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: 5661196" data-attributes="member: 996">Inevitably, it's going to be over and above that variance among classes with similar builds.  Daily-less classes aren't anymore perfectly balanced with eachother than AEDU classes are.  There are always minor imbalances, no design is perfect.  Having two or more structural aproaches to daily resources, though, introduces additional imbalance over and above that background 'noise.'  It depends on the style of the DM's campaign.  If the DM very consististently has 4-5 encounter days (assuming that's the point where all the daily-less classes adequately balance with the AEDU classes), it doesn't matter, he's attending to class balance, already.  If the DM tends more towards shorter 'days' (or the players tend to seek to have shorter days, and the DM doesn't go out of his way to disuade them), maybe averaging 1-3, then the players would be wise to have an AEDU party.  If the DM tends towards grueling days of 6-8 or more encounters, none of which are particularly more threatening than the others (and doesn't let the players get away with trying to sneak in extra extended rests), then the consistent performance of daily-less classes would make them a better choice.If a DM's style was to vary encounters/day wildly and unpredicitable, then, yes, having a 'balance' of daily-less characters for consistent staying power, and AEDU classes for peak power when desperately needed could work quite well.  Such a style worked well even with 3.x and AD&D, for that matter.  It's not something every potential DM can handle, but for those who can, it's possible to impose balance on quite a range of classes (among other things that might be balance issues).</blockquote>

Verification