I'm confused. What does it mean to judge a class based on math if you're not doing a mathematical comparison of one class or option against another? Numbers in isolation are meaningless.
D&D 5E Less about the numbers and more about the concept: Judging classes in 5th edition.
I'm confused. What does it mean to judge a class based on math if you're not doing a mathematical comparison of one class or option against another? Numbers in isolation are meaningless.
All maths judgements are about some form of balance though not always direct comparisons between different implementations. Maths results on their own are meaningless. Meaning is only gained through context -- typically comparison with results taken from some other aspect of the rule set, but also through basic play expectation.
For example, if the concept is that of a character type that swarms his enemies with a multitude of summoned minions, none of which would pose a threat on its own, but the hypothetical game system only allows each character one 'action' which can either be taken by the PC or a controlled minion, then the math suggests the concept implementation is a failure for any game with the expectation of multiple PCs even if the effective danger level to the PC and the effective success rate is the same as every other class implementation. The time taken by this implementation to complete a combat is so much greater than any other class that the implementation breaks the expected combat paradigm.
Sacrosanct
Legend
This is probably a better way of explaining what I was trying to say earlier. While yes, math is objective, how it's used is subjective and someone's opinion, therefore, the result is subjective and someone's opinion. Ergo, using math isn't any better of a metric than someone's opinion on how something feels, or how it works narrative, etc. The only real metric is, "does it work for you at your table?" We as a group (gamers) tend to over-analyze everything we can get our hands on, IMO.
For example, let's say someone says, "2+4+8 = 14. You can't argue with that. And 5+8 = 13. So obviously there's no balance there because 14 is more than 13." The subjectivity of that is how you're choosing your numbers. Maybe in someone else's game, 4 never comes up, but 3 does. So for them, it's 2+3+8 compared to 5+8. So while the numbers are objective, it's flawed to look at them in a vacuum because they change depending on playstyle preferences and other things that may occur or not occur in a game session.
Sure, but larger variances can become objectively "wrong" in the sense they skew the game compared to other implementations.
For example, assume a class whose concept is to travel alone through the wilderness for a days at a time and returning to safety to restock and refresh occasionally. Let's give that class d100 hp per level to reflect its resilience. It is subjective to say that's wrong. It is objective to say that the percentile dice for hp is way out of line with any possible peer comparison.
Jester David
Hero
There's always been people who look at the classes and think "the numbers on this one are just outright better. I'll play that." People who just want to kick butt and think mathematically besting the game is the way to "win".
I did that for a while during my Palladium days. Lot less balance there, so it was easier to build Ultimate ass kickers. Didn't make those characters any more fun at the table...
I did that for a while during my Palladium days. Lot less balance there, so it was easier to build Ultimate ass kickers. Didn't make those characters any more fun at the table...
Sacrosanct
Legend
Well, sure. But I find 99% of the things in 5e don't really fall into that level of variance. We tend to get caught up in balance discussions that are only balance issues in certain playstyles under specific scenarios, rather than something that is universally way out there.
Yeah, 5e does look like the designers did a good job with the initial maths across the rule set for their expected type of play. The dissatisfactions among the player base tend to be styles outside the bounds of expected play and/or confined to specific preferences. Even the classes with the most complaints still look OK.
BoldItalic
First Post
The Unhurried Ranger was biding his time, hiding his capabilities behind a cloak of misleading numbers. His enemies underestimated him. Even his friends underestimated him. But quietly, oh so quietly, he was gaining power. He had grit. He had resolve. Above all, he had patience. He oiled his longbow, gazing into the gloom of the forest that surrounded him. Orcs would fall to his arrows this night.
Let others deride his calling. Such cries were but feathers in the wind. In a far-off future, he would wield the Sceptre of Annúminas and re-unite the kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor. It was his destiny. It was written in Book Three. But there was no need to make a song and dance about it. His time would come when it came. Festina Lente. He was The Unhurried Ranger.
Let others deride his calling. Such cries were but feathers in the wind. In a far-off future, he would wield the Sceptre of Annúminas and re-unite the kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor. It was his destiny. It was written in Book Three. But there was no need to make a song and dance about it. His time would come when it came. Festina Lente. He was The Unhurried Ranger.
clutchbone
First Post
Yes, for the average player. Most of us want to feel like we held up our end in a team game, which is often impacted by the mathematical aspects of a class.
This isn't quite what you asked, but I think it's relevant. Some people get disappointed on principle by sub-par game design (i.e. mathematically balanced classes fleshed out with interesting concept themes), and feel let down if they think that Wizards of the Coast has approved and sold them shoddy workmanship.
Arilyn
Hero
Doing nitty gritty math, and running the numbers is a large part of the nuts and bolts of game design. It is especially true in crunchy games like 5e, and yes 5e is still very crunchy, compared to systems like Cortex Plus or Fate. In DnD, players are given pieces in which to build their character. Most players are not looking for perfect balance between the pieces, but they don't want to feel they have chosen poor ones, and fluff which does not match the mechanics can be annoying. In more narrative style games there is room for your concept to have flexibility. It is the strength of these games, but requires more initial creative input when making characters, and requires more creativity at the table. F20 games have the advantage of players picking from pre-designed pieces. There are rules for discrete actions. Feats and class features help define your character's abilities and choices in their world. Numbers matter, and getting them right is the foundation of elegant game design.
Similar Threads
