Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bluenose" data-source="post: 5899089" data-attributes="member: 49017">The problem being, that if you want to make sure that a class isn't "rendered useless" by another class, then you have to give some consideration to balance. I'd go further, and suggest that if a class can be replaced by a different class, and the group would then be more effective at overcoming almost all challenges over a normal array of the activities that D&D groups get involved in, then that is a sign that something is wrong with the design of one of those classes. Please note, E Gary Gygax quite explicitly calls this out in the AD&D 1st edition PHB and DMG, saying that classes have been modified so they should not overshadow each other. You could also read some Dragon magazine editorials or examine the letters pages for further examples from the 1970s and 1980s. You could even look back at some of the comments about 3rd edition that appeared in 2000, where you will find a significant number of complaints about the new system and how some classes are too powerful. So the idea that balance fetishism was a new idea in 2008 is one that is not supported by the history of D&D. People have been talking about blanace longer than I have been playing the game, and I started before any AD&D books came out.</blockquote>