D&D General Do you care how about "PC balance"?

[Ancalagon]

I've been in a a "return to the temple of elemental evil" campaign where one player was playing a cleric of a strength god (essentially a battle priest). This was in the 3.X days where a fighting cleric could be immensely powerful.

To have combats that would threaten that PC, the rest of the party were ins absolute mortal peril.

I was in an Ebberon campaign (3.5) with a "skirmishy" front line (barbarian, monk, swashbuckler type). I made my alchemist tough as nail because I knew melee combat was a distinct possibility. Another player elected to make a bard with midling dex, light armor, no defensive spell and no con bonus. Her PC was so weak that she had to be rescued all the time.

In 5e the disparity between PCs is not as great thankfully, and I see this a as a significant strength of the edition.

 

[Rhenny]

I have always been a fan of differentiation within character classes. That’s what’s important. Every player should feel as if he/she has a meaningful choice in most situations. Balance should revolve around that rather than things like DPS, max damage, etc.

I think D&D 5e does a very good job at that.

I don’t care about pure power, as long as playing a PC is fun because it gives me a chance to feel the character vibe.