bad at achieving that purpose relative to equivalent options (other Fighter subclasses) unless the 6-8 (combat!) encounters per day assumption is met. Since that assumption is generally not true of 5e games, this means players who want a low-engagement Fighter subclass are--statistically but consistently--shortchanged in a codifiable way compared to those who are comfortable with other Fighter subclasses.

So balance =/= balance, and that's the accepted definition. If there's a range, then it's not balanced. Period. Try balancing a pencil on your finger. If it's not equal on both sides, it will fall because it's NOT BALANCED. Balance = equal.

As with any statistical thing, you have to set what reasonable bounds are. Fortunately, we have ready-made examples thereof, like the traditional alpha value (0.05, a 5% chance of committing a false-negative error) and standard deviations/z-scores, so these are not absolutely-arbitrary, "we invented a number that sounded nice" things, but rather ones with over a century (in some areas, pushing two centuries) of established use.

All you are doing is making my argument for me and then calling it "balance." Okay then, 5e Fighters are "balanced"(your definition of it) with the other classes.

 

[Shadowedeyes]

Fighters are the weakest class in the non-combat pillars, I think that is pretty obvious, right? They get the base amount of skills, no base class enhancements to doing anything in exploration or social situations. Some of the subclasses do get some bonuses in those areas, but they tend to be pretty sparse.

In fact, here is the list, broken up by your choices.
-A Small bonus to some non-proficient ability checks, and a bonus to jump distance (Champion)
-A Tool Proficiency and the ability to determine combat attributes of someone studied for a minute. Can take a maneuver to use superiority dice to boost certain skill checks. (Battlemaster)
-A Cantrip and a skill proficiency. (Arcane Archer)
-A skill proficiency or a language. (Cavalier)
-A skill proficiency or a language, and a bonus to Persuasion checks (Samurai)
-A skill proficiency and expertise in Persuasion checks (Banneret)
-A lot of options to get advantage on various skill checks and all tool proficiencies (Rune Knight)
-Telekinetic stuff (Psi Warrior)
-Some spells I guess? (Eldritch Knight)

That is what you get over 20 levels of the class for out of combat stuff. With the exception of Rune Knight, and maybe Battlemaster and Eldritch Knight, that is not particularly impressive. Now, there is the option brought up to use feats for out of combat options, given the bonus feats the fighter gets. But then you have to weigh whether being pretty good at say, Persuasion, is worth loosing some of the big power combat feats.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because it's just common sense that it would be that way. Neither the skill nor rogue ability confer omniscience on you in order to know what's where. There's a reason why thieves primarily target coin purses. They can see where the coins are and that's what they go for.

It's 'common sense', but not actually how pick pocketing works.

Old school purse thieves we cutpurses. They didn't pick any pockets, they just cut straps. Modern pickpockets learn to identify the location of valuables like wallets and phones via outlines in clothing or unconscious tics (fun side project: try and stop yourself from touching your phone or wallet in your pocket while in public now that you know this). And all this is different from being a lifter, who takes things worn on a person like jewelry without them noticing.

Basically D&D has an overly simplified idea of 'thief' even in the narrow up close personal kind and could stand to watch a little more Leverage.

 

[Maxperson]

Fighters are the weakest class in the non-combat pillars, I think that is pretty obvious, right? They get the base amount of skills, no base class enhancements to doing anything in exploration or social situations. Some of the subclasses do get some bonuses in those areas, but they tend to be pretty sparse.

In fact, here is the list, broken up by your choices.
-A Small bonus to some non-proficient ability checks, and a bonus to jump distance (Champion)
-A Tool Proficiency and the ability to determine combat attributes of someone studied for a minute. Can take a maneuver to use superiority dice to boost certain skill checks. (Battlemaster)
-A Cantrip and a skill proficiency. (Arcane Archer)
-A skill proficiency or a language. (Cavalier)
-A skill proficiency or a language, and a bonus to Persuasion checks (Samurai)
-A skill proficiency and expertise in Persuasion checks (Banneret)
-A lot of options to get advantage on various skill checks and all tool proficiencies (Rune Knight)
-Telekinetic stuff (Psi Warrior)
-Some spells I guess? (Eldritch Knight)

That is what you get over 20 levels of the class for out of combat stuff. With the exception of Rune Knight, and maybe Battlemaster and Eldritch Knight, that is not particularly impressive. Now, there is the option brought up to use feats for out of combat options, given the bonus feats the fighter gets. But then you have to weigh whether being pretty good at say, Persuasion, is worth loosing some of the big power combat feats.

As a base class they get lots of ASIs, which if feats are being used, means that they can in addition to ASIs and combat feats, also take multiple non-combat feats. That's something the classes other than Rogues who are skill monkeys, can't do.

 

[ECMO3]

First, you couldn't pick out a certain color of 20 sided die(specific spell component). Second, you don't have a sense of touch, remember? You are unable to feel which one is the 20 sided and which is a 4 sided.

So then I could pick out the bat schite, I just would not know if it was black, brown or whitish until I got it out .... but I would still get it out

No I don't remember there is no sense of touch, I remember you making that up and claiming that and as of failing to state how the hand could do ANY of its powers without that.

1. It's a hand of magic, not a real one. 2. because the spell doesn't say that it does, so it doesn't. You don't get to add things into spells just because the spell is silent on the subject.

And you don't get to take things away. You are arguing the hand can't do something the book says it can do and you are claiming this is because of this "lack of feel" that is not mentioned anywhere, nor is it stated that feeling is needed or even relevant to execute said abilities.

You are making up this whole "feeling" thing. The rules do not say you need to use tactile feel to identify what you are grabbing.

Sure it can. It's the special ability of the subclass, so it works. What it does not say is that it has a sense of touch or that you can choose specific objects as if you were a god. If you can't see the object and you don't know where in the container it is, you are guessing blind. You also don't get to add in abilities that you want to be there. You can only go by what it says.

No it says you can take something out of a pack. That is something specific or it would be irrelevant. Further if you compare it to the spell, the spell actually does mention specific things.

Please answer, how can it pick a lock without any feeling?

When I send it in my own pack to get a potion of healing, how do I know when to close its fingers around the potion to pull it out without feeling? How do I know I got the potion of healing and not the potion of poison that is in the same compartment?

What if my Rogue is carrying a pouch of dice and I send my mage hand into my own pouch to get out a red 20-sided dice. Would it get out a red 20 sided dice? How would it do this without being able to feel it or see the color?

There are only two possibilities here:
1. Feeling is irrelevant for these things due to magic (and would therefore be irrelevant to your argument too)
2. It has feeling.

 

[Maxperson]

It's 'common sense', but not actually how pick pocketing works.

Old school purse thieves we cutpurses. They didn't pick any pockets, they just cut straps. Modern pickpockets learn to identify the location of valuables like wallets and phones via outlines in clothing or unconscious tics (fun side project: try and stop yourself from touching your phone or wallet in your pocket while in public now that you know this). And all this is different from being a lifter, who takes things worn on a person like jewelry without them noticing.

Sure, but none of them can just reach into a backpack full of small items and yank the one they want out, unless the know exactly where it is. If a D&D Rogue wants to take an object that they saw put into an empty pocket, they can do so and if they make the rolls, will get that item.

A spell component pouch is specifically full of different objects that the Rogue doesn't specifically know where is. He himself can try to cut the purse using Sleight of Hand(an explicit use of the skill), or use the Rogue ability to take only one object from a container(an explicit use of that ability). It's interesting to note that while you can cut a purse with the Sleight of Hand skill, they left that out of the Rogue ability.

 

[ECMO3]

That doesn't seem like an unreasonable interpretation, but the spell doesn't include it, so it's essentially a house rule.

Or maybe it conveys his skill to it. Either way, it's not going to let you take a specific object out of a container if you don't know where in the container it is.

The rules say it will. It says you can take "something" not "a random thing" out of a container. It doesn't say "you can take something out of a container if you know where it is in the container" ... it says you can take something out.

I take the dagger out of my scabbard.

I take the potion of healing out of my pack

I take the red 20-sided dice out of my bag full of dice

I take the ruby dust out of the mage's spell component pouch.

I take the emerald out of the fighter's belt pouch

I take the scroll out of the clerics scroll tube.

All of these work EXACTLY the same way!

 

[ECMO3]

Sure, but none of them can just reach into a backpack full of small items and yank the one they want out, unless the know exactly where it is. If a D&D Rogue wants to take an object that they saw put into an empty pocket, they can do so and if they make the rolls, will get that item.

A spell component pouch is specifically full of different objects that the Rogue doesn't specifically know where is. He himself can try to cut the purse using Sleight of Hand(an explicit use of the skill), or use the Rogue ability to take only one object from a container(an explicit use of that ability). It's interesting to note that while you can cut a purse with the Sleight of Hand skill, they left that out of the Rogue ability.

He doesn't need to know because the MHL description says he can do it.

Also pickpockets routinely pull specific items out of bags, purses and packs in cities all across Europe. A purse is full of multiple objects and multiple compartments. When a pickpocket puts his hand in your purse to try and lift out your wallet, he is not going to come out with your car keys or your hand sanitizer. He is going to come out with your wallet if he isn't caught.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sure, but none of them can just reach into a backpack full of small items and yank the one they want out, unless the know exactly where it is. If a D&D Rogue wants to take an object that they saw put into an empty pocket, they can do so and if they make the rolls, will get that item.

A spell component pouch is specifically full of different objects that the Rogue doesn't specifically know where is. He himself can try to cut the purse using Sleight of Hand(an explicit use of the skill), or use the Rogue ability to take only one object from a container(an explicit use of that ability). It's interesting to note that while you can cut a purse with the Sleight of Hand skill, they left that out of the Rogue ability.

Is a spell component pouch just full of loose crap though? I always imagined it sectioned off like a tacklebox.

Otherwise, every wizard is suddenly a bumbler like Paladine.

 

[Maxperson]

So then I could pick out the bat schite, I just would not know if it was black, brown or whitish until I got it out .... but I would still get it out

Maybe you think the pouch is like a dice pouch. In order to hold all the components of a 20th level Wizard, these pouches are really more like small bags. There's no way you could locate the bat guano with the mage hand if you don't know where it is or get very lucky. And hell, is that lump bat guano(dried due to time), or a piece of dried flesh(animate dead), or an item distasteful to the target(Banishment), or soft clay for conjure elemental, or...

There are so many similar feeling components for a myriad of spells, that even feeling by touch won't do you any good.

No I don't remember there is no sense of touch, I remember you making that up and claiming that and as of failing to state how the hand could do ANY of its powers without that.

I didn't make it up. RAW doesn't say that it has a sense of touch, so it doesn't unless you house rule it in.

And you don't get to take things away. You are arguing the hand can't do something the book says it can do and you are claiming this is because of this "lack of feel" that is not mentioned anywhere, nor is it stated that feeling is needed or even relevant to execute said abilities.

The book never says it can. Never. It says you can take an object. It does not say you can take a specific object. It grants no ability to just know where and what every object on your target is. That's something YOU are making up.

That is something specific or it would be irrelevant.

And that's false. I've already shown you how it can be and is useful. You just want to elevate it from useful to godlike.

Please answer, how can it pick a lock without any feeling?

Perhaps it picks up your skill and does it itself at your direction.

When I send it in my own pack to get a potion of healing, how do I know when to close its fingers around the potion to pull it out without feeling? How do I know I got the potion of healing and not the potion of poison that is in the same compartment?

Because, and stay with me here, YOU KNOW WHERE THE POTION IS.