Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5996477" data-attributes="member: 996">There are many alternatives when balancing across all three pillars, of course.  One is to make the fighter, as he appears to be, just marginally 'best' in combat, and really bad at the other two, but make combat a major focus of the game.  Another might be to put the fighter head-and-shoulders above the rest in combat, and generally OK, if not even pretty good in some narrow areas of the the other two, but have combats be few and far between with intrigue or exploration in some combination the meat of the campaign.  There are myriad other ways to balance classes across the three pillars.  Whatever way is settled upon will dictate the relative importance of each pillar.  Along with the need to balance daily and at-will (and, perhaps, now, encounter) resources at a point (certain number of encounters/rounds/monsters/exp) for each adventuring 'day,' 5e will have a quite specific prescription of how it is to be played (if you care about balance, and don't care to re-design it to any great degree).Of course, there is also the alternative of balancing by giving them all comparable portions of resources in each of the daily, at-will, and any in-between management periods (which 4e did), and the alternative of balancing classes within each pillar (which no version of D&D has ever even attempted), which would allow anyone to play any class in any style in any campaign with any pacing.</blockquote>

Verification