Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9201248" data-attributes="member: 7030563">You can add ability scores and luck to that long list.My opinion, supported by extensive play experience, is that it is best not to strive for balance at all.  Play what you want to play, let others play what they want to play.  I think that works best in modern 5E and making it so you don't need specific classes (no one has to play a Cleric or a Rogue) has really opened up a lot of different playstyles.The "why am I here" example above could be easily answered - "you tell me why are you here and why did you make the build choices you did."I also notice the vast majority of imbalance examples are focused on combat and not all character builds are intended to excel at combat.  I am playing a Glasya Tiefling Rogue 1/Bard 2 right now and she is awful in combat.  She has a 19 Charisma and the only real game she has is the Dissonant Whispers spell, which is a decent spell but hit or miss and really limited uses.  With a 13 Dex, she is not effective with weapons at all, her AC is 12 and her Constitution is 10.   In a party of 6 (Monk, Monk, Paladin, Wizard, Rogue, me) she is a distant 6th in combat, with the Rogue being closer to the top than she is.  That will improve as we gain levels and more spells of course but I never see her being a combat powerhouse.  She is awesome in the social pillar though, rocking expertise in Deception, proficiency in Persuasion having Friends, Minor Illusion and Disguise self.This is the second character I played with this group that was mediocre in combat.  In a previous campaign I played a 1-12 Half Elf Scout Rogue skill monkey player with the Archeologist background.  That character was better in combat, but still at the bottom of the party.  He was completely dominant at the exploration pillar and really good at the social pillar.</blockquote>

Verification