Balancing the classes [Archive] - Wizards Community

Balancing the classes [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
quaiven
08-07-04, 04:35 PM I've seen a bunch of threads on these boards that basically go along the lines of "class x is underpowered and needs y bump" or "class a is overpowered and needs b nerfed". Well IMHO most of the classes are pretty welled balanced, with the only possible exceptions being Fighter (under) and Druid (over).

But that's not the point of this thread, the point of this thread is to find out which class is the most BALANCED . What I mean is, in order to be able to tell is class x is over/under powered we must first set the benchmark. The one class by which all other classes can be judged.

So which is it? Which of the core classes is the most balanced in the game?
Ranthanas
08-07-04, 08:30 PM There isn't such a creature as the "most balanced" class in D&D- it really depends on what you are doing (a fighter is no benchmark in an intrigue game for instance)

On the other hand, there is such a creature as the "Best Balanced" class in D&D- and that is the Bard (with the Druid coming in a distant second and the Monk an even more distant third). He gets good magic (but not the best), good skills (but not the best) and good combat (remember to include his Bardic Music and magical buffs), but not the best.

In order to be balanced, a new class must be significantly better than the bard at what it is trying to do, but worse in various other fields.
Merlion
08-07-04, 09:03 PM I dont think what your talking about is really possible.

it might be possible to say which class or classes are the most balanced in the sense of not being either overly powerful, or too weak to contribute.

But that wouldnt mean you could measure all other classes by it, since classes are all so different in nature.

I tend to judge classes by comparing them to several other classes, and by weighing their advantages and disadvantages in a broad way.

However as far as which class(s) has the least issues of being to strong or not strong enough...Rogue springs to mind. Monk to some extent, in an odd way. The Bard is a strange case because it is probably a bit weak when it comes to combat in and of itself, but can contribute a lot to a party.

I'd say the two extremes of easily weighed unbalance would probably be Cleric (to strong) and Sorcerer (to weak)
Mitchell
08-07-04, 11:03 PM Taking levels into account, which class performs most consistently at all points?

Fighters and their kin are better at the low end. Wizards and sorcerors are too fragile. Clerics and druids are strong, and beginning a trend that will hold. The monk is going to struggle a bit, but not badly. Alot will depend on their stats. The bard is a strange case, and while very versatile are not overpowering in any of their fields. They may be on par with the rogue, whose unique talents and skils make them worthwhile teammates, if not overpowering.

At the mid levels, the melee classes start to taper off, their hit point advantage that served them so well early becoming less of a factor. The fighter seems to suffer most as they begin getting into second and third feat chains while the other classes have spells and/or other abilities to help them out. The wizard and sorceror wax powerful as the melee classes wane, their spells being both more numerous and more powerful. The cleric and druid continue to be stars. The rogue and bard just keep on doing what they do, only doing it better than before.

High levels are owned by the casters. Druids, clerics, sorcerors and wizards control power that can shake heaven and earth. The druids don't have the truly high end spells, but they have the wildshape power, making them nearly or even more fearsome than the others. The melee types are often little more than speed bumps, buying the casters time to use their spells. Sometimes they will have to pick it up, depending on the foe, but usually, they just need to slow them down and then pick up the pieces. The rogue and bard are the same as they always were. The casters are able to do things that make rogues a little less important, but the rogue has a consistency that the casters can't match over the long haul. The bards growing spell list keeps them in the running as well, and their team assisting abilities are still unmatched.

So there it is. The rogue and bard are the most consistent, in my view. Fighters start strong but taper off, their strong point being that they do their job equally well at all points of an adventure, depending most on their weapons, but these don't grow in power at the same rate spells do, primary arcane casters start weak but grow powerful, and primary divine casters start strong and stay there.

All of the above is, of course, an opinion. Feel free to comment and question, as always. I can take it.:cool:
quaiven
08-08-04, 06:19 AM OK well there haven't been to many responses, but still the general consensus seems to be that the Bard and Rogue are the generally best balanced classes. So other classes should be balanced according to them right.

The Bard is an odd case, able to cast arcane spells as well as divine spells (though he casts them as arcane spells), a good mix of skills and good skill points per level, an average BAB, able to buff himself and the pary, able to use light armor and a good selection of weapons, and a low HD. So can't we use the bard as the benchmark by which to judge the other classes. For example let's take the rogue, using the bard as the standard, the rogue keeps the same BAB, armor/weapons and HD, but loses the ability to buff himself or the party and replaces it with better skills and skill points, he can't cast spells but he gains class features which allow him to specialize as the sneak/thief type.

The rogue seems to be well balanced when compared to the standard of the bard. So for the sake of argument, let's say that the Bard is in fact the standard class for DnD, are the other classes balanced against this?

I'm not saying that they are, but plenty of people seem to be of the opinion that certain classes are broken and are trying to repair them, but I don't think you can fix something without having a standard to set it against.
Thermanshs
08-08-04, 06:32 AM I agree with Ranthanas despites I hate such threads....:mad:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
quaiven 08-07-04, 04:35 PM	I've seen a bunch of threads on these boards that basically go along the lines of "class x is underpowered and needs y bump" or "class a is overpowered and needs b nerfed". Well IMHO most of the classes are pretty welled balanced, with the only possible exceptions being Fighter (under) and Druid (over). But that's not the point of this thread, the point of this thread is to find out which class is the most BALANCED . What I mean is, in order to be able to tell is class x is over/under powered we must first set the benchmark. The one class by which all other classes can be judged. So which is it? Which of the core classes is the most balanced in the game?
Ranthanas 08-07-04, 08:30 PM	There isn't such a creature as the "most balanced" class in D&D- it really depends on what you are doing (a fighter is no benchmark in an intrigue game for instance) On the other hand, there is such a creature as the "Best Balanced" class in D&D- and that is the Bard (with the Druid coming in a distant second and the Monk an even more distant third). He gets good magic (but not the best), good skills (but not the best) and good combat (remember to include his Bardic Music and magical buffs), but not the best. In order to be balanced, a new class must be significantly better than the bard at what it is trying to do, but worse in various other fields.
Merlion 08-07-04, 09:03 PM	I dont think what your talking about is really possible. it might be possible to say which class or classes are the most balanced in the sense of not being either overly powerful, or too weak to contribute. But that wouldnt mean you could measure all other classes by it, since classes are all so different in nature. I tend to judge classes by comparing them to several other classes, and by weighing their advantages and disadvantages in a broad way. However as far as which class(s) has the least issues of being to strong or not strong enough...Rogue springs to mind. Monk to some extent, in an odd way. The Bard is a strange case because it is probably a bit weak when it comes to combat in and of itself, but can contribute a lot to a party. I'd say the two extremes of easily weighed unbalance would probably be Cleric (to strong) and Sorcerer (to weak)
Mitchell 08-07-04, 11:03 PM	Taking levels into account, which class performs most consistently at all points? Fighters and their kin are better at the low end. Wizards and sorcerors are too fragile. Clerics and druids are strong, and beginning a trend that will hold. The monk is going to struggle a bit, but not badly. Alot will depend on their stats. The bard is a strange case, and while very versatile are not overpowering in any of their fields. They may be on par with the rogue, whose unique talents and skils make them worthwhile teammates, if not overpowering. At the mid levels, the melee classes start to taper off, their hit point advantage that served them so well early becoming less of a factor. The fighter seems to suffer most as they begin getting into second and third feat chains while the other classes have spells and/or other abilities to help them out. The wizard and sorceror wax powerful as the melee classes wane, their spells being both more numerous and more powerful. The cleric and druid continue to be stars. The rogue and bard just keep on doing what they do, only doing it better than before. High levels are owned by the casters. Druids, clerics, sorcerors and wizards control power that can shake heaven and earth. The druids don't have the truly high end spells, but they have the wildshape power, making them nearly or even more fearsome than the others. The melee types are often little more than speed bumps, buying the casters time to use their spells. Sometimes they will have to pick it up, depending on the foe, but usually, they just need to slow them down and then pick up the pieces. The rogue and bard are the same as they always were. The casters are able to do things that make rogues a little less important, but the rogue has a consistency that the casters can't match over the long haul. The bards growing spell list keeps them in the running as well, and their team assisting abilities are still unmatched. So there it is. The rogue and bard are the most consistent, in my view. Fighters start strong but taper off, their strong point being that they do their job equally well at all points of an adventure, depending most on their weapons, but these don't grow in power at the same rate spells do, primary arcane casters start weak but grow powerful, and primary divine casters start strong and stay there. All of the above is, of course, an opinion. Feel free to comment and question, as always. I can take it.:cool:
quaiven 08-08-04, 06:19 AM	OK well there haven't been to many responses, but still the general consensus seems to be that the Bard and Rogue are the generally best balanced classes. So other classes should be balanced according to them right. The Bard is an odd case, able to cast arcane spells as well as divine spells (though he casts them as arcane spells), a good mix of skills and good skill points per level, an average BAB, able to buff himself and the pary, able to use light armor and a good selection of weapons, and a low HD. So can't we use the bard as the benchmark by which to judge the other classes. For example let's take the rogue, using the bard as the standard, the rogue keeps the same BAB, armor/weapons and HD, but loses the ability to buff himself or the party and replaces it with better skills and skill points, he can't cast spells but he gains class features which allow him to specialize as the sneak/thief type. The rogue seems to be well balanced when compared to the standard of the bard. So for the sake of argument, let's say that the Bard is in fact the standard class for DnD, are the other classes balanced against this? I'm not saying that they are, but plenty of people seem to be of the opinion that certain classes are broken and are trying to repair them, but I don't think you can fix something without having a standard to set it against.
Thermanshs 08-08-04, 06:32 AM	I agree with Ranthanas despites I hate such threads....:mad: