Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 5911787" data-attributes="member: 6688277">I am going to disagree at this point only because I have never seen THAT kind of class-balance in D&amp;D without infringing on someones play-style. I admit 5E may prove me wrong, but so far D&amp;D historically, is easier to design if it comes from an unbalanced class-system and modifications/options are available (1st-3.5E) to make it a class-balanced game (4E).&nbsp;I think most of us can agree 4E is the most class-balanced edition of D&amp;D we have, but it infringes on quite a few play-styles by enforcing its own styles of play, whereas the earlier editions although not-class balanced could easily be modified/adjusted for any playstyle and/or to have the classes balanced.I better also add, that I'm not for or against any edition - I have played all.&nbsp;To make the above simpler: The oldschoolers, prefer the way things were, with maybe a few tweaks. So if 5E is to cater for all - we have to start with a minimalist basis, which of course by 4thers standards is unbalanced. However as the modular approach kicks in we start balancing and satisfying the 3-fivers until we come full circle and please 4thers. So the FULL game is only reached once all/most modules have kicked in which eventually gives you class-balance. Therefore the basic core, which serves a particular set of players, will not necessarily be perceived as a class-balanced system by fans of later editions. They (later edition fans) will add the modules to balance the classes from their perspective and to suit their game style!&nbsp;And its easier to start &quot;non-balanced&quot; because 90% of the work has already been done with the earlier editions. No need to reinvent the wheel - figure out whats core, what needs to remain and then add-on...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sadras, post: 5911787, member: 6688277"] I am going to disagree at this point only because I have never seen THAT kind of class-balance in D&D without infringing on someones play-style. I admit 5E may prove me wrong, but so far D&D historically, is easier to design if it comes from an unbalanced class-system and modifications/options are available (1st-3.5E) to make it a class-balanced game (4E). I think most of us can agree 4E is the most class-balanced edition of D&D we have, but it infringes on quite a few play-styles by enforcing its own styles of play, whereas the earlier editions although not-class balanced could easily be modified/adjusted for any playstyle and/or to have the classes balanced. I better also add, that I'm not for or against any edition - I have played all. To make the above simpler: The oldschoolers, prefer the way things were, with maybe a few tweaks. So if 5E is to cater for all - we have to start with a minimalist basis, which of course by 4thers standards is unbalanced. However as the modular approach kicks in we start balancing and satisfying the 3-fivers until we come full circle and please 4thers. So the FULL game is only reached once all/most modules have kicked in which eventually gives you class-balance. Therefore the basic core, which serves a particular set of players, will not necessarily be perceived as a class-balanced system by fans of later editions. They (later edition fans) will add the modules to balance the classes from [U]their perspective[/U] and to suit their game style! And its easier to start "non-balanced" because 90% of the work has already been done with the earlier editions. No need to reinvent the wheel - figure out whats core, what needs to remain and then add-on... [/QUOTE]

Verification