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

[Medic]

That feels like a 2e answer that lost the shuffle by the year 2000 with the d20 system

casters makeing a belt of magnificence (+x to all 6 stats) that only worked for an elf with wizard training to make it cheaper was a common trick i saw... making it worse was if you FOUND a +X item to one stat of course let the fighter have that... he only needs 1 or 2 stats anyway.

by 4e/5e with +x wand/rod/staff in the game (and orb and totem and ki focus) it got worse.

if everyone is given the option to buy items wizards have BETTER options today with spell completion items (wand/staff) then anything you have to be a fighter for...


in this world you imagine would not rogues with use magic device and casters just load up with scrolls that are cheaper for use then potions? and they too can buy potions (that gets around concentraion)

The problem is not so much that the old way was fantastic, rather, the assumed need to buy items was stripped out and not really supplanted with a meaningful alternative, which hurts martials (who didn't have access to things like Fly or Invisibility in the first place) a heck of a lot more than it hurts casters (who still have those things in their repertoire anyway).

 

[Willie the Duck]

I'm seeing a lot of discussion in this thread about how martials need a boost and casters need a nerf. Martials (at least as presented in 5th Ed) do suffer some endemic problems that I've yet to see discussed in this thread, but I am surprised that nobody has brought up the harm that the de-emphasis of money, magic items, and crafting has done. I could vomit forth an essay on the subject, but I'll make it brief.

Money was supposed to be the ambrosia that allowed some degree of parity between classes. In concept, martials didn't need a bunch of class features, because they were "supposed to" accumulate (either by finding, buying or crafting) an expansive arsenal of useful items that casters either didn't particularly need or couldn't really use. Winged Boots, for instance, could of course be a boon to a Wizard, but they would really expand the options available to a Paladin, and only the latter could effectively use armor with the Reflecting property. Heck, being able to shop around for an array of potions meant that a Barbarian could have access to spells like Invisibility, Haste, and Tongues.

Similarly, the loss of Use Magic Device is just plain insulting to Rogues. The option for a sufficiently rich or lucky Rogue to unexpectedly pull out a Meteor Swarm or Time Stop when the situation seemed dicey is now absent, save for one archetype that can't do it reliably anyways. Even using wands and low-level scrolls to play a budget version of Inspector Gadget is gone. Can't have another class stepping on the toes of that sad, oppressed Wizard, I guess.

No, it wasn't perfect. Yes, 5th Edition has a list of magic items and rules for buying them tucked away in some splatbook or another. But between the "you don't need magic items, wink wink" design philosophy, absence of crafting, and no reliable rules for shopping around in the core system (not to mention the ludicrous prices!), how the heck is a Fighter supposed to stay stocked up on the good stuff that would actually keep them relevant at level seventeen?

That feels like a 2e answer that lost the shuffle by the year 2000 with the d20 system

Exactly when and how I'd be willing to debate, but I definitely think the general point is right. The TSR-era (or AD&D+basic/classic if 2e isn't included) metric --where treasure acquired was your power* (both through magic items/spells found and gp=xp), and the divergence in how readily one could leverage the treasure charts** being a benefit to one class or another--was a thing that worked... fairly well at keeping the balance*. 3e cut into that, but I can't decide if it was more or less about the formula-ification of magic items (thus the wizard could craft wizard-specific items if the random drops didn't play to their favor), change in how items worked, change in how being a caster worked (certainly a huge component), or just a general change in design/play philosophy. What I mean with the last one is that I think a lot of people, having now played many games other than D&D, tended to say, in effect, "my character being good at what they do shouldn't have to come from what special items they've acquired along the way." That sounds silly in that 3e was perhaps one of the more magic-item centric versions of the game (maybe), but certainly in the design phase (before how it would shake out was clearly know), things like feats and a more rigorous skill system in the like spoke to an idea that how you build your character ought to be a major component of how well they work. What's really missing from that scenario is a really well-thought-through "okay, but then what?"
***and if you wanted to do something like a LotR-style campaign where treasure-hunting wasn't a primary goal you knew you had to house-rule in a fix
** Such as so many of the best magic weapons being weapons only fighters/thieves could use
*** they still needed to figure out a benefit for fighters/thieves after name level once it became clear that most people didn't play domain-rulership; and since many of the limitations on casters were 'make it annoying to do' to compensate for great power, most house-rules/rules-ignored tended to increase caster power.
**** for those that think Book of 9 Swords or D&D 4e had that answer, good for you. I think even then a cohesive plan was a little lacking.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I can't decide if it was more or less about the formula-ification of magic items (thus the wizard could craft wizard-specific items if the random drops didn't play to their favor), change in how items worked, change in how being a caster worked (certainly a huge component), or just a general change in design/play philosophy. What I mean with the last one is that I think a lot of people, having now played many games other than D&D, tended to say, in effect, "my character being good at what they do shouldn't have to come from what special items they've acquired along the way." That sounds silly in that 3e was perhaps one of the more magic-item centric versions of the game (maybe), but certainly in the design phase (before how it would shake out was clearly know), things like feats and a more rigorous skill system in the like spoke to an idea that how you build your character ought to be a major component of how well they work. What's really missing from that scenario is a really well-thought-through "okay, but then what?"**

I will say that for every improvement d20/3e brought it brought regressions too. "I take 2 steps forward then 3 steps back" but yeah. I can see where MOST of it was intended to help.

but I want to pull one part out of context, even though I agree overall

"my character being good at what they do shouldn't have to come from what special items they've acquired along the way."

it isn't REALLY that they don't want an item... it's that they don't want it to be under DM control.

Warlocks can get there power from an item... and it is one of the classes I see the most. Artificers while not as popular show there is some call for a 'magic item class'.

the problem is this. if tomorrow I sit down and draw up a character that is supposed to be like sherlock homes (we will say I am building as a rogue) and I play 3 sessions leveling to 3rd, take my subclass, then in game 4 or 5 find a magic ring that through my will power can have multi effects (Mage hand, eldritch blast, message, and shield) at the costs of charges... but I don't know how to recharge it. and I hold onto it and use a few charges until game 9 or 10 (now almost level 5) I find a battery that I can use to regain charges during a short or long rest... I wont mind. My sherlock homes found a green lantern ring and I am very happy with it.

if however I sit down and draw up a character that is going to be a sorcerer and almost all of her powers will come from her cosmic rod/staff and the DM tells me I will get that item in game... and I have earn/find it... I will NOT be happy. My star girl just isn't very stargirl without the cosmic rod.

If I can design a green lantern and play it without the DM needing to give me the ring that's cool. If I GET a GL ring random though it wont feel 'bad'

 

[Lanefan]

Fighter's hit just as well as anyone else, since they arent even allowed to get a higher proficiency bonus than the guys who study magic. For all that vast fighter training, they aren't any better at using a dagger than a wizard with the same stats.

Well, that's the root problem right there.

At any given level Fighters should be hella better than Wizards at fighting.

Harder to kill/disable? He has one of the worst save setups so 1 more HP/level doesn't really cut it.

Another part of the problem. Wizards used to be on d4 hit dice, Fighters on d10; a 3-point/level difference on average. Non-Fighters also had their Con bonus to hit points cap out at +2, Fighters* had no such cap. End result: Fighters were usually way tougher than Wizards.

But, the Wizard players squawked as only they can, and Wizards got more bennies...

* - and their subclasses.

Valor Bards wear armor, get 2 attacks, cast full spells, get a ton of USEFUL abilities, etc. Apparently magic is sooo easy to learn that the bard can get almost all of the fighter's stuff, a massive amount of bard stuff, more skills, expertise, AND full casting!

Bards IMO shouldn't be full casters, and have yet to be done right in any edition (nor by my numerous homebrew attempts over the years). They are the Class That Cannot Be Designed, I think.

 

[payn]

Well, that's the root problem right there.

At any given level Fighters should be hella better than Wizards at fighting.

Another part of the problem. Wizards used to be on d4 hit dice, Fighters on d10; a 3-point/level difference on average. Non-Fighters also had their Con bonus to hit points cap out at +2, Fighters* had no such cap. End result: Fighters were usually way tougher than Wizards.

But, the Wizard players squawked as only they can, and Wizards got more bennies...

* - and their subclasses.

Bards IMO shouldn't be full casters, and have yet to be done right in any edition (nor by my numerous homebrew attempts over the years). They are the Class That Cannot Be Designed, I think.

Maybe if you squawked harder you could have wizards who die from paper cuts back.

Edit lol

 

[Micah Sweet]

Maybe if you squawked harder you could have die from paper cut wizards back.

What does this mean?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Well, that's the root problem right there.

At any given level Fighters should be hella better than Wizards at fighting.

Yup, it is exactly that. if I make a STR 14 wizard next to a Str 16 fighter and you will find both are similar in a fight... without magic.

Another part of the problem. Wizards used to be on d4 hit dice, Fighters on d10; a 3-point/level difference on average. Non-Fighters also had their Con bonus to hit points cap out at +2, Fighters* had no such cap. End result: Fighters were usually way tougher than Wizards.

yeah and HD stopped at 9HD (10 for those d4 wizards) so at 20th level both had WAY less hp

But, the Wizard players squawked as only they can, and Wizards got more bennies...

yup... and I get some of it. I even understand cantrips and better all day uses... BUT they can't come without giving the fighter (martial/caster really not fighter/wizard) some of the power too.

Bards IMO shouldn't be full casters, and have yet to be done right in any edition (nor by my numerous homebrew attempts over the years). They are the Class That Cannot Be Designed, I think.

I have to agree again

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What does this mean?

if enough people complain wizards are too battle ready maybe WotC will bring them back to d4hp and less + prof to hit then fighters

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The reason I dont like money and items being baked into the game balance is the legion of GMs who think it works just fine if they never give you any.

I've said this before: I don't want martials be balanced via magic items, but if martials are balanced via magic items, then certain base amount of items that are automatically given must be baked in the class progression, just like wizards get certain base amount of spells while they level.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Fighter's hit just as well as anyone else, since they arent even allowed to get a higher proficiency bonus than the guys who study magic. For all that vast fighter training, they aren't any better at using a dagger than a wizard with the same stats. Harder to kill/disable? He has one of the worst save setups so 1 more HP/level doesn't really cut it.

Valor Bards wear armor, get 2 attacks, cast full spells, get a ton of USEFUL abilities, etc. Apparently magic is sooo easy to learn that the bard can get almost all of the fighter's stuff, a massive amount of bard stuff, more skills, expertise, AND full casting!

Face it, the fighter is the equivalent of the Arby's shift manager that peaked in highschool. Fighters suck.

I think you are overselling this a bit. Valor bards, in actual game play, do not fight as well as fighters regardless of the medium armor and 2 attacks (honestly they are fairly lackluster). Fighters, If-And-Only-If the 5 minute workday* is policed, are genuinely better than most others at the one task they've been allowed -- fighting really well. The extra feats, fighitng styles, 3+ attacks at higher level, native proficiency in all weapons and armor, action surge, and of course the archetype choices people so oft leave out when doing these comparisons, really do have an effect. Is a fighter a lot better at fighting with a dagger? No, and that is an interesting design decision on 5e's part; however they may very well be quite a bit better at fighting with two daggers (2wf), or surviving while fighting with a dagger (because they are in armor), or more likely just better at fighting with the greatswords or halberds or longbows that play better to their strengths.
*Which I will again the oft-unread DMG has advice and optional rules and a clear rundown on the consequences of decisions regarding this issue.

I'm not saying fighters don't suck, they do. However, it is when combat stops which is where they start sucking.

it isn't REALLY that they don't want an item... it's that they don't want it to be under DM control.

Warlocks can get there power from an item... and it is one of the classes I see the most. Artificers while not as popular show there is some call for a 'magic item class'.

the problem is this. if tomorrow I sit down and draw up a character that is supposed to be like sherlock homes (we will say I am building as a rogue) and I play 3 sessions leveling to 3rd, take my subclass, then in game 4 or 5 find a magic ring that through my will power can have multi effects (Mage hand, eldritch blast, message, and shield) at the costs of charges... but I don't know how to recharge it. and I hold onto it and use a few charges until game 9 or 10 (now almost level 5) I find a battery that I can use to regain charges during a short or long rest... I wont mind. My sherlock homes found a green lantern ring and I am very happy with it.

if however I sit down and draw up a character that is going to be a sorcerer and almost all of her powers will come from her cosmic rod/staff and the DM tells me I will get that item in game... and I have earn/find it... I will NOT be happy. My star girl just isn't very stargirl without the cosmic rod.

If I can design a green lantern and play it without the DM needing to give me the ring that's cool. If I GET a GL ring random though it wont feel 'bad'

I think we're on the same trail here. At that point the fact that the power comes from a ring and not the character ends up being important in very few situations (I guess the 'wake up naked in jail' scenario). Players, appetites whetted by playing not-D&D (including things like Hero System, where a green lantern-like ring is a specific option bought with build resources) and the slow accumulation of character build options in late 1e through 2e and in later BECMI as well, wanted the ability to choose and make internal to the character's being certain factors of their abilities. Not inherently an unwarranted desire, simply one that the downstream consequences have never been fully addressed (or I guess they have, and the results favor casters).