Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5796081" data-attributes="member: 32536">First off, I'll disagree that the classes in 3E were balanced. There is absolutely no way that the PHB classes are balanced in any way... You don't get such staggeringly laughable class imbalances if you make an attempt at balance. That said, a lot of the late 3.5E stuff was actually quite well balanced (it took them a while to figure it out, but they did, mostly), and a lot of fun, too. 4E was kind of the opposite... They started with a lot of balance, but it took them until Essentials to really begin to figure out how to have 3E's variety of fun classes within that balance.Anyways, I'll always disagree with the idea that balance is a bad thing. Balance is only a bad thing if you enjoy watching players be miserable at the table, or absolute craziness that makes playing the game a matter of russian roulette.Overall, I think people tend to use balance as a scapegoat for other, more legitimate issues with a game. I don't know why people latch on to a necessary and positive concept like balance for that scapegoat, but they do. In my opinion, though, is that anyone who blames balance for their problems is better off re-appraising their reasons for disliking a game rather than complaining about something that is so important. After all, there are plenty of perfectly valid and reasonable reasons to dislike a game. Balance, a concept with the sole purpose of letting everyone who sits down to play the game have fun, is never going to be a bad thing.</blockquote>

Verification