Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 6518208" data-attributes="member: 23716">SirAntoine, by your definition of balance, we would all be playing 1e AD&amp;D, with a few add ons, since you seem to regard that as the pinnacle of balance and gritty realism.&nbsp; There should have been no new editions since then.&nbsp; That is all well and good for you, but suffice it to say that others disagree.&nbsp; The balancing of classes by having different XP progressions, only allowing the strongest classes to be played by those who rolled really well (thereby getting the double bonus of getting better stats and a more powerful class), is so antithetical to the concept of balance as discussed on these boards I can't really even relate.&nbsp; Once again, if that is what one likes, great!&nbsp; Enjoy your game!&nbsp; But holding that as some sort of baseline standard of objective balance does not really seem productive.I would assume that saying D&amp;D on the cover would lead one to believe that one could role play a bold warrior, cunning thief, magical wizard, or devoted cleric delving into dungeons with companions, having adventures, finding treasure and exploring lost ruins.&nbsp; D&amp;D 5e delivers on that in spades.&nbsp; It may not everyone's edition of choice, and there are surely rough patches in the rules that need to be ironed out, even some balance issues, but I submit that none of these will be that fundamental in nature.&nbsp; There are even many optional rules to tweak the game to ones liking (like more gritty), though they are not as extensive as many expected and wished them to be and will not meet everyone's needs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gadget, post: 6518208, member: 23716"] SirAntoine, by your definition of balance, we would all be playing 1e AD&D, with a few add ons, since you seem to regard that as the pinnacle of balance and gritty realism. There should have been no new editions since then. That is all well and good for you, but suffice it to say that others disagree. The balancing of classes by having different XP progressions, only allowing the strongest classes to be played by those who rolled really well (thereby getting the double bonus of getting better stats and a more powerful class), is so antithetical to the concept of balance as discussed on these boards I can't really even relate. Once again, if that is what one likes, great! Enjoy your game! But holding that as some sort of baseline standard of objective balance does not really seem productive. I would assume that saying D&D on the cover would lead one to believe that one could role play a bold warrior, cunning thief, magical wizard, or devoted cleric delving into dungeons with companions, having adventures, finding treasure and exploring lost ruins. D&D 5e delivers on that in spades. It may not everyone's edition of choice, and there are surely rough patches in the rules that need to be ironed out, even some balance issues, but I submit that none of these will be that fundamental in nature. There are even many optional rules to tweak the game to ones liking (like more gritty), though they are not as extensive as many expected and wished them to be and will not meet everyone's needs. [/QUOTE]

Verification