D&D 5E Why Balance is Bad

[Ahnehnois]

Sports at the level you are talking about aren't designed for the fun of the participants.

Nor is offense equal to combat and defense equal to noncombat.

Okayy...they're not quite equal. Sports are supposed to be fun for the participants. There are rec leagues and kids playing everywhere, not just the pros. But the point is that in social activities it's normal for people to be ostensibly involved in the activity, but not participating 100% of the time.

 

[The Human Target]

Balance is bad, mmmmmmkay.

 

[The Human Target]

Okayy...they're not quite equal. Sports are supposed to be fun for the participants. There are rec leagues and kids playing everywhere, not just the pros. But the point is that in social activities it's normal for people to be ostensibly involved in the activity, but not participating 100% of the time.

PCs kept out of combat are more like the waterboy during a football game.

 

[n00bdragon]

Well, plays aren't, but sports are. The quarterback of the football team doesn't complain about not being able to play defense. It's not his thing. Likewise, your noncombatant D&D character (rogue scout, bard socialite, pacifist cleric, support mage, etc. etc.) doesn't need to complain about being left out of the fighting part. Nor, for that matter, does the low-Cha character get to participate in negotiations much, and so on. D&D characters are specialized.

People are benched in sports because there is a rule that limits the number of players allowed on the field. As far as I know there is no rule in any version of D&D I know where only a certain number of players are allowed to contribute to some situation, particularly something like combat or dialog.

 

[The Human Target]

People are benched in sports because there is a rule that limits the number of players allowed on the field. As far as I know there is no rule in any version of D&D I know where only a certain number of players are allowed to contribute to some situation, particularly something like combat or dialog.

Also so your Quarterback doesn't get his head knocked in on a defensive play. And to bring in your most talented person in each niche position.

Its not about fun, its about winning.

 

[Ahnehnois]

People are benched in sports because there is a rule that limits the number of players allowed on the field. As far as I know there is no rule in any version of D&D I know where only a certain number of players are allowed to contribute to some situation, particularly something like combat or dialog.

And yet there are abundant practical limits on how many people can be talking at the same time.

I'm curious as to what anyone that doesn't think non-participation is okay thinks of simply splitting the party. If the characters are split between two or more separate locations, it seems obvious to me that the players are going to have to take turns.

 

[n00bdragon]

And yet there are abundant practical limits on how many people can be talking at the same time.

I'm curious as to what anyone that doesn't think non-participation is okay thinks of simply splitting the party. If the characters are split between two or more separate locations, it seems obvious to me that the players are going to have to take turns.

I've done splitting the party myself and that does work to some extent. It can be very difficult to manage two stories at once though.

 

[The Human Target]

And yet there are abundant practical limits on how many people can be talking at the same time.

I'm curious as to what anyone that doesn't think non-participation is okay thinks of simply splitting the party. If the characters are split between two or more separate locations, it seems obvious to me that the players are going to have to take turns.

See I don't think anyone serious has ever said that everyone needs to be a hundred percent involved a hundred percent of the time.

That's silly and impossible.

So splitting the party isn't an issue at all, in that sense at least.

Of course with PCs that have very specialized roles you're probably going to bescrewed if you run into trouble.

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

Here is how it goes in my campaigns.

My players acknowledge that sometimes people sit out while others participate. Now know one starts doing other things because what's going on affects the game as a whole and while some may not be directly involved in what's going on at the moment, they may need to pay attention for what happens in the future.

 

[Wyckedemus]

Here's the thing. No class will be worthless in combat. no one will be "benched" or be "the waterboy" unless the player wants to create a character that is worthless in combat. Everyone can contribute, even if their character does not steal the show with "high DPS" or "mezzes". They all have access to weapons or cantrips that can affect the enemies in some way, and part of their fun can be occasionally getting the last hit to drop a foe, or getting a crit, or using the environment, or providing a "tank" with a real purpose, which is protecting people who need it, all while making tactical choices to better their chances for survival.

The DM should test the pulse of the player characters and throw encounters and obstacles at them that allow and ecourage them to contribute and perhaps use the environment in fun and interesting ways. Navigating an adventure should be a collaborative affair.

... in my opinion.