Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5897926" data-attributes="member: 996">Sounds like &quot;Combat as War friendly&quot; = &quot;broken.&quot;&nbsp; Because there's some slim chance they might succeed, or because you just want broken spells back?&nbsp; Seriously, balance is great for a game, but not everyone approaches D&amp;D as a game.&nbsp; Do you think there might be a reasonable way to add back &quot;desirable brokenness?&quot;&nbsp; For instance, as an optional module?The Pillars are a handy reference.&nbsp; Yes, I think it's clear from the fighter design goals that any balance 5e may retain is going to be across all Pillars rather than within each.&nbsp; Though the Fighter won't be /better/ at combat, but 'best.'&nbsp; Keep in mind that in marketing speak, the claim of best means &quot;just as good as everyone else&quot; or &quot;nothing else is better.&quot;&nbsp; Even if Mr. Mearls wasn't being quite that disingenuous, &quot;best&quot; can be best by a very small margin.&nbsp; Combat can probably be presumed, by D&amp;D tradition, to be a very substantial part of the game.&nbsp; Thus, &quot;best&quot; at combat can be balanced by &quot;worthless&quot; in the other two pillars, while &quot;best&quot; in exploration can be balanced by &quot;slightly limited in combat.&quot;&nbsp; Again, all very AD&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5897926, member: 996"] Sounds like "Combat as War friendly" = "broken." Because there's some slim chance they might succeed, or because you just want broken spells back? Seriously, balance is great for a game, but not everyone approaches D&D as a game. Do you think there might be a reasonable way to add back "desirable brokenness?" For instance, as an optional module? The Pillars are a handy reference. Yes, I think it's clear from the fighter design goals that any balance 5e may retain is going to be across all Pillars rather than within each. Though the Fighter won't be /better/ at combat, but 'best.' Keep in mind that in marketing speak, the claim of best means "just as good as everyone else" or "nothing else is better." Even if Mr. Mearls wasn't being quite that disingenuous, "best" can be best by a very small margin. Combat can probably be presumed, by D&D tradition, to be a very substantial part of the game. Thus, "best" at combat can be balanced by "worthless" in the other two pillars, while "best" in exploration can be balanced by "slightly limited in combat." Again, all very AD&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification