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

[Vaalingrade]

In terms of what actually matters to people, balance is the feeling of fairness.

That feeling can come from different things for different people. Some need mathematical proof, some needs a feeling in terms of spotlight, some need to feel they're as or more powerful than the other players(often this is where DMs complain about balance--when their power over the game is limited, transferred or altered), etc.

In the end, we have to remember that the point of the rules is fairness. RPGs are playing make-believe like we did back in the day with rules in place to keep your friend from declaring that no, you didn't hit them because they were secretly wearing a laser-proof shirt and now they've killed you using their dinosaur gun (a gun that shoots dinosaurs). It's to make sure there's an even playing field that everyone agrees to abide by so everyone can have fun.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Nope precise doesn't matter.

Okay. So if someone asks for something to be made in a balanced way, you don't think that person demands perfection? Just trying to be completely clear here.

Everyone has fun and as long as you're good at something and that sonething cones up often enough shrig.

And no one's getting over shadowed constantly.

Is it possible for someone to overshadow, not dramatically and obviously in a single session, but over an extended period of time? E.g., not "wow, this session I literally did no combat as a Fighter" type stuff, but rather (say) never landing a killing blow across 5-10 sessions because someone else just does that much more damage overall?

 

[cranberry]

Delete

 

[Piperken]

• OP's question appears to be focused on the idea of individual class balance, comparing past versions of classes with more current ones, mainly in regards to particular mechanics.
• Echoing others' sentiment, I feel a game works well when it has class balance (not PvP class balance, but as others ppls have already described above), as well as parity in play.
• If someone asked me to play in a game where despite my very average skill at role playing games, the best I could hope for was a 50% chance of survival in any combat encounter (Paranoia being an exception), I'd probably decline!

 

[Zardnaar]

Okay. So if someone asks for something to be made in a balanced way, you don't think that person demands perfection? Just trying to be completely clear here.


Is it possible for someone to overshadow, not dramatically and obviously in a single session, but over an extended period of time? E.g., not "wow, this session I literally did no combat as a Fighter" type stuff, but rather (say) never landing a killing blow across 5-10 sessions because someone else just does that much more damage overall?

Players generally don't care to much about killing blows unless they gave a cleave type ability eg 3E, 1E, C&C or ACKs.

Usually they joke if someone pikes the kill. Damage doesn't matter eg the fighter is outdamaging the rogue.

As long as the rogue gets to do it's thing often enough eg skills or whatever (or said rogue is two levels higher that helps as well).

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Players generally don't care to much about killing blows unless they gave a cleave type ability eg 3E, 1E, C&C or ACKs.

Well, I was more meaning like, they're participating in combat, but they never really make a major contribution. They're there, they're helping, it's not like they're a burden, but over an extended span of time, they never really get a chance to shine.

As long as the rogue gets to do it's thing often enough eg skills or whatever (or said rogue is two levels higher that helps as well).

Isn't that a pretty damning criticism of the Rogue's design? Or are you talking about an older edition where XP is different between different classes?

 

[Zardnaar]

Well, I was more meaning like, they're participating in combat, but they never really make a major contribution. They're there, they're helping, it's not like they're a burden, but over an extended span of time, they never really get a chance to shine.


Isn't that a pretty damning criticism of the Rogue's design? Or are you talking about an older edition where XP is different between different classes?

OSR

New player talked to her what she wanted to 0lay. Asked her what she likes skill vs combat.

She's figuring out backstab and has hit level 6 and on her way to 7. She gets to backstab about once a session and has a rapid firing short bow.

Makes her skill checks 85% of the time trained 55% untrained. Skills getting used a lot.

 

[Maxperson]

Is it possible for someone to overshadow, not dramatically and obviously in a single session, but over an extended period of time? E.g., not "wow, this session I literally did no combat as a Fighter" type stuff, but rather (say) never landing a killing blow across 5-10 sessions because someone else just does that much more damage overall?

I can't answer for anyone but me, since this isn't something that can have a general answer. In my game, though, the answer is no. Combat doesn't play a large enough role that someone can overshadow anyone else for an extended period of time.

All PCs engage in all three pillars in my game. Every PC in my game is going to shine somewhere every 1-3 sessions, and I don't even have to go out of my way to place specific things for them to shine in. Although I do often tailor some things in the game to specific PCs due to roleplay developments and background.

 

[Retros_x]

Not a single player wants true game balance. That would mean a chess-like experience with a win-chance around 50% in a balanced match.

That would be
a) highly unsatisfying to lose every second fight
b) impossible to achieve with asymmetric game design of DnD

What most player want when they say the want a balanced game is a win chance of 100% for an easy fight and a win chance of 90% for a hard fight. I am pulling completely exxagerated numbers out of my ** here to illustrate my point: They want the illusion of a fair fight, but come in with the expectation to win most fights. Which is the standard for most Dnd campaigns. Even if multiple TPK happen in one campaign, they win most fights.

 

[ptolemy]

I'm genuinely astonished that people thing players want a 100% or 90% chance at winning. This is unimaginable at my table. Each to their own but it strikes me as mind-numbingly boring. If you go onto, say, Mongoose Traveller forums the received wisdom isn't balance. The advise newbies get is NEVER fight a balanced fight. If you can't contrive a massive advantage then you don't fight. Simple. And the Keeper isn't expected to only throw ghouls and deep ones at you in Call of Cthulhu. A star spawn is going to tear the city apart, not be a decent challenge to experienced investigators. Balance is something you put in your game because you want it and the rule have little to do with it.