Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6353036" data-attributes="member: 996">I was responding to the 'Nova' you implied would do more than that.  If you didn't mean to imply or assert the desirability of such a thing, no worries. If they all had the same abilities, you wouldn't have real balance, you'd just have a lack of choices. Happily, that's never happened in any edition of D&D - not even close - and 5e does not appear to be in danger of that extreme (largely hypothetical) form of imbalance, at all.  Rather, it's in danger of more traditional and comfortably familiar forms of imbalance. Not if the classes are too imbalanced.  Dialing up the difficulty so that an ubercharacter doesn't erase the encounter in one round just leaves everyone else outmatched and unable to contribute meaningfully - they're still spectators, just spectators who might very well be killed.Of course, that's a worst-case, 3.5-era out-of-control-optimization scenario that we don't yet know for a fact will be possible in 5e. Don't be so sure.  Spell lists are always expanding in D&D.  All it takes is one incautiously-written spell - a good self-buff that doesn't require concentration, an item/feat/feature/etc that makes maintaining concentration more likely, an SoD without a hp cap, etc... and we could be right back there, again.</blockquote>