D&D (2024) Do players really want balance?

[Xenolith234]

D&D isn't about dungeon delving anymore. 5E still had that in mind when it was written.

Hopefully it's rebalanced for the 2-3 fight adventuring day with our ultra powered heroes going HAM in both of them.

But I doubt it. Monsters would have to be massively redesigned and rebalanced, and I don't think WotC wants to put forth that much effort for an edition they feel is not an edition change (although it is).

Time for a "back to the dungeon" edition!

 

[Micah Sweet]

By my meaning of exploration, I'd like varying survival and tracking mechanics, environmental conditions and hazards, different wilderness terrains and their effects, varying temperatures and their effects, weather, tables to make maps of different terrains. I don't think any of them would be wildly difficult to include and flesh out more than something like "disadvantage on XYZ". I don't think the default ranger will ever feel satisfying or balanced to play (no matter what changes WotC makes to it) and to satisfy the player expectation of what a ranger should do/be until exploration has more material around it for a DM to challenge the player with.

From what i understand, the designers don't think 5e is a game of attrition, which leaves me the wonder - what is it then? You try to reduce the characters' resources so that you can challenge them, but if you're not able to do that because the designers are fighting against it, then how can you possibly challenge them? That might be balanced in players' minds, but the DM is also a player, and one that doesn't seem to be valued. Though DMs are outnumbered, our opinion should weigh more heavily than just the equivalent of 1 player at best, which I don't think we're even valued that much.

Maybe the designers aren't looking to challenge the PCs any more than the players are?

 

[Micah Sweet]

If they are labeled differently then they aren’t about the same thing. We have labels for reasons.

Nope. Threads can drift as well. A counterpoint relevant to the discussion relying on an example from another game is probably fine in that context, even if it causes the other game to be discussed a bit.

Saying ‘I’m going to post about other games here just because I can and I want to’ is a whole different level though.

Doesn’t matter IMO.

Not many.

More importantly why do you insist on inserting non-2024-d&d games into 2024-d&d threads? At least with the 5e tag you could make an argument that the other games you talked about were 5e too, but that’s not the case for 2024-d&d.

Because how other games handle a general topic like, "do players care about balance?" is relevant. Just like suggesting or talking about an alternative to the 5.5 ranger in a 5.5-tagged thread about what do we do with the 5.5 ranger is relevant.

 

[Micah Sweet]

D&D isn't about dungeon delving anymore. 5E still had that in mind when it was written.

Hopefully it's rebalanced for the 2-3 fight adventuring day with our ultra powered heroes going HAM in both of them.

But I doubt it. Monsters would have to be massively redesigned and rebalanced, and I don't think WotC wants to put forth that much effort for an edition they feel is not an edition change (although it is).

Hard to call it the same edition if 2014 cared about dungeon delving and 2024 doesn't, and they're both supposed to be the corebook for 5e.

 

[Hussar]

I gotta ask, why are you folks having such a difficult time challenging the characters?

I'm running Shattered Obelisk right now, and I've seen some pretty skin of the teeth fights. Six Revenants, all immune to turn, 2 attacks per round at +7 dealing 6d6+4 damage per hit. How is that not beating the snot out of your 7th or 8th level party? Or, currently, one behir, which has, as of the end of the session, dropped two PC's down to single digit HP with it's breath weapon, and swallowed the barbarian. This is going to be one seriously rough fight.

I just don't get the whole "Oh, I cannot challenge the PC's, they're just too strong" thing. It utterly baffles me. Ramping up difficulty is just so easy.

 

[Xenolith234]

I gotta ask, why are you folks having such a difficult time challenging the characters?

I'm running Shattered Obelisk right now, and I've seen some pretty skin of the teeth fights. Six Revenants, all immune to turn, 2 attacks per round at +7 dealing 6d6+4 damage per hit. How is that not beating the snot out of your 7th or 8th level party? Or, currently, one behir, which has, as of the end of the session, dropped two PC's down to single digit HP with it's breath weapon, and swallowed the barbarian. This is going to be one seriously rough fight.

I just don't get the whole "Oh, I cannot challenge the PC's, they're just too strong" thing. It utterly baffles me. Ramping up difficulty is just so easy.

I don’t think it’s purely a matter of challenging them in combat because we can always use stronger monsters (though default monsters are pretty dull to run), but that the sense of challenge is only merely temporary. Got knocked unconscious? Eh, you’re not dead yet. 1 point of healing and you’re right as rain (and it resets all of your dying-ness!). And challenging characters in other tiers not combat-related is mostly nonexistent.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because how other games handle a general topic like, "do players care about balance?" is relevant.

Not really in the context of '2024 D&D'

Just like suggesting or talking about an alternative to the 5.5 ranger in a 5.5-tagged thread about what do we do with the 5.5 ranger is relevant.

1. This isn't a 5.5-tagged thread. It's a '2024 D&D' tagged thread.
2. I have no idea what the 2024-D&D Ranger has to do with the thread, though maybe it drifted in a way that makes sense.

But the issue is more this sentiment.

And that's unfortunate for them, but I won't limit my conversation to WotC only just because some folks are required to tow their line if they want to play 5e at all.

 

[Micah Sweet]

TSR era D&D had supplements that went into detail on exploration IIRC, but it's just another area that varies so much dependent on situation that I never found them useful. Doing exploration is a whole other topic, and what it means probably differs from one person to the next. I think the DMG should and hopefully will provide better suggestions, but I think suggestions are all we'll ever get.

Why exactly is exploration too diverse a topic for which to have granular rules, but combat isn't? You don't think combat differs from one person to the next, or that it varies based on the situation?

 

[Xenolith234]

Why exactly is exploration too diverse a topic for which to have granular rules, but combat isn't? You don't think combat differs from one person to the next, or that it varies based on the situation?

I believe exploration is definitely on-topic regarding balance in this thread, and not too diverse, if we’re looking at balance as a whole.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don’t think it’s purely a matter of challenging them in combat because we can always use stronger monsters (though default monsters are pretty dull to run), but that the sense of challenge is only merely temporary. Got knocked unconscious? Eh, you’re not dead yet. 1 point of healing and you’re right as rain (and it resets all of your dying-ness!). And challenging characters in other tiers not combat-related is mostly nonexistent.

And because these issues are addressed in other 5e games, why should we be prohibited from discussing them just because someone put a 2024 tag (the current and expected to be most popular version of 5e) on the thread?