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

[Lanefan]

And what, exactly, does the Fighter contribute to social scenes that isn't literally what ANYONE can do?

That's the whole point: in those scenes a Fighter is pretty much the same as "anyone". In a mass melee the party 'face' might be pretty much the same as 'anyone' while the Fighters whale away and do their thing.

What you're not giving credit to is the concept that yes, in most situations anyone can contribute, even if not much. It's on the player to figure out how, and tha represents part of the challenge of play: finding ways to stick your oar in during situations where your character isn't necessarily intended to be front and centre.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Adn demonizing balance is usually about keeping the status quo for the spotlight hogs.

Most of the "balance isnt important" posters would flip their script if we ever had an edition where the mundanes were at the top of the heap. They walked out when 4E dared to just make casters slightly better than everyone else.

Balance and character agency are different measures for me. The low ability of non-caster to affect the world with their class ability is more of a sticking point than damage per round. Other games award the non-casters more meta currency or build points. My 1 refresh kinetomancer in Dresden is so much more at the mercy of the dice than the non-magic users. D&D doesn't even try for balance, let alone agency.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So you just want the characters to be all-capable superheroes that always win with ease?

I want them to be able to do awesome things. This is not the same thing no matter how many times people purposefully mischaracterize it as that.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Do you mean this is the desired result following character progression through play (so higher levels become D&D-as-supers) or following power creep in player options (so 2014 5E characters start off weak and 2022 5E characters can do much more)? I feel like there's a distinction to be made.

I feel like we should have started with 2024 5e and not gone though all that other wasteful song and dance.

 

[Ondath]

I feel like we should have started with 2024 5e and not gone though all that other wasteful song and dance.

Hmm, I had taken your post to initially mean the former and I disagree, but to each their own!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I want them to be able to do awesome things. This is not the same thing no matter how many times people purposefully mischaracterize it as that.

But you specifically said you didn't want arms race, I.E. the opposition to be scaled to match. So I have hard time seeing how only buffing the PCs but not their challenges wouldn't lead to them winning with ease.

 

[Lanefan]

Except for the arms race, this is the desired result for me, yes.

So I'm unclear here - are you saying you prefer the player-side to be able to become stronger but that you prefer the DM-side not be able to compensate for this?

'Cuase if yes, how can the DM viably present any significant (as in dangerous or legitimately threatening) challenges to the PCs?

 

[Vaalingrade]

But you specifically said you didn't want arms race, I.E. the opposition to be scaled to match. So I have hard time seeing how only buffing the PCs but not their challenges wouldn't lead to them winning with ease.

The opposition being scaled to match isn't an arms race. And an arms race is constant escalation back and forth with one side trying to get one over on the other ala RPG horror stories.

 

[Lanefan]

The opposition being scaled to match isn't an arms race. And an arms race is constant escalation back and forth with one side trying to get one over on the other ala RPG horror stories.

Let's say we have a party with a range of characters in it - all the same level, sure, but a couple of them are only about 5 on the awesome* scale where a couple of others are up around 9. That gives an average awesomeness of 7.

You want to balance these guys out. A laudable goal. But rather than by cutting the 9s to 7 and boosting the 5s to 7 (thus keeping the same party average), you want to simply boost the 5s up to 9s.

So OK, now they're all 9s. But now you've made the party's average a 9 instead of a 7, and if the DM can't compensate for this by jumping up the challenges a bit to match this power boost the party is going to curb-stomp things that previously were legitimate challenges. And while that might be fun for a while, I can't see it being fun forever.

And where does the arms race start? Right here, when the players of the original 9s realize they're not the shining stars any more that they had become used to being, and want themselves jumped up to 10 or even 11 in order to get that status back. DM caves. Party's average increases a bit more. DM has to up the challenges again. Lather rinse repeat.

* - where awesome is here defined as having the ability and-or power(s) to overcome reasonable challenges in neat cool ways.

 

[Vaalingrade]

And where does the arms race start? Right here, when the players of the original 9s realize they're not the shining stars any more that they had become used to being, and want themselves jumped up to 10 or even 11 in order to get that status back.

Or the group is all reasonable adults and that doesn't happen.