D&D 5E D&D Next Design Goals (Article)

[P1NBACK]

Unless being unbalanced is inherent in the idea ("magic is mightier than the sword," etc), a lack of balance is a lack of designer skill. Hopefully WotC hasn't fired ALL of its good designers.

So, what you're saying is that the hundreds of pages of errata released to "balance" 4E means that the initial designers lacked skill.

 

[Bedrockgames]

"Unless being unbalanced is inherent in the idea"

Missed that

 

[Incenjucar]

i think this is a very specific view of balance though. Personally i want balance, but I dont need dont need that to include having something to do at all times.

In practice, D&D games are run differently by different people. You cannot balance the game with assumption of correct percentages of time being spent such that, over the course of a game, everyone gets to have an equal opportunity to play.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

So, what you're saying is that the hundreds of pages of errata released to "balance" 4E means that the initial designers lacked skill.

Nobody's perfect. At least they cared enough to fix their mistakes as opposed to letting them fester.

 

[Incenjucar]

So, what you're saying is that the hundreds of pages of errata released to "balance" 4E means that the initial designers lacked skill.

Eh. 4E was remarkably balanced, even from day 1. That said, the editing team has been lax the entire edition. So many absurd errors and oversights, even with the latest books. Some of it was from bad assumptions, such as the size of the table growing as you gained tiers.

Even in the latest material... mind you I love most of the concepts in the Heroes of the Elemental Chaos book, but it's riddled with terribly obvious errors that should never be seen in print.

And then there's the adventures... from what I've seen, even 4E fans tend to prefer the Pathfinder adventures to what WotC puts out.

 

[Libramarian]

Off the top of head it would be balance based on combat parity with the encounter as the focus of balance (instead of balancing things over the adventure or campaign). Along with other features like gamist conisderations taking precedence (making sure characters canheal fast andget back in the game, that sort of thing).

OK. I like your breakdown of balance at the encounter level vs. balance over the adventure vs. balance over the campaign.

Now I'm thinking, what about balance at the round level? Everyone is guaranteed to be exactly as equally effective each and every round.

That would be unfun though, because if things are absolutely balanced all the way down the line, there's no challenge. There's no space between good and poor play.

Absolute balance is antithetical to good gameplay. Tipping the balance in your favor is where the fun is. We don't want more or less balance, we want more or less frequent opportunities to tip the balance in our favor.

We're considering different lengths of time the game might force you to go between these opportunities. This is equal to the space between the time unit below the unit at which the game is said to be balanced.

So, a game balanced at the encounter level means you have opportunities to tip the balance in your favor each round.

A game balanced at the adventure level means you have opportunities to tip the balance in your favor each encounter.

A game balanced at the campaign level means you might have to go whole adventures without an opportunity to tip the balance in your favor.

Just a different way of looking at the issue, perhaps.

 

[P1NBACK]

What you need is different from what I need. What I propose gives us both what we need.

If I wanted a "balanced" game, I could just play 4E right? I don't want to houserule a whole game. And, 4E-balance isn't a concern for me.

What edition has the Fighter actually been the toughtest, most durable character over the course of a campaign? 1E? Because it certainly hasn't been true since 2E, until 4E. Anyone can have an army.

The Fighters in every D&D campaign I've been in have been tough and durable.

Or just using a druid.

Ok...

The point of balance is to make most choices good ones, to ensure that everyone has something to do during the game at almost all times, and to ensure that the DM doesn't have to spend hours each week altering adventures because there are too many wizards in the party.

You can have your fertilizer on top of that, if a lack of balance is truly required for your ideal game.

I don't care if each class has a "do something interesting" button on their sheet for each turn.

And, as a DM, I don't "alter adventures" to suit the characters. I set up an environment, and they do what they want. If they all want to play wizards, good luck with that... That wouldn't even be a consideration in my current B/X game. You'd be laughed at if you suggested it. The Fighters are an essential component to the adventuring party.

And, lack of balance isn't required. As I said earlier, there is certainly some aspects of the math that need to make sense. But, lack of "4E-balance", where ideal balance is everyone having the same DPR and combat worthiness certainly isn't something I'm interested in.

 

[Steely_Dan]

Or just using a druid.

Such a tired old line; again with the Druid (don't listen to these people, ones who want to enjoy any edition of this game, especially for the first time, without any tarnish).

 

[Bedrockgames]

In practice, D&D games are run differently by different people. You cannot balance the game with assumption of correct percentages of time being spent such that, over the course of a game, everyone gets to have an equal opportunity to play.

I am still not interested in Euro style balance of giving people something to do in each part of the game. To me that is not the kind of balance I want at all in an RPG. It takes balance too far for my tastes. There are different ways to do balance. You could balance every aspect of the game for instance (ie everyone has something to do in combat, in exploration, in social situations, in mercantie endeavers, etc)--to me that is dull and uniform. I would much prefer things be balanced around the overall experience of the game so each choice feels unique and matters.

 

[P1NBACK]

Eh. 4E was remarkably balanced, even from day 1.

Seriously? The game was riddled with problems. They had to basically redesign monsters from scratch in MM3, release feats to solve higher scaling of monster defenses, changed the DCs of Skill Challenges multiple times, etc. etc.

Maybe the game is "balanced" now. I haven't played it in ages. But, when I was playing the game, there were numerous issues... From Day 1.