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

[strawbellebelle]

So many people are so eager to cite surveys and threads, but how many people realize that the creators have access to a massive wealth of player data far beyond what mere surveys can offer?

That, of course, is D&D Beyond character sheets.

It tells them not only what classes and subclasses are the most popular, but also tells them how far classes/subclasses are played. If there are certain subclasses that in general reach higher levels, indicating players having played those subclasses for longer.

So if you have a thread full of people whining about how Fighters don't get all kinds of special bells and whistles they can use every turn, and a site full of people who regularly and deeply play the Fighter, then which of these two is a more useful source of information?

And which do you feel a creator should be more willing to place their product direction in: people who regularly play and enjoy the game, or people who constantly complain about it and act like they're being persecuted and victimized when classes aren't as OP as they want them to be?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well that puts wizard right the hell out.

And the Cleric.

Only outside of D&D itself; if you're familiar with the tropes of Dungeons & Dragons, then the Wizard is quite recognizable.

But that makes the whole 'follow the tropes argument' nothing but a reactionary demand for maintaining the traditional status quo ante of the Martial/Caster gap....

 

[Amrûnril]

So many people are so eager to cite surveys and threads, but how many people realize that the creators have access to a massive wealth of player data far beyond what mere surveys can offer?

That, of course, is D&D Beyond character sheets.

It tells them not only what classes and subclasses are the most popular, but also tells them how far classes/subclasses are played. If there are certain subclasses that in general reach higher levels, indicating players having played those subclasses for longer.

So if you have a thread full of people whining about how Fighters don't get all kinds of special bells and whistles they can use every turn, and a site full of people who regularly and deeply play the Fighter, then which of these two is a more useful source of information?

And which do you feel a creator should be more willing to place their product direction in: people who regularly play and enjoy the game, or people who constantly complain about it and act like they're being persecuted and victimized when classes aren't as OP as they want them to be?

Stating the opinion that fighters are underpowered, in a thread specifically about class balance, isn't whining. And while I'm sure it's happened somewhere in one of these threads, the people expressing that opinion are not, generally speaking, describing themselves as persecuted or victimized.

As for D&D Beyond data, it provides a large sample size but doesn't show the reasoning behind any of the decisions people are making. Forums provide a much smaller sample size but extensive discussions of reasoning. Both can be useful so long as one understands their strengths and limitations.

 

[SteveC]

So if you have a thread full of people whining about how Fighters don't get all kinds of special bells and whistles they can use every turn, and a site full of people who regularly and deeply play the Fighter, then which of these two is a more useful source of information?

I think the real point is why they don't play them. I played almost exclusively martial character in 4E. I play a fighter and rogue in PF2. I don't play martial characters in 5E. I entirely do spellcasters. Clearly I don't have something against martials, I'm just concerned about the implementation.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Because popularity and quality are not directly related. The most popular thing is not always the best.

80s D&D was, until the advent of 5e, the most popular version of D&D ever, in terms of units moved. Insomuch as we have any information at all on that sort of thing. (Briefly) "more popular than monopoly" was a TSR claim, back in the day, for instance. In the midst of some broader point, Mearls or someone at WotC let drop that the '83 Basic set was the single best-selling individual D&D product of all time (at the time, 5e, with no two-prong approach and a larger demographic of potential customers, has surely dunked that record).

But it was 30 levels of treadmill, where the PCs are incentivized to play the same game the same way over their entire career, just with bigger numbers and supposedly higher stakes.

It was the same in 3e and 5e to be fair.

The treadmill idea is another one of those dogwhistles for balance.

Yes, if you have class balance, encounter design becomes easier as party capability is more of a known quantity.

The easier encounter design becomes, the more readily a DM can design a challenge (combat in most eds, or skill challenge or out of combat task or whatever) that will be exactly as challenging to a high level character as a different, lower level challenge, was to the same character in the past.

Thing is, it also becomes easier to design a more or less challenging encounter than that. The treadmill assertion is that the DM must churn out exactly the same degree of challenge, every level, because balance makes it possible. But balance makes it possible to consistently design challenges close to the DMs intent more easily and consistently, regardless of whether that intent is high, low, reasonable, or, most likely, varies with the progress of the campaign.

TWF is kinda silly in real life as a fighting style anyway.

It's been an historical fighting style in widely separated periods and cultures. Typically a dueling or street-fighting style rather than a battlefield one, from the very little I can recall on the subject.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So if you have a thread full of people whining about how Fighters don't get all kinds of special bells and whistles they can use every turn, and a site full of people who regularly and deeply play the Fighter, then which of these two is a more useful source of information?

And which do you feel a creator should be more willing to place their product direction in: people who regularly play and enjoy the game, or people who constantly complain about it and act like they're being persecuted and victimized when classes aren't as OP as they want them to be?

The one with the person who constantly slanders anyone that disagrees with them as whining?

 

[TwoSix]

But that makes the whole 'follow the tropes argument' nothing but a reactionary demand for maintaining the traditional status quo ante of the Martial/Caster gap....

I'm saying that the tropes of modern D&D demand that the Wizard be THE top-tier class at the highest levels (with other casters nearly as good, although less versatile), the single best class at solving non-combat obstacles, but have more fragility and a weaker starting point to compensate.

However, there is no such demand that a Fighter can't be a near unkillable wrecking ball that even a Wizard would only face with extensive preparation. Maintaining D&D tropes demands that a gap remains, but it doesn't mean it can't be shrunken even further and only really relevant at the highest levels.

 

[TwoSix]

But it was 30 levels of treadmill, where the PCs are incentivized to play the same game the same way over their entire career, just with bigger numbers and supposedly higher stakes.

It was the same in 3e and 5e to be fair.

To be fair, I don't think any version of D&D, either TSR or WotC, has really done the attempt to shift to "domain level" play at higher levels right. The only game in the D&D-like family I can think of that successfully navigates it is ACKS.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm saying that the tropes of modern D&D demand that the Wizard be THE top-tier class at the highest levels (with other casters nearly as good, although less versatile), the single best class at solving non-combat obstacles, but have more fragility and a weaker starting point to compensate.

That's just saying that, because the wizard has been imbalanced for a long time, it should remain so.

However, there is no such demand that a Fighter can't be a near unkillable wrecking ball that even a Wizard would only face with extensive preparation. Maintaining D&D tropes demands that a gap remains, but it doesn't mean it can't be shrunken even further and only really relevant at the highest levels.

Setting a goal of not changing things, and then evaluating how things should change is going to be unproductive.

Now, if the idea was, the wildly OP caster is not going away, it just has too much inertia, how could we, instead, bring non-casters up to the same level? That might help.

TBF, 'stay the course' is almost certainly what WotC is going to do, here, since the current course (backwards and intentionally imbalanced garbage to avoid triggering edition-war II nerdrage) has been successful for nearly 10 years. As a product designed to generate steady revenue growth, D&D is about all that can be desired... it can't last forever, but as long as it rolls on, more of the same is a prudent/easy business decision, and by the time it's stabilized, it could slide into a sustaining model, basically forever, like Hasbro's other 'most popular of it's kind' perennial, Monopoly. I'm sure they'll be delighted with that.

To be fair, I don't think any version of D&D, either TSR or WotC, has really done the attempt to shift to "domain level" play at higher levels right. The only game in the D&D-like family I can think of that successfully navigates it is ACKS.

I think the Immortals set, Council of Wyrms, and Birthright, perhaps, may have taken stabs at such mechanics? From what I've heard, since I've never so much as glanced between the covers of any of them.

It doesn't mean much, since 4e skill challenges were pretty stark and could be adapted to prettymuch anything, but I have run larger scope challenges dealing with politics or warfare (or the disposition of a plane of existence) that way.

 

[TwoSix]

That's just saying that, because the wizard has been imbalanced for a long time, it should remain so.

Correct.

Setting a goal of not changing things, and then evaluating how things should change is going to be unproductive.

The goal isn't to not change things. The goal is to identify those things that should not be changed, and then change the things that can be changed to make the game stronger.

I am explicitly saying that I've come to the conclusion that the Wizard trope is a sacred cow of mainline D&D design. I love many, many games that turn that cow into delicious holy hamburgers, but that isn't going to happen in mainline D&D.