Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 1451608" data-attributes="member: 158">I think that balance is important between characters, but not the simplistic version of balance that means "combat effective." All PC's should have a useful part to contribute to the game, whether it be in a role of offense, defense, support, or intel. The cleric for instance gets a lot of grief nowadays because with 3E it has left its traditional role of defense and support, and has ventured heavily into offense and intel as well. All classes should have some use in two or even possibly three of these roles, but a class that ventures into all four is the class that becomes a more attractive option than any other.You don't have to be powerful in offense or defense to be useful; see the 3.5 bard and the rogue for this point. however, support and intel are "unglamorous" and "unsexy" roles, and hence have fewer proponents.If you looked at each class as a mix of 4 parts of any of the list above (offense, defense, support, intelligence), the breakdown might look close to:Fighters offense 2/defense 2Barbarians are offense 3 / defense 1Paladins offense 2 / defense 2Rangers are offense 3 / support 1Druids are offense 2 / support 2Bards are support 1 / intel 3Rogues are offense 1 / intel 2 / support 1Wizards are offense 2 / defense 2Sorcerers are offense 3 / defense 1Monks are offense 1 / defense 2 / support 1Clerics, by contrast, now seem to be offense 1 / defense 2 / support 2 / intel 1, whereas in the past they were closer to defense 1 / support 2 / intel 1.At least, that's a very rough look at how the classes seem to me to balance with one another in terms of various in-game roles.</blockquote>

Verification