Older Editions and "Balance" when compared to 3.5

[Bedrockgames]

I personally liked 3E a lot. But I think what people are talking about when they take issue with balance in 3E versus earlier editions, is the multiclassing system (at least that is where I saw most of the holes in the game). One of the things I loved about 3E was its versatile multiclassing system (which allowed you to make all kinds of interesting characters). But because each class is basically a list of powers you get over time, there are all kinds of combinations that strain the game. Especially when the splat books introduced new material at a steady clip. That and the feats. A player who knew how to work the feat and multiclassing combinations, could devise an overpowered character fairly easily. By the same token someone who didn't understand the system could unintentionally create an underpowered one.

In my experience about half of the people in my group saw this as a feature, the other half saw it as a flaw. I think this is largely a matter of taste. For some, having a system where power imbalances are possible is important because it means character creation and development choices have significant mechanical consequences. For others this was problematic because it required system mastery in order to fully enjoy and participate in the game (but there are tons of threads on that discussion here I am sure). And others in my group thought balance was important, and felt 3E could be balanced provided the GM kept an eye on character creation choices, and ruled against broken combos.

Earlier editions certainly had balance issues (wizards have always been more powerful than fighters at high level--that sort of thing). But from what I remember, it was really hard to achieve the scope of imbalance in 2e or 1e that you could in 3e. GMing 2e I definitely encoutnered min maxers and they were able to push the game in places and find loopholes. But there just weren't the number of combinations and loopholes that existed in 3E due to the multiclassing/feats.

I haven't really played much 4E, so I can't comment on the balance in the new edition. But from what my friends who play it tell me, many of the issues created 3E multiclass system, have been eliminated. However, I am also told, there are still ways to push the system (though I don't know to what extent).

 

[Votan]

The question is, is it reasonable for a kobold to feel threatened by pale, wheezing Jimmy wearing pyjamas, or Tornado, the ½-orc wielding an axe bigger than the kobold, especially when the latters is starting to froth at the mouth and screams bloody murder? How often have the kobolds experienced magic vs how often have they been bullied by bigger creatures? How often have they plundered treasure from non-magical foes, vs magical foes? How often have they traded and bartered with the humans? How about taking prisoners and getting ransom? Must be far better than just stabbing everything to death... However, YMMV.

I would intelligent opponents acting the way average poeple would in a world where the rules were different. Let's consdier the sleep spell to be equivalent to carrying around a grenade. If wheezing Jimmy is carrying a grenade than modern folks would see him as the primary threat. Similarily in a fantasy world where the decision not to wear armor while adventuring is either a sign of reckless overconfidence or an "I am a spellcaster" logo.

Futhermore, Jummy has to declare he is casting before initiative is rolled. Even if the grenade was not obvious in advance, it sure will be when he pulls it out. It doesn't mean that a grenade is bad (it is very, very good) but rather that it is never ideal to be the most obviosuly dangerous thing around.

Ask the people who had the displeasure of carrying flame throwers into combat . . .

 

[ExploderWizard]

True, within reason...

Once a DM had a skeleton rush past two fighters, (provoking AoO from each) to attack my wizard, which had been hanging back in the background. Sunless Citadel apparently had skeletons that were vicious members of the anti-spellcaster league.

IOW, if the DM sucks, the DM sucks, and there isn't much you can do about it in game. Basically, it comes down to "fun".

The question is, is it reasonable for a kobold to feel threatened by pale, wheezing Jimmy wearing pyjamas, or Tornado, the ½-orc wielding an axe bigger than the kobold, especially when the latters is starting to froth at the mouth and screams bloody murder? How often have the kobolds experienced magic vs how often have they been bullied by bigger creatures? How often have they plundered treasure from non-magical foes, vs magical foes? How often have they traded and bartered with the humans? How about taking prisoners and getting ransom? Must be far better than just stabbing everything to death... However, YMMV.

At lower levels, IMC, intelligent opponents are much more likely to capture for ransom, than kill outright. You really need a reason to kill, because it messes up the whole neighbourhood. And in the end, Fresh meat just tastes better: Keep them alive until it is time to put them in the pot.

PS: above sentiment applies to ALL versions of the game... even Basic D&D.

The year is 1981:

What is this AoO thing you're talking about?


The year is 2000:

Assuming 3E rules the sleep threat becomes MUCH nastier:

1) The wizard decides ON HIS TURN what if any spell will be cast. Disruption of the spell requires not only that the kobolds recognize that the robed fella is dangerous, but to be both faster AND tactically savvy enough to ready an action just in case he might cast.

2) The wizard may move before or after casting in order to "shoot" after popping out from behind cover or a corner. This includes waiting to cast until after the kobold charges and stabs at him-then doing a simple step back to cast without provoking the AoO.

 

[Nagol]

The year is 1981:

What is this AoO thing you're talking about?


The year is 2000:

Assuming 3E rules the sleep threat becomes MUCH nastier:

1) The wizard decides ON HIS TURN what if any spell will be cast. Disruption of the spell requires not only that the kobolds recognize that the robed fella is dangerous, but to be both faster AND tactically savvy enough to ready an action just in case he might cast.

2) The wizard may move before or after casting in order to "shoot" after popping out from behind cover or a corner. This includes waiting to cast until after the kobold charges and stabs at him-then doing a simple step back to cast without provoking the AoO.

Except that Sleep acquired a saving throw, had its variability removed, had its radius reduced to 10', and took a full round to cast so the enemy can interrupt without a held action so long as they go before the caster goes again. Oh, and saving throws became much easier to make as well (DC is 11 + casting modifier -- probably 14-15 so even if the opponent had no bonus to Will saves at all, 25-30% of the enemy are unaffected).

 

[NewJeffCT]

Funny, I've never used hirelings. They tend to be even more squishy than a mage. And then you have to deal with their family when one dies.

I played 1E for many years - all throughout the 80s and into the early 90s... the players in my group almost never used hirelings - they didn't want to give up a share of both the XP and treasure for a 5th wheel hireling.

 

[fanboy2000]

Is this why modern editions of D&D make DMing less fun? So the DM won't have more fun than the players?

I don't know, I had a blast DMing 3e and 3.5. I'm having a blast DMing 4e. But I don't have much experience with prior editions to compare it to.

Um, wouldn't this mean that pre 3e was NOT balanced in your opinion. Pre 3e D&D was always balaned over the length of a campaign...

I don't know, I didn't play enough pre 3e D&D to form an opinion on the matter. The only pre-3e edition I played was AD&D 2e.

However, I would find it weird if someone kept playing a game where they would often spend the whole game session not having fun.

 

[billd91]

Um, wouldn't this mean that pre 3e was NOT balanced in your opinion. Pre 3e D&D was always balaned over the length of a campaign...

No. If his players were having about the same amount of fun in a session, it wouldn't even matter if the PCs were of wildly different levels, the game would still be balanced.

 

[amerigoV]

I can only compare 1e (my high school daze) to 3e:

3e tried to balance the classes to each other, with some variance. Everyone had something to do in combat that was meaningful. It was not perfect, but it was pretty solid. 4e seems to want to balance everything at every step, but I have only played a bit of it.

1e character creation for my groups went like this:

• The guy that like to smash stuff and be effective from the get-go ran the Fighter
• The guy that like magic, wanted a more complex class, and was willing to wait it out for more power ran the Magic User (sadly that was me - and the campaign tended to end just when my boy really got to kick some butt)
• The troublemaker that did not care that much about combat ran the thief
• The last guy to the session ran the cleric, cuz whomever ran the cleric had to pray for mostly healing spells to keep the rest of us alive (or the cleric was the NPC we dragged along).

I do not know much about 2e (kits and such), but 1e was not as worried about pure combat balance. The classes all had something they were good at, but not in a combat sense. For example, since 1e was still in the dungeon crawl days, thieves got a lot of limelight in the exploration phase of the game vs. the pure combat side.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Sleep is an auto-win because there is no saving throw for it. From the First Edition AD&D PHB:

Sleep (Enchantment/Charm)
Level: 1
Range: 3" + 1"/level
Duration: 5 roundsAeve1
Area of Effect: Special
Casting Time: 1 segment
Saving Throw: None
Components: V, S, M
Costing Time: I segment
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: When a magic-user casts a sleep spell, he or she
will usually cause a comatose slumber to come upon one or more
creatures [other than undead and certain other creatures specifically
excluded (see ADVANCED DUNGEONS 8 DRAGONS, MONSTER
MANUAL) from the spell's effects]. All creatures to be affected by the
sleep spell must be within a 3" diameter circle. The number of creatures
which can be affected is a function of their life energy levels, expressed os
hit dice and hit points:



Creatures
Hit Dice
up to 1
1+1 to2
24-1 to3
3+1 to4
4+1 to4+4

Number Affected
By Sleep Spell
4-16 (4d4)
2-8 (2d4)
1-4 (1d4)
1-2 (1 half d4, round off)
0- 1 (d4,3 or4)

The area of effect is determined by the range and area center decided
upon by the spell caster. Slopping or wounding will awaken affected
creatures, but noise will not do so. Awakening requires 1 complete melee
round. Note that sleeping creatures con be slain automatically at a rote of
1 per slayer per melee round. The material component for this spell is o
pinch of fine sand, rose petals, or a live cricket.

However, just because there's no saving throw to the spell, it doesn't mean that the scenario is an auto win. Because if there's more monsters than the spell can handle, those monsters might be able to wake up their sleeping friends.

All it really does it gives the party a super really extra big advantage.

 

[Mournblade94]

However, I would find it weird if someone kept playing a game where they would often spend the whole game session not having fun.

I agree. According to some posts on this board there were many people forced to play 3rd edition with all of its inequities, and suffered like good martyrs for the good of their gaming group.