D&D 5E Is 5E Special

[GMforPowergamers]

How about none?

okay how do I show soomeone that just becuse a problem does not effect every last used doesn't mean it isn't a problme?
How do I show case that if some % of the user base has an issue that issue should be looked at not ignored?

No hyperbole, no analogies, and not making the rest of the thread (or at least those who don't agree with you) defend a position you have put forth and said is the experience you have in threads like these.

anyone can say "In my experience that doesn't come up" and have a perfectly normal conversation... you know not telling me I am doing it wrong, or that I don't count, or that "Most people agree with me so sucks to be you"

the thread did not turn into this discussion until you placed it here.

no 1 person places anything here... it is an ongoing discussion that if people do not wish to have they do not have to. I am forceing no one to respond or be responded to.

I apparently have had this account for 7 years, but I've only been seriously back into it for 8-9 months, and my entire experience with you is you saturating threads with self-declared victimhood and grievance

welcome back... I took a long break too (right around covid) but I have been off an on here since 3e was new. Most of my posts (and what I WANT to talk about) are my examples of my play and responding to others. MY favorite threads are ones where we all talk about our games... but yet more and more as I find that I DO keep talking about this.... the same reason you talk about what you do, it's what you think is important.

and part of it is "how big that comment is" I posted 3 times in 1 thread about a magic item that I REALLY wanted to hear what people had to say and everyone just kept going with arguments... so I joined the argument, then my post got responded to multi times... the last of teh 3 times talking about the disintegration sword was in part of teh augment where I tried to curve back to it... and everyone that responded avoided that part of it.

this isn't just a YOU, or a ME thing it's not an enworld thing even... it's an internet thing. If I start a post about how cool something is let's say "1980's voltron is cool" and no one disagrees I may get 1 or 2 responces, it might last a little while but most likely it will fade away... BUT if someone say "No it wasn't, it stinks" then that will lead to discussion and argument and that will blow up to maybe 100 pages...

(that I have no doubt was seeded by a real experience at onemore than one point), many times missing when you have proceeded to be rude, mean-spirited, or derisive to your fellow thread participants in your defense against the slings and arrows that happened in other, previous threads.

I have gotten more warnnings in this year ffrom mods then in the last 5 together so I am sure not blameless...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think noone tells you that your problems with the system are invalid.

this thread alone I have been told "sucks to be you" and "it's only a problem if you let it be"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You are literally talking about using a product differently than intended, amd then being offended it doesn't work as advertised. Like, of course it doesn't. You can't run a Ford with chocolate syrup in the tank.

wanting balanced classes is now "not as intended"

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, at which point I question the need for it, when tables have been provided in the DMG and Xanathars.

If that is the standard for which we define "balance" and "it works", then this spreadsheet is fairly meaningless I guess.

I'm talking about ability balancing, for Classes, Raves and Feats. It's what WotC uses to finalize designs for hardcore playtesting and then publication.

 

[Parmandur]

wanting balanced classes is now "not as intended"

The Classes are balanced, you demonstrated that with math in this very thread. You don't like the fashion of balance, but it exists and it works. The books explain it and how to use it.

 

[Scribe]

I'm talking about ability balancing, for Classes, Raves and Feats. It's what WotC uses to finalize designs for hardcore playtesting and then publication.

Right, but considering the math and tables released, are not specific to anything (races, classes, feats) and that's how encounters are 'balanced' we can only imagine that the internal tuning is just as loose, no?

If encounters are balanced with the most casual approach, or a hardcore min/Max party, then to Wizards, a poorly built character is balanced with a min/max one.

Now, that doesn't meet my personal view on balance, but clearly it meets Wizard's.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

this thread alone I have been told "sucks to be you" and "it's only a problem if you let it be"

I would say the opposite. If it IS a problem for you, then it’s a problem.

This does not mean the game is broken however. It means you may want to invest in a fix that increases your enjoyment.

Given the popularity of the game, it is unlikely to garner a systemic overhaul of significant proportions. Neither is it probably fruitful to convince people (like me) that they are more happy than we should be.

I get it—-I have had much time on the sidelines and it sucks. My solution was to embrace the sidelines until things changes. AD&D right up to 3e.

And just nothing during 4e! Should have gone back but I digress.

There is a lot of debate about the game philosophy and design goals. It might be an interesting academic debate and perfect grist for the mill. But the designers really have one thing in mind: fun. And of course their vision of fun is carried forward if it leads to sales.

It’s pretty subjective in many ways. I personally don’t care about perfect balance. I don’t want to be ineffectual but neither do I have out a stats program. Those fickle dice lay people low and raise them up often enough. Small sample sizes are an interesting beast!

I cut my teeth on a lack of balance. Sometimes I played a thief knowing darn well my MS and HS was low and my chance to hit AC 0 was…poor. But I wanted to try to solve challenges that way.

I am glad that balance is better now—-and it is. I just don’t think it’s the highlight of the game. There are so many func classes and combos…sure there may be some that are less powerful but if you still can solve in game problems and contribute, most people can enjoy the flavor enough to compensate for less than perfect balance.

That said was there any edition that really hit the sweet spot for you?

 

[Parmandur]

Right, but considering the math and tables released, are not specific to anything (races, classes, feats) and that's how encounters are 'balanced' we can only imagine that the internal tuning is just as loose, no?

If encounters are balanced with the most casual approach, or a hardcore min/Max party, then to Wizards, a poorly built character is balanced with a min/max one.

Now, that doesn't meet my personal view on balance, but clearly it meets Wizard's.

The key specific bit of public data that Mearls pointed to as a chest sheet is the Spell damage table on page 283 of the DMG. That reveals the basic bones of the point buy underlying the system, hit points.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

wanting balanced classes is now "not as intended"

You do want supernatural fighters. Many people don't want them.
Although I think today less people would mind fighters having a few supernatural powers at higher levels than 10 years ago. But I am just guessing without proof.

Here is something I wish they retained from 4e: paragon paths. This would be an easy way to add a supernatural layer over a mundane fighter.
Or just add a few abilities to chose from at higher levels baked in the base class, some of which might be clearly extraordinary.

 

[Scribe]

The key specific bit of public data that Mearls pointed to as a chest sheet is the Spell damage table on page 283 of the DMG. That reveals the basic bones of the point buy underlying the system, hit points.

I'll look it over, thanks.