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

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Back atcha chief. I'm sure you can point to objective data on the vast multitudes who need the fighter to be the designated training wheel class.
I and others here have played with people like that. That makes their existence an objective fact. You on the other hand have no such objectivity to your opinion. Further, I reject your Strawman of my position. I never claimed "vast multitudes" or "training wheel."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why do we need simple at all? The whole idea of 'simple' seems to be either patronizing new players and assuming they can't learn how to operate Rage, or appeasing people who say they don't want to engage with the game most of the time.
if back in the 90's I was forced to play a 5e fighter champion or something like it well everyone else had more power more choice and more complexity there would be 1 less D&D player
 

Undrave

Legend
Who says the Warlord isn't wide enough for a full class? It hasn't been made yet, but that doesn't mean that it won't be. The Warlord is easily as wide and probably wider as a concept than an Artificer is.
Every time we bring up a possible 5e Warlord we get an entire Chorus of 'You got the Battlemaster' and 'What makes it different from a Fighter?', and 'It's just a Fighter subclass!' or, worse, 'You got the Purple Dragon Knight'.
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
Also "player who is great at roleplay but isn't at all interested in game mechanics and would rather leave all that to the DM".
I've never met this particular beast in the wild. Not that they don't exist, but I have no experience with them. Usually I have to contend with "great roleplayer who believes in making the worst character possible" (Guy and Dale, I'm sorry but it's true!) and "quiet guy who suffers from decision paralysis and takes 5 minutes to calculate whether he hit or not and how much damage he did" (Sorry Drew, if you see this!).
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
Every time we bring up a possible 5e Warlord we get an entire Chorus of 'You got the Battlemaster' and 'What makes it different from a Fighter?', and 'It's just a Fighter subclass!' or, worse, 'You got the Purple Dragon Knight'.
The last time I brought up the Purple Dragon Knight/Banneret in a thread as a proto-Warlord, I got told "I don't allow that subclass in my games". Martials aren't allowed to have heals (according to some)!
 

I and others here have played with people like that. That makes their existence an objective fact. You on the other hand have no such objectivity to your opinion. Further, I reject your Strawman of my position. I never claimed "vast multitudes" or "training wheel."
"My experience is objective fact. Your experience is opinion"

Do you hear yourself?
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Why do we need simple at all? The whole idea of 'simple' seems to be either patronizing new players and assuming they can't learn how to operate Rage, or appeasing people who say they don't want to engage with the game most of the time.
Engaging with the game does not always equate to engaging with the game's mechanics.

This is one way in which RPGs are different than pretty much any other type of game, in that unlike most games one can engage with and play an RPG perfectly well as a pure roleplayer without really needing to interface very much with the game's mechanics.
 



The last time I brought up the Purple Dragon Knight/Banneret in a thread as a proto-Warlord, I got told "I don't allow that subclass in my games". Martials aren't allowed to have heals (according to some)!
i just got into an argument last week on these boards that Martial healing can never happen and I brought up second wind (not even with banneret) just I heal myself 1d10+x on command and it cause an outrage
 

Remove ads

Top