Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Have we rebalanced the Champion Yet?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7950349" data-attributes="member: 6683613"><p>Thank you for finally acknowledging that the break-even point is way up there.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Feats are optional. The classes are supposed to be balanced in a featless environment. If a class only achieves power when it takes a specific feat, it is underpowered. This is doubly true when the feat is GWM, probably the number one suspect overpowered feat. And it's triply true since, by your logic, our hypothetical champion player is not going to remember to activate any of the features of GWM.</p><p></p><p>And for what it's worth, I <em>did</em> do the calculations after making a couple of assumptions, and it looks like it amounts to around a 10% increase in expected damage. Assumptions are assumptions, but the take-home point is that it's not gonna bring that break-even point down a huge amount.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It seems to me like you're conflating the dichotomy of enjoying/not enjoying tactical combat with the dichotomy of noticing/not noticing a numbers discrepancy. These are independent. If Alice wants a simple fighter and plays a champion, and Bob wants a tactical fighter and plays a battlemaster, there's nothing stopping Alice from noticing, "Hey, on 90-95% of my attacks, I flat-out deal less damage than Bob."</p><p></p><p>Comparing the brute to the battlemaster is much more balanced on that perceptual level. Alice can see instead, "Oh, Bob deals more damage and does a special thing a limited number of times, but I deal extra damage the rest of the time, that seems fair." This has been the basic tradeoff between fighters and mages since 1E, the model obviously works (again, talking perceptions, not math). The question then becomes whether the brute damage is mathematically too much over the long term, which is an interesting exercise but harder to actually notice at the table, getting back to your point about the limited utility of white-room analyses. And if it <em>is</em> too much, then you can just dial it back a bit (while still leaving it above fighter-normal) and then everybody is happy, Alice and the white-room analysts both.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7950349, member: 6683613"] Thank you for finally acknowledging that the break-even point is way up there. Feats are optional. The classes are supposed to be balanced in a featless environment. If a class only achieves power when it takes a specific feat, it is underpowered. This is doubly true when the feat is GWM, probably the number one suspect overpowered feat. And it's triply true since, by your logic, our hypothetical champion player is not going to remember to activate any of the features of GWM. And for what it's worth, I [I]did[/I] do the calculations after making a couple of assumptions, and it looks like it amounts to around a 10% increase in expected damage. Assumptions are assumptions, but the take-home point is that it's not gonna bring that break-even point down a huge amount. It seems to me like you're conflating the dichotomy of enjoying/not enjoying tactical combat with the dichotomy of noticing/not noticing a numbers discrepancy. These are independent. If Alice wants a simple fighter and plays a champion, and Bob wants a tactical fighter and plays a battlemaster, there's nothing stopping Alice from noticing, "Hey, on 90-95% of my attacks, I flat-out deal less damage than Bob." Comparing the brute to the battlemaster is much more balanced on that perceptual level. Alice can see instead, "Oh, Bob deals more damage and does a special thing a limited number of times, but I deal extra damage the rest of the time, that seems fair." This has been the basic tradeoff between fighters and mages since 1E, the model obviously works (again, talking perceptions, not math). The question then becomes whether the brute damage is mathematically too much over the long term, which is an interesting exercise but harder to actually notice at the table, getting back to your point about the limited utility of white-room analyses. And if it [I]is[/I] too much, then you can just dial it back a bit (while still leaving it above fighter-normal) and then everybody is happy, Alice and the white-room analysts both. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Have we rebalanced the Champion Yet?
Top