Is DnD well-balanced?

[Argyle King]

And that is exactly why your history is revisionist. The errata took time to appear. The game as it stands in mid 2011 is less unbalanced than the PHB only 4e of 2008. You do not get to add the errata to the game back then because the errata did not exist back then (hell, they're still continuing with nerfs and tweaks to the PHB). Adding the errata is happening at the same time as adding the new options.

.

Actually, I wasn't giving a history. My original statement -which was assuming errata- was that I did not feel D&D was balanced; likewise, I used the example I did (assuming errata.) It was a statement which did not address history; it was a time neutral statement which simply compared and contrasted older material against newer material.

If I don't consider errata, then my answer of no becomes a more emphatic no. The orb wizard was nowhere near being balanced against anything else. It only gets worse as better feats, powers, and items become available in the later books. The Orb of Ultimate Imposition is the easiest example which comes to mind.

There's also the hybrid rules in PHB which would allow you to get rid of the spellbook feature in exchange for pretty much anything from another class which would be better. It only takes on feat to get back your implement mastery feature... so, I get my orb features and possibly some cleric healing or invoker control (possibly even a few monk powers if I want better melee prowess.) Yeah, the orb only works with half of my powers, but how many powers beyond sleep do I really need when I can cause even a solo to auto fail?

 

[SpydersWebbing]

I hate to say it but it's the honest truth, but at the end of the day there are loop holes in the rules that are exploited that makes a few players that want to to this hold all the power though this method. These players wait to urn the action point on a boss to 2 hit and kill them no matter how many months of planning and forethought went into it.

Also, there is a strange meta that is going on in how the skills and other things work which is often translated into 'A paper thin excuse for my character to know everything I know'.

Does it mean that this edition or any other edition or any other game can be fun? No. Does it mean we cant make these valid points? Also no.

---Rusty

I've played a few epic games, with people who openly abused the system. I've seen some things that make CharOp people blush with shame, and have been DM'ing 4th since before it came out (put it together from all the previews and such), and I have never but NEVER seen someone one shot a solo. Or even two shot.

With what do you back up your claim?

As for the topic on hand...
4th edition has several balancing issues, but it's much better balanced than a lot of games, the previous edition 'specially. Is it perfect? No. But that's why I write in my PHB's and houserule the game to my liking.

 

[CancR]

I've played a few epic games, with people who openly abused the system. I've seen some things that make CharOp people blush with shame, and have been DM'ing 4th since before it came out (put it together from all the previews and such), and I have never but NEVER seen someone one shot a solo. Or even two shot.

With what do you back up your claim?

As for the topic on hand...
4th edition has several balancing issues, but it's much better balanced than a lot of games, the previous edition 'specially. Is it perfect? No. But that's why I write in my PHB's and houserule the game to my liking.

You never seen some one use an action point to use 2 dailies or even an an encounter and a daily to kill something far above the player's current level? I don't think your group is doing it right.

 

[SpydersWebbing]

You never seen some one use an action point to use 2 dailies or even an an encounter and a daily to kill something far above the player's current level? I don't think your group is doing it right.

Yeah, I have, but never a solo. To even get to half that level of damage you'd need a vorpal falchion with the Brutal 1 gloves (higher average damage because you're re-rolling half the dice) and a good crit or two (or three). Now if each person did that you'd get about 3/4's the health on a solo, and that's assuming a crit a person. Each of those crits gets about 300 damage (assuming the vorpal falchion and the gloves), and even then that's pushing it.

That's assuming you don't use a Warlord ability to "re-start" the round and do it over again, but even that requires a lot of luck and crits. Unless you have a cleric in your party who can give you an auto-crit (which we did), but even that only gets you so far.

Maybe I'm missing something? Now I'm curious.

 

[Dragon Sin-Camealot]

Yeah, we should have simply remembered that truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to be believed.

It's our ability to imagine certain situations and variables in games that makes it interesting. We have the ability to create valid and invalid ideas.

If you like anything you'll believe whatever you want about it. To be general. Either way I'm sure we've all said something about it.

 

[technoextreme]

I disagree. There instances in which a hybrid version of a class actually turns out better than the base class. An easy example is the hybrid wizard. You ditch features (spell book) which have very little worth in comparison to what you gain. Likewise, I find the hybrid cleric generally tends to be better than a full cleric; especially when mixed with another leader class.

So what you are saying is that a system which WoTC explicitly and overtly states will unbalance the game unbalances the game.

 

[Argyle King]

So what you are saying is that a system which WoTC explicitly and overtly states will unbalance the game unbalances the game.

No, I'm saying it further unbalances the game.

 

[Tony Vargas]

4e was about as balanced as D&D ever got. Essentials only slightly less so.

 

[Dragon Sin-Camealot]

I know it's been said before. We've mentioned elsewhere that the idea is to find the most unfair strategy and abuse it.

It could be a magic card, dnd character, and/or whatever. As long as you can find a way to tilt the game in your favor there really isn't a balance. A dedicated person to the game can do it.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

So you are saying that so long as a game has choices that can be used advantageously, it isn't balanced?

That's basically saying that no game is balanced. Which perhaps is true if one is talking about "perfect balance" but isn't a terribly helpful defintion if one wants to talk about degrees of balance.

I wouldn't argue that D&D 4e is "perfectly" balanced, but it is certainly more balanced than a game like Rifts (to give an example). And there can be value on examining the degree balance and whether the game would be improved if the balance were better or worse.

Where I can see no value at all in a black-and-white view of a game either being balanced or unballanced, as you seem to suggest.