D&D 5E Is the imbalance between classes in 5e accidental or by design?

[Charlaquin]

So, I wouldn’t say that any imbalance was intentional, but certainly some imbalance was intentional. The developers were very clear during the playtest that their goal was never precise numerical balance, but rather a feeling of parity. They wanted each class to feel similarly effective, and as long as that benchmark was reached, they didn’t really care if the numbers said one class or another was actually stronger or weaker.

They also said at one point that they wanted to balance across the pillars, so for example if a class had a lot of features that made it really strong in the social pillar, it was ok for it to be a bit weaker in the combat pillar than a class that was all combat all the time. But I don’t think that really remained their goal all the way throughout the playtest and to release.

 

[Art Waring]

the average amount of damage done by a Big, Fat Spell versus a Big, Bad Fighter has largely flipped over the decades, and this likely is not accidental. And, I mean, just from the numbers on his chart, that does seem true, doesn't it?

Hmm, I can't seem to find my older post cause its ways back, but I mentioned in another thread my own calculations, using the rogue as the martial benchmark instead of the fighter, due to the fact that its easier to calculate the DPR for a rogue than a fighter based on the variables for hitting creatures with attacks.

The chart may be useful in some aspects, but not for every aspect of the martial/caster problem.

Edit: And, my calculations aren't intended to be a be-all answer either, just a different approach to the problem is all.

 

[Morrus]

Balance isn’t the be-all and end-all that it is often portrayed as — in fact it can be detrimental to creativity. There’s a third option not in the poll — it wasn’t weighted as the most important element of game design. Carefully designing everything to be exactly equal as your primary goal can result in very bland and rigid design.

 

[Undrave]

I mean why does the guy who can cast knock and prestidigitation need sleight of hand?

The Wizard should automatically get proficiency in Arcana (with Expertise later on even) and then get ONE skill to pick from. They spent too much time learning magic to cultivate more skills.

Meanwhile, the Fighter should just get Athletics as a free skill on top of the 2 they get to pick, since they just become good at it while training for fighting.

 

[billd91]

I mean why does the guy who can cast knock and prestidigitation need sleight of hand?

Because he wants to be skilled in it. No other justification is really necessary.

 

[FrozenNorth]

None. That's why it shows that it's their fault. That's what their posts demonstrate. They rely on the ability to cast dozens of different spells over a 1 hour period that include several concentration spells that all last their full duration. And that all 6-8 encounter happen in under an hour. And that you can explore an entire dungeon in 10 minutes. It complete relies on the DM being at fault.

Really? The consensus seemed to be that those who considered wizards balanced all played with house rules, many of which drastically changed the balance between classes.

Seems like the conclusion was that wizards ARE overpowered.

 

[Vaalingrade]

People seem to be conflating 'balanced' as 'the same', which I feel is a grave mistake that's become damaging to game design because it tells designers to not even consider it because any attempt at game balance is going to result in things being 'bland' and 'the same', which isn't true.

 

[Oofta]

Balance isn’t the be-all and end-all that it is often portrayed as — in fact it can be detrimental to creativity. There’s a third option not in the poll — it wasn’t weighted as the most important element of game design. Carefully designing everything to be exactly equal as your primary goal can result in very bland and rigid design.

The poll is also begging the question. Imbalance (however you define it) is a foregone conclusion based on the wording. I can't give my real answer which is that it doesn't apply, at least not consistently across all levels and groups.

 

[Morrus]

People seem to be conflating 'balanced' as 'the same', which I feel is a grave mistake that's become damaging to game design because it tells designers to not even consider it because any attempt at game balance is going to result in things being 'bland' and 'the same', which isn't true.

I wouldn’t worry. There’s no danger that game designers won’t attempt balance. That’s not a thing that is going to happen.

Some designers might not out the same weight on it as some others, but that’s about the extent of it. Don’t panic!

 

[Oofta]

Really? The consensus seemed to be that those who considered wizards balanced all played with house rules, many of which drastically changed the balance between classes.

What consensus? The consensus of people who believe the wizard is not balance who claim that you must require house rules to make them balanced? Because I don't have many house rules, certainly none that would shift the balance towards casters. I don't see an issue in games I play. I don't recall anyone who doesn't see the issue stating that they have many house rules on this.