D&D 5E All levels are not equal

[mellored]

Levels 5, 11, and 17 are supposed to be big levels.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I think that the comparison with feats is fishy in the first place. Yes, Martial Adept is weaker than a level of Battlemaster, but a Battlemaster never takes Martial Adept. The point of the feat is that it allows a character with other skills and abilities to replicate certain abilities that are normally the domain of another class.

Same with Magic Initiate and Ritual Casting: adding some cantrips (and a first-level spell) or rituals means less to a spell caster than it does to a character without spells.

The only legitimate comparison for a feat is comparing it to an ASI. By that measure, feats are not all the same strength (obviously), but comparison with comparable abilities in class advancement (within another class) is not going to be properly calibrated.

 

[Ahrimon]

If you compare Martial Adapt with Battlemaster they won't be anywhere near equal, but that is because, like all feats they aren't "about the same level" One is a feat that ANYONE can get at any level that they are allowed a feat. The other is an ability that you can only get by having 3 levels of fighter, and the appropriate Str/Dex if you didn't start out as a fighter. Those are two wildly different opportunity costs, so yes the Battlemaster ability is going to be much stronger. Same with magic initiate. A feat that requires no multi-classing (an optional but common rule) and it's corresponding ability score requirements, available at any level you get an ASI, and doesn't derail your current class progression and access to higher level class abilities. Of course it's going to be weaker than taking a level in a casting class.

I think your mistake is not looking at the opportunity costs for feat vs class ability and assuming that just because you CAN get them near the same level that they should be equal in power.

 

[Xeviat]

Not so much in the sense I thought you were getting at. What if a build ends up taking the 'ribbon' level, but waits a long time for the 'big feature' (or worse, never gets it)?

Of course, I'd prefer if every level was perfectly balanced. But there is something to be said for getting a feature that, on it's own, is a bit better than other features. It makes it feel big and important. And if you have to "pay for it" by having a weaker feature before it, that's a fair trade to me.

I suppose multiclassers build around them. I know in classless, skill systems, you have to make choices like that all the time.

 

[jgsugden]

Power balance is not essential to the game. Every edition to date has had imbalances in power. We've been able to enjoy all of them. Don't stress if all options are not equal. The only questions we need consider are whether an option gives someone so much power that the game becomes less fun for others.

Further, as noted by some, if you want to compare powers, a single class character that takes a feat is not disrupting or delaying access to abilities achieved at a higher level in the class they are advancing. That has to be factored in when comparing multi-class levels versus feats, etc...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Power balance is not essential to the game. Every edition to date has had imbalances in power.

Some orders of magnitude greater than others.

And, 5e tries to evoke all of them, particularly the classic game, where, though balance was repeatedly called out as an objective, it was not much delivered.

We've been able to enjoy all of them.

The question is, though: enjoy in spite of imbalance, or because of it?
I think in the case of D&D, a lot of the fans who stuck with the game all through the TSR and 3.x/PF years found ways to leverage the game's unintentional imbalance, or intentional rewards for system mastery, and enjoy it /because of/ rather than in spite of them.
And, since that's most the game's history, right there, 5e really needs to continue supporting that sort of experience.

Even so, the OP's a fair theoretical discussion.

 

[jrowland]

2nd level is better than all the other levels. It DOUBLES your previous level. No other level can do that.

 

[TwoSix]

2nd level is better than all the other levels. It DOUBLES your previous level. No other level can do that.

Bah, 1st level is INFINITELY better than 0th level.

 

[jrowland]

Bah, 1st level is INFINITELY better than 0th level.

0th level is undefined.

 

[TwoSix]

0th level is undefined.

That's not what my commoner friend L'Hôpital told me.