D&D 5E Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)

[Bedrockgames]

3.0 and 3.5 were both designed for minatures - and you can't get AoOs right without knowing exactly who stands where. The only difference here is that in my opinion removing the AoOs with their numerous triggers from 3.X probably makes for a better game. 4e doesn't. But this doesn't mean that 3e wasn't designed for minatures every bit as much as 4e was.

And AD&D and oD&D have their movements stated in inches due to the tabletop wargaming roots of D&D. You have blast radiuses for spells - again you have to have the map to use them properly.

Yes, 4e was designed for minatures. So was every other edition of D&D published, especially 3.X. It's simply that rather than just being designed for minatures 4e took advantage of the things minatures can bring to the game by way e.g. of forced movement rules.



Good for you. What sort of spells did your wizards prepare, and how much in the way of anti-magic fields were there?

For AD&D you really didn't need maps or grids. If you wanted absolute precision, then you m tht usethem. But so many people didn't use miniatures and simply used things like blast radiuses to gauge are of effect within a minds eye approach (with the GM having ultimate say). In my experience miniatures were not ubiquitous until sometime during 3E. Even then, I played with groups that didn't use them (though that makes attacks of opprtunity tough to handle as you point out).

 

[Ahnehnois]

Played loads of high level games in 3rd edition. Played all they way to level 38 twice and never saw these so called problems. I know there were people who tried all sorts of crazy but when you dug deeper you found that most of it didn't actually work.

Hm. I think the highest level I ran was 37, so you might have me beat on that. But yes, by and large it plays out the same way as in 2e, where high-level magic is a lot of trying crazy things and watching them fail. And then you have those supposedly inferior nonmagical characters taking over at times.

Perhaps the disparity doesn't appear until past level 40?

 

[Ahnehnois]

In my experience miniatures were not ubiquitous until sometime during 3E. Even then, I played with groups that didn't use them (though that makes attacks of opprtunity tough to handle as you point out).

I actually used them more with 2e than with 3e (though still a minority of the time). I never understood why an AoO is so hard. Reach, 5 ft steps, and the very finite list of things that provoke make things pretty easy to adjudicate in my head. I haven't used them with 3e in a long time.

To me, the only time there's a real upside is when there are a large number of combatants. Human short-term memory being what it is, I would place that number at around ten. Even then, though, if you've got a double-digit number of combatants, it's often because you have a bunch of little ones, which can often be "chunked" together. In almost all combats I run, I find battles run faster and easier without a grid.

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

All we needed in 3rd edition was graph paper and pipe cleaners.

 

[The Human Target]

All we needed in 3rd edition was graph paper and pipe cleaners.

That totally counts as "miniatures."

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

That totally counts as "miniatures."

Emmm.....no.

 

[Iosue]

For AD&D you really didn't need maps or grids. If you wanted absolute precision, then you m tht usethem. But so many people didn't use miniatures and simply used things like blast radiuses to gauge are of effect within a minds eye approach (with the GM having ultimate say). In my experience miniatures were not ubiquitous until sometime during 3E. Even then, I played with groups that didn't use them (though that makes attacks of opprtunity tough to handle as you point out).

The only real difference between editions and the use of miniatures is foregrounding. You can play 3.x or 4e using exactly the same kind of estimation, rule-of-thumbing, and the like, that you used with TSR-era D&D. Likewise, you can play TSR-era D&D using miniatures and battle-mat. Heck, Moldvay talks about using a 1"=5' scale dry-erase battlemat and miniatures in the 1981 Basic rules. The only difference was that 3.x and especially 4e foregrounded that style of play, to the point where 4e used squares instead of feet. If you just replace "(x) squares" with "(multiples of) 5 feet", it's not especially different.

Now, to be sure, the use of "squares" instead of "feet" is a distinct choice that might make it seem like it's difficult to play without miniatures, and eminently criticizable, but that's an aesthetic and presentation issue, not a design issue.

 

[pemerton]

That totally counts as "miniatures."

Emmm.....no.

In that case 4e doesn't need miniatures either - after all, we use plastic and cardboard counters on paper grids.

 

[The Human Target]

Emmm.....no.

Yes, it is.

You are using a map and physical representations of PCs and NPCs, in order too keep track of positioning and ranges.

Miniatures and Dungeon Tiles are just fancy versions of that.

Unless you were using graph paper and pipe cleaners to make fun crafts at the table.

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

In that case 4e doesn't need miniatures either - after all, we use plastic and cardboard counters on paper grids.

We didnt even use that much. We used an A4 sheet of graph paper to show the room size.

Everything was drawn in pencil while using bits of pipe cleaner for the occasional AoE.

Thats not using miniatures.