D&D (2024) Party Balance?

[deadman1204]

I think its complicated by the concept of video game balancing. Everyone must be "equal" now. In older dnd, the cleric aws never gonna be a combat monster, and the wizard was gonna do hands down the most damage but had no defenses. However now everyone has to be able to do similar damage and be equal. Class design is such that you don't depend on others anymore, thus everyone is more samey but "balanced".

 

[payn]

I think its complicated by the concept of video game balancing. Everyone must be "equal" now. In older dnd, the cleric aws never gonna be a combat monster, and the wizard was gonna do hands down the most damage but had no defenses. However now everyone has to be able to do similar damage and be equal. Class design is such that you don't depend on others anymore, thus everyone is more samey but "balanced".

Sorta, but there is a long answer to this. Games like 4E and PF2 have a tactical lean. They are designed where you need certain roles filled, that do certain actions each round to succeed. Combat is not only expected, but its a game event all on its own. For it to be interesting and valuable, it needs to be balanced around the above concepts. Other editions of D&D, have placed less emphasis on the combat particulars. Yes, combat is expected, and the lion's share of the rules. Though, the roles are general instead of specific. If you optimize and work as a team, you will certainly be more successful, but its not required for the game to work. Ingenuity and a little luck will suffice in most cases.

 

[Quickleaf]

I think this confirms in 2024 bards are try-sexual. We all knew it, but they said it.

 

[deadman1204]

Sorta, but there is a long answer to this. Games like 4E and PF2 have a tactical lean. They are designed where you need certain roles filled, that do certain actions each round to succeed. Combat is not only expected, but its a game event all on its own. For it to be interesting and valuable, it needs to be balanced around the above concepts. Other editions of D&D, have placed less emphasis on the combat particulars. Yes, combat is expected, and the lion's share of the rules. Though, the roles are general instead of specific. If you optimize and work as a team, you will certainly be more successful, but its not required for the game to work. Ingenuity and a little luck will suffice in most cases.

True, the later editions of dnd become more and more war gaming. 5th ed reduced or just removed all sorts of non-combat rules from earlier editions. While most editions have devoted the majority of pages to combat stuff, 5th ed took it further (I didn't play 4th, but 1, 2 , 3, 3.5, 5.0). There are far fewer non-combat spells than in the past, and those that exist are far more limited. Non-combat spells all have drastically reduced duration, area of effect, ect. There are fewer skills and skill options, all of which become more vague. Its obvious the design intent is to simply focus on rolling dice for big numbers and solving all your problems in combat.
Its more and more war gaming with some character chatter in between.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Never saw Ranger/Druid at the time.

Seeing it now in clones or 2E with modern players (Mielekki also has them).

So it's real weird. In the original 2e PHB if you look at the list of acceptable multiclass combinations for half-elf in the multiclass section, it lists fighter/druid and ranger/cleric. But if you read the entry for half-elf, it specifically says "ranger/cleric (or druid)".

Triple class leveled to slow. Low hit points. With spells like magic missile, sleep, cloud kill and very MAD.

Yeah, probably something along those lines. I just recall nobody ever tried it. Maybe nobody rolled well enough. That is... unlikely given how we tended to roll. We usually rolled up 6 characters (each) at once with 4d6 keep 3 and picked the best ones. If you got an 18, you played something with Fighter in it. Sure, you were supposed to keep the rest of the stats and use them. But somehow they always got lost. Funny, huh?

LOL. Using that method, I just rolled: 18/94, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10. Which could be a Half-Elf Ranger/Druid, but would likely be better as a Ranger/Cleric.

I've seen rogues meta their fast leveling to get their hit points and HD above that and ahead of the fighter they have similar thaco.

Yea, but then you're The Thief. You take thief because you want the skills like hide and move silent, plus slightly better saves. Nobody wants to be the guy who has to find and remove traps or pick locks or pick pockets. That's dangerous!

 

[Ashrym]

I've seen rogues meta their fast leveling to get their hit points and HD above that and ahead of the fighter they have similar thaco.

Bards for caster levels too. 2e XP leveling rates were kind of wild.

You mean DragonLance? Isn't that the plot of every written DL adventure? You get captured and its not until some totally new group of people come to rescue you that you have no option to escape?

No, I definitely meant LoTR et al. I don't remember the DragonLance novels well enough to recall similar issues. Do you have examples?

I think this confirms in 2024 bards are try-sexual. We all knew it, but they said it.

There is no try. There is do or do not. Bards are do-sexual.

Yea, but then you're The Thief. You take thief because you want the skills like hide and move silent, plus slightly better saves. Nobody wants to be the guy who has to find and remove traps or pick locks or pick pockets. That's dangerous!

Pffft.... rangers could hide and move silently.

See? ;-)

Bard rogue skills were climb walls, hear noise, pick pockets, and read languages. Rangers were way better at stealth given a low chance until high levels > no chance at all.

The problem with hide and move silently for the thief was they were also extremely low. Same with finding and removing traps. They needed that fast leveling to do the basic function of the "role" provided and even then the progression on THAC0 and saving throws seemed to be more useful than the progression on thieving abilities at that faster leveling rate.

2e bards fell under the rogue heading too and it was the faster access to caster levels through the advancement table that was far more useful than their rogue abilities.

2e monks were a priest option from a splat book and wouldn't fall under these skill at all.

I think people played thieves because they like the concept, but the practical application of that concept didn't happen until higher levels. Poor success ratios on those abilities plus the requirements for backstab to apply were detrimental to the class, IME.

 

[LordEntrails]

No, I definitely meant LoTR et al. I don't remember the DragonLance novels well enough to recall similar issues. Do you have examples?

Start with DL1... In short, they are scripted to follow the stories of the books, without any way for the characters to deviate. How about the death rule? Where major characters and NPCs can't die and if they do the event is retconned like some dream montage? Or when the party fights the black dragon and it dies in a prescribed way no matter what the party does or rolls? Or when the party is captured in DL2 and the only means of escape is when NPCs come and rescue them? Further details are too traumatic to try to remember. I've blocked out the rest of my experience with DL1-DL12 to preserve my love for D&D!

All of those things can be fixed by a competent DM, but, but, ugh.

 

[cbwjm]

Bards for caster levels too. 2e XP leveling rates were kind of wild.

Yeah, I always felt like the bard should have had a higher xp rate than the typical rogue, much like how the paladin and ranger had higher xp requirements than the fighter.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, I always felt like the bard should have had a higher xp rate than the typical rogue, much like how the paladin and ranger had higher xp requirements than the fighter.

Where I saw it blow out was optional 2E rules with 1 hp=2xp.

Rogues suck. That game that obe hit level 9 whole everyone else was 5 or 6 maybe 7 max.

Played Castles and Crusades last night. They buffed the the rogue but ot retains the same xp rate of old.

New player in 3 sessions so far. Her and the bard hit level 6 last night (C&C bard is different than 2E ).

Using gold for xp and xp for magic items. Crossbiw of speed 7500gp.
She's already worked out if she got that solo or starts getting creative......

 

[Ashrym]

Start with DL1... In short, they are scripted to follow the stories of the books, without any way for the characters to deviate. How about the death rule? Where major characters and NPCs can't die and if they do the event is retconned like some dream montage? Or when the party fights the black dragon and it dies in a prescribed way no matter what the party does or rolls? Or when the party is captured in DL2 and the only means of escape is when NPCs come and rescue them? Further details are too traumatic to try to remember. I've blocked out the rest of my experience with DL1-DL12 to preserve my love for D&D!

All of those things can be fixed by a competent DM, but, but, ugh.

I didn't play those modules so I cannot really comment on them, and still don't remember the stories in the books. I was never really big on DragonLance.

I do remember Raistlin and Caramon being competent although Fizban had a similar role in rescuing characters.

In LotR it's the eagles, or the rohirrim, or some random elves, or the ents, or Tom Bombadil, or whoever who rescues main characters who do nothing impressive.

Frodo is one of the most important characters in that trilogy but what did he actually do? He inherited an artifact that he needed to carry, later inherited some more magic items, and had Sam there to protect him but Frodo failed in the end and if it weren't for Gollum everything would have gone to crud. Sam fits the profile of our heroes are in our friendships. Frodo got to sail to the undying lands with the elves over circumstance because there was an entitlement implicit to the character over the burden of his possessions.

When we talk about the heroes journey I don't think this applies to Frodo because of his lack of overcoming his own downfall in favor of others doing it for him before returning to live in peace.

I enjoyed LotR and the Hobbit, and when I first start playing DnD it was typically as a halfling because of it. I don't think many of the main characters were good at overcoming challenges as opposed to being rescued from them, however. That's before getting into the trope of heroics requiring sacrifice, which is something I also recall from Huma in DL.