D&D 5E You Cant Fix The Class Imbalances IMHO

[EzekielRaiden]

Talking about game design. Been going through see what they got tight or wrong.

Fighters get the dual wield option level 1 5E btw.

There is literally nothing preventing a 4e Fighter from using two weapons at first level. Not. One. Thing.

 

[Zardnaar]

No. Starting roles. You have the tools to be a defender or leader etc. You can always get other tools as you level up. You are no more "forced" to use them than you are forced to heal people as a cleric in 5e--even though absolutely every cleric knows, and can prepare, healing spells. Nor how a Fighter is forced to use a shield because they know how to use one. I know that the "roles are straightjackets" thing is quite ingrained, but it's as false today as it was in 2007.


Okay. Name a class in 5e that can dual-wield "effectively." Because the only one I know of is rogue--every other class, you really want a shield or a 2H weapon, because that's where all the damage is. For anyone that isn't a rogue, including rangers, it's mediocre at best past 5th level. And, as @deganawida said, in 4e there's also Tempest Fighter, but further, there's Whirling Barbarian, and both the Rogue (especially if using hand crossbows) and the Assassin very much benefit from dual-wielding.


How is that not the case for PHB classes in 5e--or 3e, for that matter? Choose Dex or Strength, for example (and usually Dex, unless you have to use Str.) Choose sword-and-board or two-handed. Etc.


Er...what? Not if they're actually designed to do things. MM3 on a business card is for basic monsters. The absolute bare minimum. I don't even know how you got this.


It isn't "10 levels stretched over 30." And frankly I find your characterization of level 21+ being "anemic" hilarious, considering that the design of characters at that level fully expects that you'll frequently die once a day. That's literally why Epic Destinies have features that trigger when you fall to 0 HP. They might as well openly say, "Once per day, when you die..."

The one and only complaint you've made here that actually lands is the grind--and WotC agrees with you! They addressed it with MM3. Which, admittedly, is rather a long time to wait for what should have been the rules from the beginning. But it was, nonetheless, addressed.

I posted level 29 phb dailies.

They're on par with damage and effects of 5th level 5E spells. A lot weaker in effect due to what you'reaiming them at.

Every class has a role in 4E hard coded. What if you dont want that role full stop or a fighter that's not a defender?
. Can't do it at least with the PHB.

 

[Zardnaar]

There is literally nothing preventing a 4e Fighter from using two weapons at first level. Not. One. Thing.

Complete lack of powers. You can technically do it all the power support is in Ranger class. All the fighter powers low level are strength based.

Straight jacket you have to have powers and a role. 5E it's opt in.

 

[deganawida]

There is literally nothing preventing a 4e Fighter from using two weapons at first level. Not. One. Thing.

Yep. What’s more, before Martial Power even gave it fighters, I played in a short game a fighter who took the rogue multi class feat and used a dagger in his offhand for any opportunity to deal SA damage, which fighters could easily set up. Was cool how it worked, and actually matched historical usage a lot more than dudes swinging two swords around, dealing damage with both.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I posted level 29 phb dailies.

They're on par with damage and effects of 5th level 5E spells. A lot weaker in effect due to what you'reaiming them at.

Every class has a role in 4E hard coded. What if you dont want that role full stop or a fighter that's not a defender?
. Can't do it at least with the PHB.

What if you want to be a Wizard that doesn't cast spells? Can't do that in the 5e PHB.

What if you want to be a Rogue that never sneak attacks? Can't do that in the 5e PHB.

What if you want to be a Cleric that cannot heal people--not just chooses not to, but truly can't? Can't do that in the 5e PHB. But that's what you would need to do in order to not have the Leader role in 4e.

Or, for one that has actually been requested--and found wanting!--what if you want to be a Ranger that doesn't cast spells? Can't do that in the 5e PHB. Lots of people wanted one. If there weren't a call for such a thing, they wouldn't have tried...what was it, two or three times?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Every class has a role in 4E hard coded. What if you dont want that role full stop or a fighter that's not a defender?
. Can't do it at least with the PHB.

What if I don't want to play a wizard that cast spells?

What if I want to play like a super chill barbarian that never raises their voice and solves all conflict through the mighty thews of compromise?

Roles were always in the game. That time around they just weren't obfuscated to screw over new players.

Even money Rehashing the Classic Edition War Fallacies: The Thread is still open when I wake up.

 

[Zardnaar]

What if I don't want to play a wizard that cast spells?

What if I want to play like a super chill barbarian that never raises their voice and solves all conflict through the mighty thews of compromise?

Roles were always in the game. That time around they just weren't obfuscated to screw over new players.

Even money Edition War: The Thread is still open when I wake up.

Tgey added it in 4E it wasn't part of the D&D experience and they forced it in.

No one's forcing you to take 4E inspired options in 5E they're opt in for the most part.

5E fighter is a lot more organic than 4E. Strength or dex and weapon styles later it onto the subclass you want.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Complete lack of powers. You can technically do it all the power support is in Ranger class. All the fighter powers low level are strength based.

Straight jacket you have to have powers and a role. 5E it's opt in.

So, what you're actually saying is, it's not that you can't do it, it's that it isn't bleeding-edge optimal to do it.

The exact same standard applies to 5e. It's sub-optimal for any class other than Rogue to dual-wield.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Tgey added it in 4E it wasn't part of the D&D experience and they forced it in.

Do you remember Clerics? And Rogues? Like the classes that had roles so hard-coded that you needed them in the party to accomplish basic healing and trap detection and no one else was allowed to do their thing.

 

[Zardnaar]

What if you want to be a Wizard that doesn't cast spells? Can't do that in the 5e PHB.

What if you want to be a Rogue that never sneak attacks? Can't do that in the 5e PHB.

What if you want to be a Cleric that cannot heal people--not just chooses not to, but truly can't? Can't do that in the 5e PHB. But that's what you would need to do in order to not have the Leader role in 4e.

Or, for one that has actually been requested--and found wanting!--what if you want to be a Ranger that doesn't cast spells? Can't do that in the 5e PHB. Lots of people wanted one. If there weren't a call for such a thing, they wouldn't have tried...what was it, two or three times?

Thise are D&Disms not 4Eisms.

Not everyone wants a fighter to be a strength based defender. That's your only option in 4E.

AD&D had weapon specialization, 3E had fests build your fighter how you want.

Can't really get around that 4E stripped those options away. Fighter is a defender and there's only strength based options in phb at least early on.