Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 9169633" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm sorry, but that is factually incorrect.  The classes, among other player facing choices in D&D, including 5e, are profoundly imbalanced.  In the case of 5e, that can even be taken as imbalanced by design, since they were closer to balanced in the prior ed, and 5e backed off from that.Even in the very specific case examined in the OP, balance is only nominally achieved with a prescribed day length.It's on the DM to present challenges in play, it's his choice how challenging he wants to make them.  Which can mean balancing, for instance, combat encounters, or not - in a 'living world' style, if the players decide to bully weak creature or march into certain death against a vastly superior foe, it's on them.The player facing choices, like class, can be modified by the DM, but they're presented by the game as if they were balanced (as equally weighted choices) and they very clearly are not.  It should not be on the DM to don a designer hat and fix them up-front, nor should it be in the DM job description to compensate for class imbalances in play, by, for instance, forcing day length so Fighter and Wizard DPR come into some sort of rough balance.By all rights, level should be a good metric of party capability and monster threat.  It would be intuitive.Thats something else that the game could deliver, if it had better class balance.It makes it a simplified starting point.  And, again, one that favors the fighter, and, even so, finds nominal balance only at a point. As you add back many other considerations, the analysis will get more difficult - and cast the fighter in a worse and worse light.   Because, while overall DPR for the day an be balanced between a resource heavy and low resource class by forcing day length, the tremendous versatility of neo-Vancian slot casting only becomes more valuable, the more complexity you introduce.</blockquote>

Verification