Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5989379" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>There's some really good stuff there, check it out sometime.</p><p></p><p>That's not what either of us were talking about, though (and, really, Gandalf is the equivalent of an NPC, a source of exposition and the occassional Deus ex Machichina, not a protagonist).</p><p></p><p>What we were talking about was the relative desireability of fighters vs casters. I found one example (and it's not the only one) of a successful all-caster campaign in 3.x, if, indeed, non-casters are at not great disadvantage in that edition, then it shouldn't be any harder for you to find an existing example of an equally successful all-martial campaign. </p><p></p><p>I figure 'additive' is what we get /during/ a run. The core comes out, supplements add to it until it collapses under it's won weight. I'd like a long run for every ed like the one 1e had: over 10 years, and not that much over 10 books. (MM, PH, DMG, FF, Dieties&Demigods, UA, WSG, DSG, MM2, OA - am I forgetting anything?). A real quality hardcover book a year, rather than a dashed out book a month. I'm sure that's impossible from a business perspective, though.</p><p></p><p>If you're not going to make fundamental changes with a new ed, when would you make them? I don't think D&D has ever been so perfect that there wasn't some very real potential for fundamental change to improve it.</p><p></p><p></p><p>A ready-made rationalization is a thing of beauty. And, like I've said twice to no avail, there's an underlying real mechanical distinction that's being talked around. The whole 'dissociative' pitch, is just a very snarkily-intellectual way of saying you don't like that difference, though. Another variation on "it's not really an RPG." Or your own Monopoly reference, where you basically say anyone who prefers 4e isn't a real gamer, with just the commitment to D&D that a kid playing Monopoly has. On the other side, there's the conclusion that anyone wanting Vancian is just on a power-trip with their god-wizard, or that Pathfinder is exactly 3.5, or whatever.</p><p></p><p>Ad Hominems and Straw Men all around, that's the edition war. Nothing for the winners nor the losers to be too proud of.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5989379, member: 996"] There's some really good stuff there, check it out sometime. That's not what either of us were talking about, though (and, really, Gandalf is the equivalent of an NPC, a source of exposition and the occassional Deus ex Machichina, not a protagonist). What we were talking about was the relative desireability of fighters vs casters. I found one example (and it's not the only one) of a successful all-caster campaign in 3.x, if, indeed, non-casters are at not great disadvantage in that edition, then it shouldn't be any harder for you to find an existing example of an equally successful all-martial campaign. I figure 'additive' is what we get /during/ a run. The core comes out, supplements add to it until it collapses under it's won weight. I'd like a long run for every ed like the one 1e had: over 10 years, and not that much over 10 books. (MM, PH, DMG, FF, Dieties&Demigods, UA, WSG, DSG, MM2, OA - am I forgetting anything?). A real quality hardcover book a year, rather than a dashed out book a month. I'm sure that's impossible from a business perspective, though. If you're not going to make fundamental changes with a new ed, when would you make them? I don't think D&D has ever been so perfect that there wasn't some very real potential for fundamental change to improve it. A ready-made rationalization is a thing of beauty. And, like I've said twice to no avail, there's an underlying real mechanical distinction that's being talked around. The whole 'dissociative' pitch, is just a very snarkily-intellectual way of saying you don't like that difference, though. Another variation on "it's not really an RPG." Or your own Monopoly reference, where you basically say anyone who prefers 4e isn't a real gamer, with just the commitment to D&D that a kid playing Monopoly has. On the other side, there's the conclusion that anyone wanting Vancian is just on a power-trip with their god-wizard, or that Pathfinder is exactly 3.5, or whatever. Ad Hominems and Straw Men all around, that's the edition war. Nothing for the winners nor the losers to be too proud of. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How much should 5e aim at balance?
Top