Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Votan 01-17-07, 12:23 AM	It is my understanding that the playtesting was based on iconic characters. These iconic characters are specific class and race combinations. I am thinking that maybe part of the balance issues are that the combination is balanced but the individual elements are not. The iconics are: Kursk, Half-Orc Barbarian Gimble, Gnome Bard Jozan, Human Cleric Vadania, Half-Elf Druid Tordek, Dwarf Fighter Ember, Human Monk Alhandra, Human Paladin Soveliss, Elf Ranger Lidda, Halfling Rogue Hennet, Human Sorcerer Mialee, Elf Wizard Some interesting patterns emerge. The strongest race (Dwarf) is paired with a class often thought to be the weakest (Fighter). On the other hand, the weakest race (Half-Elf) is paired with what is often considered to be the strongest class (Druid). Humans are the race with the broadest range of classes: Cleric, Monk, Paladin and Sorcerer. Notice that the cleric is a cleric of Pelor as that is almost the worst choice from a power-gaming perspective. Half-Orc is often thought to be a weak race but the 4 skill points per level of the Barbarian probably compensate for the -2 INT of the Half Orc when compared to the Fighter. What do people think? Could this explain some of the paradoxes in D&D 3.5 in terms of class and race balance?
OneWinged4ngel 01-17-07, 12:29 AM	What do people think? Could this explain some of the paradoxes in D&D 3.5 in terms of class and race balance? Race is insignificant enough a factor in power levels that it wouldn't make much difference. Really. The effects are rather minor, and become less significant as levels increase. The differences between a Druid and a Fighter are much more than the differences between a half-elf and a dwarf. In and of themselves, the racial pairings don't explain it in the least. Inadequete playtesting that didn't go into moderately high levels would do more to explain it, however, as well as the suboptimal use of versatile spells with unforeseen benefits and complications by a dev team lacking foresight, and an incredibly strong policy not to ever significantly change any mechanics without creating a new edition, as exemplified by such things as the polymorph erratas and commentaries.
Votan 01-17-07, 12:32 AM	Race is insignificant enough that it wouldn't make much difference. Really. The effects are minor. The differences between a Druid and a Fighter are much more than the differences between a half-elf and a dwarf. In and of themselves, the racial pairings don't explain it. It just seems to be another excuse to try and support WotC for doing far less than thorough playtesting, not even including moderately high levels. :( True. I suspect that the low level of playtesting could accelerate this effect (as I recall, most playtesting was levels 1 to 10). But a Dwarf Fighter can be a contributer across levels 1 to 10 (okay, he is getting weak at levels 8 to 10 compared to full casters but he is pretty strong at levels 1 to 3). But I wondered if this might help explain some of the paradoxes that show up repeatedly in terms of class and race balance.
OneWinged4ngel 01-17-07, 12:34 AM	But I wondered if this might help explain some of the paradoxes that show up repeatedly in terms of class and race balance. Perhaps some. Very few. I would blame the "shortsighted dev teams and inadequate playtesting" more.
mkill 01-17-07, 04:56 AM	Inadequete playtesting that didn't go into moderately high levels would do more to explain it, however, as well as the suboptimal use of versatile spells with unforeseen benefits and complications by a dev team lacking foresight, and an incredibly strong policy not to ever significantly change any mechanics without creating a new edition, as exemplified by such things as the polymorph erratas and commentaries. Agreed. I'd even add a few items to the list * "rushed and half-baked current edition" to the list (it even says so in the numbering) * Leftovers from 30 years ago that the traditionalists can't get rid of (you'll notice everytime an elf passes a secret door) * the simple fact that a splatbooks with more and more new crunch no matter how badly written and awful the artwork sells better than a well-written setting module :weep:
Zumarai 01-17-07, 10:05 AM	* the simple fact that a splatbooks with more and more new crunch no matter how badly written and awful the artwork sells better than a well-written setting module :weep: But some of us, such as myself, don't particularly need modules, as we design our own campaigns/adventures.
unundindur 01-17-07, 10:19 AM	But some of us, such as myself, don't particularly need modules, as we design our own campaigns/adventures. word. That said, I love setting-books for inspiration and for reading pleasure :)