Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9696333" data-attributes="member: 18">Really?I would say 5E reaches far above that.Assuming you put your highest stat as your primary, and increase that from time to time, D&D's worst combination of race/class/subclass is probably like, a 5.5/10 where the best is probably a 10/10 (excluding multiclassing for now). And that's abnormal. If you only include likely/PHB races/classes/subclasses it's more like between 6.5/10 and 10/10, or even 7/10 and 10/10 if you're being generous.And I don't even like 5E all that much. I preferred 4E, but it was nowhere near as balanced, even with constant balance updates. Worst was easily 3.XE, where you could make a totally legit sensible lore-appropriate, right stats in right place character and they'd be like 2/10 on a good day, and someone else could do the same, and be like 10/10 easy by comparison or like 12/10 if PrCs got involved.I mean, you're necessarily making a relative comparison by talking about "poorly balanced", so what's your point of reference? I'd say "mainstream traditional RPGs over the last 30 years" is mine, and by that reference point, D&D 5E is one of the most balanced RPGs on the market, and thus cannot, for me, be defined as "poorly balanced".If, however, I was comparing D&D to like, big, successful MMORPGs, D&D would not be particularly well-balanced, sure. But that seems to a questionable comparison to me.</blockquote>