D&D 5E What Level is the Wizard vs. the Fighter?

[Maxperson]

I mean you didn't use the word better. You did say you could and did routinely match up to challenge the entre group with out tpk BECUSE the game wasn't balanced around hp/resource depletion. so I inffered you meant better in this case.

Better in this case, yes. That didn't mean 3e was better balanced than 5e, which is talking about the whole. 3e was the most unbalanced edition of the game. LOL For all that, though, it was in my opinion the most fun as well.

I like running relatively few encounters, because parties just won't be running into 5-8 encounters in most adventuring "days" unless they are in a highly populated dungeon or something. I prefer 1 or 2 in-between rests, which 5e just can't do.

 

[HammerMan]

I think 4e's development of everybody having encounter based powers, healing surges being able to be spent in between combats, and regaining expended action points after two encounters was a deliberate move to encourage parties to keep going in a dungeon environment instead of a five minute work day. It still had daily powers and full healing on a long rest, but I think it was a conscious design step to addressing the daily resource base of pre-4e spells.

yeah, I think they slipped up by making every class have the exact same number of abilities but overall I liked the idea.

later things (here's looking at you psionic power souces) showed that something like more at wills that could be boosted to act like encounter abilities could work.

I honestly beleive that a system based more on 4e's idea of "everyone has all the types of abilities (at will/short rest/long res/daily/ritual) but mix and match more would be perfect.

 

[HammerMan]

I like running relatively few encounters, because parties just won't be running into 5-8 encounters in most adventuring "days" unless they are in a highly populated dungeon or something. I prefer 1 or 2 in-between rests, which 5e just can't do.

yeah that is close to my preferred method as well. occasional wars or dungeons with a lot of small encounters to eat away, some big 1 or 2 encounter days and lots in-between.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It was generally a self-created issue. Keeping the world moving while the party constant rests makes for resting that often being a bad idea. If everything else stopped while the party rested, then sure, the 5 minute work day was a problem.

Even if that were true, the fact that so many groups had an issue with it is in itself a design problem.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To me 4E's design based on number of encounters seems to contrived and forced to really like the approach, but that is just my preference. I never got to play it so if I had I might feel otherwise.

I played it for quite a while, and for me and my group, it absolutely was too contrived and forced.

 

[Maxperson]

Even if that were true, the fact that so many groups had an issue with it is in itself a design problem.

Only in so far as the DMG should have given better advice on not just letting the party constantly rest with nothing else going on in the outside world.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think 4e's development of everybody having encounter based powers, healing surges being able to be spent in between combats, and regaining expended action points after two encounters was a deliberate move to encourage parties to keep going in a dungeon environment instead of a five minute work day. It still had daily powers and full healing on a long rest, but I think it was a conscious design step to addressing the daily resource base of pre-4e spells.

This is why I always say 4e didn't go too-far enough.

They left in all these remnants of the old bad design that kluged the new one.

Edit: Adding 'IMO' to head off the inevitable response some people won't be able to keep themselves from posting.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is why I always say 4e didn't go too-far enough.

They left in all these remnants of the old bad design that kluged the new one.

Edit: Adding 'IMO' to head off the inevitable response some people won't be able to keep themselves from posting.

You do realize that 4e's status as "the edition that failed" is in large part due to the feeling that it did go too far. What you are looking for has never been D&D, and I don't see it ever becoming so. On the other hand, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I hope there is gaming in your life that suits your needs.

 

[Voadam]

This is why I always say 4e didn't go too-far enough.

They left in all these remnants of the old bad design that kluged the new one.

Edit: Adding 'IMO' to head off the inevitable response some people won't be able to keep themselves from posting.

My brother developed house rules to turn healing surges per encounter instead of per day and to trade in dailies for lower level dailes as encounter powers.

We had been tinkering around with recharge magic in 3e and Pathfinder for a while and these house rules suited our playstyle preferences fairly well.

 

[Vaalingrade]

You do realize that 4e's status as "the edition that failed" is in large part due to the feeling that it did go too far.

That's the narrative people who didn't like it enjoy pushing.

Despite not actually failing until they pivoted to try to win back all the people who were never going to come back anyway.