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

[Justice and Rule]

I have literally been told that Rage is too hard to operate.

What, is halving damage too much math?

 

[Haplo781]

People say that, but a whole lot of new players are playing 5e right now, and liking it. Making big changes to the system they've adopted and greatly enjoy is by no means going to keep them.

Do they like it because of the imbalance, or in spite of it?

 

[Vaalingrade]

What, is halving damage too much math?

I have no idea.

I also don't understand how putting rest limits on the Battlemaster's basic fighter abilities makes it more simple than having them at-will, but the 'simplicity' people seek is far too complicated for me to understand.

 

[Oofta]

Do they like it because of the imbalance, or in spite of it?

Ignoring the possibility that they simply don't see a major imbalance?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What, is halving damage too much math?

I have seen posters claim that the choice of 2/day makes it hard to pick when to do it and when not to... the fact that you need a different number to add to damage and half damage.

 

[Haplo781]

I hate to tell you, there aren't any RPGs out there that aren't non-ultra-simple-mechanics roleplaying games that satisfy your requirements.

Zero, non, zilch.

You can buy the "here are stumps of wood as chairs" version of the RPG, or you can buy ones with fancy chairs that require the end-user to do self maintenance.

There isn't anything else on the market. Not red box, not AD&D 1st, not AD&D 2nd, not vampire, not GURPS, not RIFTS, not mage, not shadowrun, not pathfinder, not call of cthulu, not ORE, not d6 SW, not paranoia, not ars magica.

The only ones that come close are ultra-simple ones that embrace near narrative styles, or ones that pretend it doesn't matter if the rules give one player control of a PC that has orders of magnitude more control and impact on the story than others.

 

[Haplo781]

Ignoring the possibility that they simply don't see a major imbalance?

That would fall under "in spite of it."

 

[Vaalingrade]

We're not supposed to talk about that.

 

[Oofta]

That would fall under "in spite of it."

That's ... not how it works. There is no "in spite of" when it's simply not an issue for many people.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I have no idea.

I also don't understand how putting rest limits on the Battlemaster's basic fighter abilities makes it more simple than having them at-will, but the 'simplicity' people seek is far too complicated for me to understand.

If you take away the damage boost, most of the attacks are perfectly serviceable as At-Will abilities/techniques/whatever won't trigger people who don't like fighters getting "powers".

I was working on a version of the fighter that resembled something from 4E and I made up 12 "Weapon Techniques" for "regular fighter" subclass and 12 "Battle Tactics" for the Warlord subclass.

I have seen posters claim that the choice of 2/day makes it hard to pick when to do it and when not to... the fact that you need a different number to add to damage and half damage.

That's ... not how it works. There is no "in spite of" when it's simply not an issue for many people.

I mean, that people can continue on with classes that are flawed even by the tacit admission of WotC (Again, the Ranger) would kind of indicate it kind of does.