D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[MuhVerisimilitude]

Well, that is why I always try to include that in my statements.

It's hard to get tone across in text. In my head it sounded joking in tone, but it seems that didn't come across well

 

[Scribe]

It's hard to get tone across in text. In my head it sounded joking in tone, but it seems that didn't come across well

Its not your fault. If there were not people who pushed their opinion as unassailable object truth, all discourse could improve.

 

[Clint_L]

It's only subjective in terms of people seeing it, though. The problem still exists whether or not people see it. D&D being more balanced wouldn't make it a worse system.

No, if that were the case it would not be a subjective problem, its would be an objective problem. Much of the air in this debate is expended by folks demanding that their subjective opinion be accepted as objective fact.

To be clear: many of us are not seeing the same problem that you and some others are seeing, and the evidence suggests that WotC is not seeing it reflected in their research. Insisting that you are factually right and we are factually wrong suggests a certain level of hubris. There is no objective right or wrong here.

There are other developers that actually see an issue with this and heck even WotC saw it back when they made the good edition (4E). Paizo is making PF2 which is much better balanced than 5E is, and Enworld has the A5E which is supposedly an attempt to deal with the same problem.

I don't want to get into edition warring, but the fact is that WotC dropped 4e like a hot potato and have reiterated MANY times that they are happy with 5e and keeping it. They are highly unlikely to embrace the design decisions of competitors who sell a fraction of the games that they do.

I'm willing to bet that it's purely a design team problem.

You haven't even established that "it" (whatever "it" is; I have yet to see full agreement even among those who keep making these threads) is a general problem. All you have established is that it is a problem for you. Except it's not even that, since you have already noted several preferred options available to you.

I mentioned in another comment that the problem is highly amplified if you have a player who is min-maxing and when it happens it can happen pretty much as early as 5th level, when 3rd level spells come into the picture.

The "problem," which is not widely agreed upon as an actual problem, becomes apparent to you as early as 5th level. Noted.

I retired a character because of balance issues. That's what actually made me realise this was a problem in the first place. Before that I mostly dismissed the problem entirely. I remember a friend of mine refused to play D&D because he argued magic was overpowered and I didn't see his point. Then one day I did.

Okay, so you have identified two people. WotC has a much bigger data set, and the evidence suggests that they are not perceiving a widespread problem. I typically have 1-2 campaigns ongoing in my home campaign, and run 4-6 more throughout the school year. I have watched every episode of Critical Role, Dimension 20, and a ton of other actual play shows. I did a statistical breakdown of the DPR from ALL episodes of CR (more than 300) and showed that melee classes dominate in that department. I have never had ONE person refuse to play D&D because "magic was overpowered", nor seen that happen. So while I respect your experience, I do not find it persuasive.

 

[Clint_L]

I see a lot of folks insisting that there is an objective balance problem here, while I am arguing that this is an inherently subjective problem. To solve this and see if it is possible to establish an ironclad premise, someone please give me a definition of "class balance" that is precisely measurable and does not depend on personal taste, campaign style, and experience.

While we wait for that to happen, let's just agree that this is a subjective debate, and respect each other's opinions as valid.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

No, if that were the case it would not be a subjective problem, its would be an objective problem. Much of the air in this debate is expended by folks demanding that their subjective opinion be accepted as objective fact.

I'm still not convinced it's a subjective problem. I mean the way the discussions are pretty much a constant noise on these forums (and every other D&D related forum) seems to make it actually a thing. I think it might also be indicative that it isn't the same thing at all on the PF2 boards.

I don't want to get into edition warring, but the fact is that WotC dropped 4e like a hot potato and have reiterated MANY times that they are happy with 5e and keeping it. They are highly unlikely to embrace the design decisions of competitors who sell a fraction of the games that they do.

Edition wars are the only good wars.

I dislike the implication that D&D 4E failed because it was balanced, and of course D&D is selling better than PF2. D&D is a much bigger brand.

You haven't even established that "it" (whatever "it" is; I have yet to see full agreement even among those who keep making these threads) is a general problem. All you have established is that it is a problem for you. Except it's not even that, since you have already noted several preferred options available to you.

Somewhat simplified:

• Martial classes don't grow outside of a few class abilities. Many martials have levels entirely without features.
• Magic solves most problems.
• Many non-martial classes are functionally eclipsed by other classes in certain configurations.
• When you design challenges you have to consider magic, but you almost never have to consider martial classes.
• Magic can easily deal with non-magical things, but there are few non-magical ways to interact with magic

The "problem," which is not widely agreed upon as an actual problem, becomes apparent to you as early as 5th level. Noted.

Noted.

Okay, so you have identified two people. WotC has a much bigger data set, and the evidence suggests that they are not perceiving a widespread problem. I typically have 1-2 campaigns ongoing in my home campaign, and run 4-6 more throughout the school year. I have watched every episode of Critical Role, Dimension 20, and a ton of other actual play shows. I did a statistical breakdown of the DPR from ALL episodes of CR (more than 300) and showed that melee classes dominate in that department. I have never had ONE person refuse to play D&D because "magic was overpowered", nor seen that happen. So while I respect your experience, I do not find it persuasive.

Yes, but:
1: I, myself, certainly argue that it is a problem.
2: Another person who I know agrees that it is a problem (and he thought it was a problem before I did)
3: Other people agree with me that it is in fact a problem too.

So it's not just two people saying this and DPR is one of the things I don't really think is that relevant. I've played two fighters in D&D and DPR wasn't really the problem. My problems were lack of mobility, it was easy to shut my fighter down, and also the party had a min-maxed bladesinger with an AC in the stratosphere.

 

[overgeeked]

Conversely, there are people on this very forum who will evade and dodge any attempt at getting them to admit that their opinions are not objective fact. So why not simply clarify what one feels is their opinion, an opinion expressed by others, or, in those rare cases, actual objective fact, like ASI being tied to species being better for the game?

Since you know those people exist, what’s a better use of your time: fighting to get them to admit a thing you know they never will or just accepting that they never will and moving on?

 

[Scribe]

Since you know those people exist, what’s a better use of your time: fighting to get them to admit a thing you know they never will or just accepting that they never will and moving on?

 

[Scott Christian]

So it's not just two people saying this and DPR is one of the things I don't really think is that relevant. I've played two fighters in D&D and DPR wasn't really the problem. My problems were lack of mobility, it was easy to shut my fighter down, and also the party had a min-maxed bladesinger with an AC in the stratosphere.

I would just ask that you look at your quote and think if it is actually a class-balance problem or a DM problem. It can be a problem for you and your table without actually being a problem with the design or ruleset of the game.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't know if it's a class-balnace problem or a DM problem, but the PHB walks new players down creating a dwarf fighter who has a Cha +1 and no social skills like its a good idea.

Correction: Numbers because I hate football

 

[Scribe]

I don't know if it's a class-balnace problem or a DM problem, but the PHB walks new players down creating a dwarf fighter who has a Cha 7and no social skills like its a good idea.

Because it absolutely is a fine idea. It's a party based game as you have pointed out.