D&D 5E What is balance to you, and why do you care (or don't)?

[Crimson Longinus]

No - he's able to hit as well and do as much damage. There's nothing in there about how hard he hits.

But that is blatantly absurd. How hard one hits is directly related to how much damage one can do. Superman can punch trough a tank* with ease, Batman can't. Or shouldn't.

*or a tank-like super foe.

 

[Jer]

But that is blatantly absurd. How hard one hits is directly related to how much damage one can do. Superman can punch trough a tank* with ease, Batman can't. Or shouldn't.

But that's not what the damage stat or the to hit bonus in a game measures. Superman being able to destroy a tank would not be an attack roll, it would be a strength check where he pulls it apart with his bare hands. And Batman doesn't have the strength to do that.

The damage bonus on an attack roll is not about how hard you hit. it's about how well you hit. And you can get that from a number of different places - it could be you hitting harder, or it could be you hitting better. Batman hits better, Superman hits harder.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But that is blatantly absurd. How hard one hits is directly related to how much damage one can do. Superman can punch trough a tank* with ease, Batman can't. Or shouldn't.

*or a tank-like super foe.

tanks are not people... batman hits a tank (no effect) and superman hit tank (tank breaks) doesn't mean batman hits killer croc and he goes down... if superman hits killer croc he goes down.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As a fan of Batman, I feel personally attacked...

Believe it or not, Batman (in his heroic "I am the power that protects the powerless" versions, not the incredibly dull and almost always crapdark "I am a twisted, near-insane monster sublimating my aggression and depression by beating up helpless mentally ill victims") is one of my favorite superheroes. He is second only to Superman (in his "Clark Kent is who I really am"/"shining moral example to all" versions, not his "pompous superdick" or crapdark "grim and detached loner who only saves people for petty reasons" versions).

I adore these characters because they are such radically different ways of showing moral rectitude and passionate pursuit of justice, complementary and somehow both deeply American in character. Or, as the Bat himself said in JL, "I've got some things to say. I should have said then when you were here, but.... Despite our differences, I have nothing but respect for you. I hope you knew—know—that. You showed me that Justice doesn't always have to come from the darkness."

Batman and Superman are like a Rogue and a Paladin who find that, despite their radically different lives, they deeply respect and trust each other and are truly pursuing the same goals, even if they do it differently. That's a wonderful thing.

 

[billd91]

I mean what year did the silver age end? 1970ish so 50+ years ago, that may be a bit outside what most people picture as superman (now maybed you are 60+ years old and this was your superman growing up... I am in that boat too when I talk about the superman I read in the 90's people remind me that isn't the same as today)

Hah! I'm in my 50s and the Silver Age Superman was pretty dominant through the 1970s and early 80s as well - right up until John Byrne did his reboot... which has been subsequently rebooted how many times now?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Batman and Superman are like a Rogue and a Paladin who find that, despite their radically different lives, they deeply respect and trust each other and are truly pursuing the same goals, even if they do it differently. That's a wonderful thing.

a paliden hits with his great sword for 2d6 and smites for +3d6
the rogue hits with his short sword for 1d6+4d6 sneak attack

end result (assuming eqaul rouge dex and pal str and same + of weapon) they do the exact same damage 5d6+x

 

[Scribe]

Batman and Superman are like a Rogue and a Paladin who find that, despite their radically different lives, they deeply respect and trust each other and are truly pursuing the same goals, even if they do it differently. That's a wonderful thing.

I'm not a fan of Superman, but I can appreciate almost all versions of Batman, and I like this comparison.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Hah! I'm in my 50s and the Silver Age Superman was pretty dominant through the 1970s and early 80s as well - right up until John Byrne did his reboot... which has been subsequently rebooted how many times now?

85 into 'my' superman... 95 in zero hour 200X in infinite crisis, 20xx in nu52 then rebirth then death metal... so atleast 6 times in my life maybe double that
edit when was the bronze age then?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But that's not what the damage stat or the to hit bonus in a game measures. Superman being able to destroy a tank would not be an attack roll, it would be a strength check where he pulls it apart with his bare hands.

Why it is not an attack roll? And as it is superhero game, the 'tank' could just as easily be a guy in tank-like armour.

The damage bonus on an attack roll is not about how hard you hit. it's about how well you hit. And you can get that from a number of different places - it could be you hitting harder, or it could be you hitting better. Batman hits better, Superman hits harder.

And when we are talking about this sort of difference in strength it is utterly absurd. There should be a massive list of foes Batman simply is unable to harm, because they're just too tough, whilst Superman could harm them with ease, and in turn basically vapourise any normal human with single punch if he so chose.

This seem like the sort of attempt at balance I don't like. Try to absurdly balance a stargod with a normal skilled human. It just leads to nonsensical results and fails to represent their capabilities properly. I would just do this by making the Superman much higher power level and stating it outright that this is how it is, take it or leave it. But I'm a simulationist at heart.

 

[billd91]

85 into 'my' superman... 95 in zero hour 200X in infinite crisis, 20xx in nu52 then rebirth then death metal... so atleast 6 times in my life maybe double that
edit when was the bronze age then?

Roughly early 70s to about 1990-ish is what I usually see as the reference. Superman's power level was unaffected for a long time - though Clark Kent did shift to working for television and not so much the newspaper so I guess there was some updating of the world around him.