Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 3729084" data-attributes="member: 704">Game imbalance occurs when either one choice or particular combination of choices is demonstrably better than all other reasonable choices 90% of the time.  Not that the combo is unbeatable (there is a random element to the game, after all), just that it is always tactically the right choice.  The inverse is also true, but less serious.  Having a spell, race, or ability that is always a sub par choice is also harmful.Borrowing from Starcraft, Mutalisks used to be the default best choice for a Zerg player.  They were so good that even if you built anticipating that choice, you still had a good chance of being beaten.  Before certain patches, if you were Zerg and you knew nothing else about your opponents, your best option was to build Mutalisks.In 3rd there were some pretty bad imbalances (Haste, Harm) that got fixed in 3.5.  However, there are still some things that just do not work out.  The one thing that does annoy me most is that there are too many choices that should be viable that simply are not.- Monks are presented as potentially effective front line fighters, but low AC options and a poor BaB make them less effective then most other classes.- Sticking to a single class is never as effective as taking selected level dips for certain abilities.- Trying to multiclass between Caster and Fighter results in you sucking at both.- The drawbacks of size Small races always outweigh the benefits (due to weapon size and movement).- Too many garbage "+2 to 2" feats.  - Too many garbage skills- Skills with fixed DC's would reach a point where further ranks were unnecessary- Some magic items were way too necessaryEssentially, I would have liked to be able to create a Halfling Monk and have it reasonably competitive with a Half Orc Barbarian.  Obviously, the Half Orc should have the edge in terms of raw damage output.  But the Halfling Monk would basicallly be terrible in melee due to a Str penalty for size, a slow movement rate, reduced damage output for being small, a crap BaB, and a poor AC.  For a class designed around Melee, there would be very few situations where the Halfling Monk (Or any small melee bulid) would be particularly effective compared to other melee builds.I am not asking that a Halfling Monk be able to take down a Half Orc Barbarian 1 on 1.  It is ok for one build to be less effective than another, even somewhat substantially so.  But I would at least like it if the Hypothetical Halfling could at least make the Half Orc work for it a little.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

Verification