D&D 5E (2014) Is the imbalance between classes in 5e accidental or by design?

[GMforPowergamers]

I'll give you that one. I love magic in that system!

what is that?

 

[NotAYakk]

D&D 5E - Is the imbalance between classes in 5e accidental or by design?

I have literally been told that Rage is too hard to operate. What, is halving damage too much math?

www.enworld.org

No, 4e doesn't produce a balanced game.

I played 4e extensively. Suppose we start with per-essentials.

A level 30 PC in 4e has 18 feats, 3 encounter powers, 3 daily powers, 1 paragon path, 1 epic destiny, 1 race, 1 theme, 1 class, 1 subclass, and about 10 items of consequence. By the rules, swapping items around isn't all that hard, except for your top-tier ones (L 25+ ones).

In my experience, a well optimized PC can easily make each of those picks generate a character that is 10% better at their job (the easiest of which to quantify is damage) than a run of the mill choice.

18+3+3+1+1+1+1+1+1+10 is 40 choices. If choices are a mere 5% better than baseline, that gives us 1.05^40, or 7x competence ratio between an optimized PC and an unoptimized one.

Even by level 11, you have 6 feats, a half dozen items, 3 encounter powers, 3 daily powers, 1 class, 1 theme, 1 subclass, and 1 paragon path; if optimized choices average 5% better than baseline that produces a character 3x as competent as a baseline PC (1.05^22 =~ 3). And sure, paragon path doesn't matter much; but I skipped utility powers, so there is still more than enough room.

And this isn't theory crafting. I've played games where this happens, watching a PC that was fine at level 1 devolve to incompetent by Paragon tier. Why? Because at level 1, picking everything for flavour was viable! You got to pick class, race, theme, 2 powers and 1 feat. 6 picks, even if the optimizer was 5% better in each choice, they where only 34% better at their job. They could contribute; heck, they might not notice!

Then each optimized choice accumulated, and you kept falling behind because you picked every feat and every paragon paths and powers for flavour, not for mechanical optimization purposes. What worked fine at level 1, generated an incompetent PC by level 11.

What more, monsters split the difference. If you didn't do any optimization, the number of rounds to kill an average encounter grows with level in 4e, and the number of rounds it takes for them to kill you also grows. Higher level monsters mainly became deadlier not from higher damage or more HP, but from higher ATK and defences -- so if you failed to optimize accuracy, you are reduced to your turns consisting of a lot of "miss".

And different classes did have a different optimization ceiling in practice. The ones that did best? Almost always the ones with more options to pick between (PHB1 classes).

 

[teitan]

Deeply rooted in the old Nerd VS Jock dichotomy so prevalent in the 80s. I think this fantasy is still super popular with the Wizard players.

I think it was rooted in more than that. It was rooted in the general “strong man vs weak man” stereotypes going back thousands of years where the Wizard was the fantasy of the man left behind because he was weaker and found the secret to untold power and used it to become the advisor to the king or usurp the throne and avenge himself on the bullies. It’s classic power dynamics of our Hunter/gatherer roots where the weak were left to work with the women and children and the strong Hunted or went to war to protect the resources of the tribe/city/kingdom.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Characters have plenty of cool things. Feats, class levels, etc.

Unless DMs forbid feats, which a huge number do, as I have been repeatedly reminded.

Class levels are great! It's just too bad so many DMs refuse to ever start higher than level 1 and make sure to drag out every level as long as they can.

Sure they do, if the DM throws deadly encounters at the party and/or plays enemies like a tactical rpg.

Which is something nearly every 5e DM complains about. Combat is too easy! "Deadly" is a cakewalk! Players are just handed victory! There's no challenge! Etc., etc., ad nauseam.

But encounter difficulty in 5e is really easy to scale.

My experience is exactly the reverse, having seen multiple campaigns fold because different DMs repeatedly struggled to make encounters that weren't TPKs.

 

[teitan]

Debates like this are why I always liked the variable XP tables of older editions as a balancing factor as well as ability score requirements. You have to meet certain criteria to be an Army Ranger, Navy Seal, get a doctorate etc so the classes like Ranger, Paladin etc had more stringent requirements to become one and to advance or even retain the abilities. You no longer met those criteria you were no longer of that rank until you could be reinstated. I disagree with the gender limits etc in 1e but some of that with regard to choosing class kept those classes rare even amongst players and also made high powered wizards mean something even to players for example. DCC has a breakdown of what the characters mean to the world in one chapter that also help drive it home too without variable XP charts.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

My experience is exactly the reverse, having seen multiple campaigns fold because different DMs repeatedly struggled to make encounters that weren't TPKs.

my experence is it is easy to TPK and easy to make cake walks... it's hard to make challenges that wont TPK

 

[Flamestrike]

8 years of this same thread popping up 3 times a week in various iterations, and still nobody has been able to post any actual evidence that wizards (or indeed any casters) are actually unbalanced compared to other classes.

Heck, I've literally ran several online games here (including at 7th, 11th and 15th level) in a mixed party where - in every single game - the Fighter was the MVP, and all classes contributed equally.

'OP Spellcasters' are a myth.

The cause of the problem, to my eye, seems to be DMs that can't run high level games.

For the 4th time, I'll happily run a high level (lets go 17th this time) one shot, cleaving closely to the DMG encounter creation/ adventuring day guidelines, and ill run it for 5 of you.

I bet you London to a Brick the Wizard is not OP compared to the other PCs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

8 years of this same thread popping up 3 times a week in various iterations, and still nobody has been able to post any actual evidence that wizards (or indeed any casters) are actually unbalanced compared to other classes.

what evidence will you except?

Heck, I've literally ran several online games here (including at 7th, 11th and 15th level) in a mixed party where - in every single game - the Fighter was the MVP, and all classes contributed equally.

okay how can you have an MVP AND equally contribute?

'OP Spellcasters' are a myth.

I assume you have evidence of this

The cause of the problem, to my eye, seems to be DMs that can't run high level games.

the issue begins at level 3. It gets worse through level 10, then gets slightly better at level 11 but goes back down hill from there

 

[Maxperson]

This is exactly my point! No, you are not just playing with the alternate DMG rule. You have modified the alternate DMG rule into a house rule by increasing the duration of several spells.

Note if you DON’T do that, the alternate house rule doesn’t work particularly well, and it overnerfs wizards at low levels.

That's not a change to the alternate resting rule. That's a change to those spells only. And it makes sense to house rule those spells. I think I'll adopt those changes and tell the wizard at my table about them next session.

 

[Flamestrike]

I assume you have evidence of this

Yeah. The literally 3 times now I have ran (on here) a PbP high level campaign at levels 7, 13 and 15. In none of those one shots, were the casters OP in any way, shape or form.

Actual empirical evidence, instead of the standard handwringing on here.

the issue begins at level 3. It gets worse through level 10, then gets slightly better at level 11 but goes back down hill from there

Fine. Lets run a 3rd level one shot. Ill DM. You can be the Wizard. I'll DM and run the other 3 PC's.

Are you in? I'll take 'No' as a concession you know Im right.