Class balance & how they relate to roles [Archive] - Wizards Community

Class balance & how they relate to roles [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
TekknoMancer
11-05-06, 09:49 PM Ok, this is sort of an off-shoot of my "Too many base classes?" thread but also stems from the large number of threads I've seen about how classes are not balanced. I think an important question that must be asked before determining a class to be balanced or not is: what is the role of the class?

I consider a class to be unbalance it does something outside it's role more effectively than a class that was designed for that role. If a class is superceded in its role by another class, then it's unbalanced (too weak).

Many people (myself too) consider casters to be too powerful in general. What is the role of a wizard? Don't say "to cast arcane spells." That's the means by which they fulfill their role, but what are these spells intended to accomplish? What is the purpose of a rogue's 8-skills/level and large skill list? How does the role of a barbarian compare to that of a fighter? Balance is more than just about 1v1 combat.

Here are some categories that I would consider as important roles:

melee combat
ranged combat
area-effect assault - combat against multiple enemies
crowd control
ability to escape from a losing battle
social skills and non-combat interactions
buffs and healing
intelligence gathering (divinations, skills, spying, etc.)
general problem solving (how to cross that pit of lava, etc.)
item crafting or making money
belthazzar1113
11-05-06, 10:38 PM i think an even more importaint question is -- "why does class balance matter so much to you?"

this isn't about who has the best character, or who can churn out the biggest numbers, this isn't about who is the best on paper or what kind of uber combos you can manage to abuse into the game. classes will never be balanced perfectly because there is no such thing. if there is a difference between to classes then they are going to be unbalanced. there are no perfect equivalents in dnd, even trading +2 to one save and taking a -2 to another causes debate because everyone has a save they think is better than the others.
picking a single catigory or even a selection of catigories isn't going to help you establish any sort of real class balance. people like what they like. your character should be the deciding factor on what you play, not what class gives you the best numbers. I am certain its possible to have 9th level wizard, and cleric spells with 16bab and a host of skills and abilities, but that character would be a mash of half a dozen level dips in different PrCs and really make no sense at all.

people need to just let go on class balance. yes its a good idea to keep the power level roughly even in a game, but you should build your world with the classes that fit, not the classes that numerically balance perfectly, because you will never find anything like that.

just look at the list you created... all numerical combat catigories except two, social skills (meaning using numbers to get around roleplaying) and general problem solving, meaning using abilities to avoid thinking. I am sorry but thats a poor list that just shows uncomprimising bias towards the numbers of a character rather than the character itself.

if your character idea is a fighter then be a fighter, if your a paladin then be a paladin, if your a swordsage then be a swordsage, they don't all have to be perfectly balanced against each other to be perfectly fine fighting side by side.

so why not get rid of the balance idea and just go with what you want to play?
Tempest Stormwind
11-05-06, 11:01 PM Please read this thread before continuing. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=603724)

And for the record, while it isn't about being the strongest, it is about being *good* at what you do. This is a fantasy story. When I envision a fantasy adventuring party, I do not think of the buffoons from 8-Bit Theater (as funny as it is, they are incompetent). Instead, I envision a team far closer to, say, the cast of Firefly (if you haven't seen this, do so. Now. It's *that* good.). No one is *bad* at what they do. There may be discrepancies in some areas (the battles in the movie come to mind), but together, they compensate for each other's weaknesses, compliment each other's strengths, and as a team overcome the odds. No one on the ship is a burden to the party unless they're unconcious or captured. Each has unique talents. No one's useless, and no one's the indisputable "best" at everything. And when you put them together, you get something that's able to take on the world. Plus excellent roleplaying, but that's independent of mechanical balance.
TekknoMancer
11-06-06, 10:54 AM In all fairness, I think you missed the entire point of my thread Belthazzar. I NEVER even implied perfect balance among classes, and I'm not saying balance was of paramount importance. You're the one that has a giant block of "cheese" as your avatar.

Perfect balance is meaningless given that each class has a different role...apples and oranges. This thread is a response to all those "xx class sucks" "xx class is too powerful" threads. I'm looking for constructive feedback on what everyone's idea of balance is, because I feel that there's a lot of confusion about this topic. Class balance is more than 1v1 combat.

On that note, I'm not alone in thinking that some level of balance is necessary. Have you visited the character optimization boards lately? Just look around on this board, and you'll see a large number of threads address this very issue.
Lotus Crane
11-06-06, 12:27 PM Indeed; while perfect balance may in fact be impossible to achieve, in the current state of things, I'm not sure we even have a rough approximate balance. There will always be a few individuals who will nitpick anything and everything to death, and we'll never be able to satisfy them. However, when a large number of people, or even an actual majority of people, sense that something isn't quite right, such as spellcasters being more powerful than non-spellcasters in general, the role of the fighter being usurped by the knight and warblade, or the very existence of CoDzilla, it should be a sign that we need to pause and re-evaluate things.
Tony Vargas
11-06-06, 08:39 PM I think an important question that must be asked before determining a class to be balanced or not is: what is the role of the class? That is a good question. You could define roles broadly, though (warrior, archanist, divine, skillz) or narrowly (ranged damage, melee damage, melee damage, melee tanking, trapfinding, face, etc...). I think broad roles probably make a bit more sense, unless you're thinking in terms of larger parties (6 or more PCs), in which case narrow roles become quite viable.

I consider a class to be unbalance it does something outside it's role more effectively than a class that was designed for that role. If a class is superceded in its role by another class, then it's unbalanced (too weak).So classes are always unbalanced in pairs?

What is the role of a wizard? Don't say "to cast arcane spells." That is it, though. Arcane spells do quite a range of things, some of them /very/ specific. Some challenges can only be addressed with the expected level of dificulty for thier CR, if you have access to the right spell, and, that spell may only be in the sorc/wiz list. If you don't have a sorc/wiz, or a UMD scrollmeister with that spell, you'll have more trouble than you should with the challenge. In that sense "making the arcane list available to the party" /is/ a big part of the arcanist role.

What is the purpose of a rogue's 8-skills/level and large skill list?The stereotypical rogue 'role' is trapfinding (which encompasses two skills) and scouting (at least 4). To retain some effectiveness in combat, Tumbling and Escape artist are also a big help, and Bluff can be helpful as well. That's 9 skill, and still pretty bare-bones.

How does the role of a barbarian compare to that of a fighter?In the broad sense, they're both warriors. In a basic sense, thier role is to take pressure off rest of the party by engaging in melee so others can avoid it ('tanking'), and putting damage on the enemy, so others don't have to expend as much limitted resources (like spells) on offense.

Here are some categories that I would consider as important roles:
I'd say those are generally too narrow - and some of them are at least a bit redundant.
theotherdraxen
11-06-06, 09:02 PM so why not get rid of the balance idea and just go with what you want to play?
They tell us not to play warriors for a reason. Classes are supposed to be balanced. If you really believe this, then in your next game, play a warrior, spend all your feats on toughness and put all your ranks into swim. Then watch as everyone has to pull you along at high levels. It'll probably be fun for a while, but mainly because your character is a running gag, which is not the kind of fun that D&D is supposed to bring. After 20-40 session, you'll get bored and want to play something that's stronger.
Please read this thread before continuing. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=603724)
I really disagree with this thread's argument. Sure, its sound from an overhead perspective, but this is not chess. If we got to play all the classes, then this analogy would be fine. But we are locked into one character from the beginning of the game. Therefore, the Knight, the Rook, and the Queen need to be balanced from levels 1-20, or at some point, someone is going to end up a deadweight.

Imagine chess, only you are just one piece, and everyone else has to work to make up for your weaknesses, because you are just a pawn or knight.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TekknoMancer 11-05-06, 09:49 PM	Ok, this is sort of an off-shoot of my "Too many base classes?" thread but also stems from the large number of threads I've seen about how classes are not balanced. I think an important question that must be asked before determining a class to be balanced or not is: what is the role of the class? I consider a class to be unbalance it does something outside it's role more effectively than a class that was designed for that role. If a class is superceded in its role by another class, then it's unbalanced (too weak). Many people (myself too) consider casters to be too powerful in general. What is the role of a wizard? Don't say "to cast arcane spells." That's the means by which they fulfill their role, but what are these spells intended to accomplish? What is the purpose of a rogue's 8-skills/level and large skill list? How does the role of a barbarian compare to that of a fighter? Balance is more than just about 1v1 combat. Here are some categories that I would consider as important roles: melee combat ranged combat area-effect assault - combat against multiple enemies crowd control ability to escape from a losing battle social skills and non-combat interactions buffs and healing intelligence gathering (divinations, skills, spying, etc.) general problem solving (how to cross that pit of lava, etc.) item crafting or making money
belthazzar1113 11-05-06, 10:38 PM	i think an even more importaint question is -- "why does class balance matter so much to you?" this isn't about who has the best character, or who can churn out the biggest numbers, this isn't about who is the best on paper or what kind of uber combos you can manage to abuse into the game. classes will never be balanced perfectly because there is no such thing. if there is a difference between to classes then they are going to be unbalanced. there are no perfect equivalents in dnd, even trading +2 to one save and taking a -2 to another causes debate because everyone has a save they think is better than the others. picking a single catigory or even a selection of catigories isn't going to help you establish any sort of real class balance. people like what they like. your character should be the deciding factor on what you play, not what class gives you the best numbers. I am certain its possible to have 9th level wizard, and cleric spells with 16bab and a host of skills and abilities, but that character would be a mash of half a dozen level dips in different PrCs and really make no sense at all. people need to just let go on class balance. yes its a good idea to keep the power level roughly even in a game, but you should build your world with the classes that fit, not the classes that numerically balance perfectly, because you will never find anything like that. just look at the list you created... all numerical combat catigories except two, social skills (meaning using numbers to get around roleplaying) and general problem solving, meaning using abilities to avoid thinking. I am sorry but thats a poor list that just shows uncomprimising bias towards the numbers of a character rather than the character itself. if your character idea is a fighter then be a fighter, if your a paladin then be a paladin, if your a swordsage then be a swordsage, they don't all have to be perfectly balanced against each other to be perfectly fine fighting side by side. so why not get rid of the balance idea and just go with what you want to play?
Tempest Stormwind 11-05-06, 11:01 PM	Please read this thread before continuing. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=603724) And for the record, while it isn't about being the strongest, it is about being good at what you do. This is a fantasy story. When I envision a fantasy adventuring party, I do not think of the buffoons from 8-Bit Theater (as funny as it is, they are incompetent). Instead, I envision a team far closer to, say, the cast of Firefly (if you haven't seen this, do so. Now. It's that good.). No one is bad at what they do. There may be discrepancies in some areas (the battles in the movie come to mind), but together, they compensate for each other's weaknesses, compliment each other's strengths, and as a team overcome the odds. No one on the ship is a burden to the party unless they're unconcious or captured. Each has unique talents. No one's useless, and no one's the indisputable "best" at everything. And when you put them together, you get something that's able to take on the world. Plus excellent roleplaying, but that's independent of mechanical balance.
TekknoMancer 11-06-06, 10:54 AM	In all fairness, I think you missed the entire point of my thread Belthazzar. I NEVER even implied perfect balance among classes, and I'm not saying balance was of paramount importance. You're the one that has a giant block of "cheese" as your avatar. Perfect balance is meaningless given that each class has a different role...apples and oranges. This thread is a response to all those "xx class sucks" "xx class is too powerful" threads. I'm looking for constructive feedback on what everyone's idea of balance is, because I feel that there's a lot of confusion about this topic. Class balance is more than 1v1 combat. On that note, I'm not alone in thinking that some level of balance is necessary. Have you visited the character optimization boards lately? Just look around on this board, and you'll see a large number of threads address this very issue.
Lotus Crane 11-06-06, 12:27 PM	Indeed; while perfect balance may in fact be impossible to achieve, in the current state of things, I'm not sure we even have a rough approximate balance. There will always be a few individuals who will nitpick anything and everything to death, and we'll never be able to satisfy them. However, when a large number of people, or even an actual majority of people, sense that something isn't quite right, such as spellcasters being more powerful than non-spellcasters in general, the role of the fighter being usurped by the knight and warblade, or the very existence of CoDzilla, it should be a sign that we need to pause and re-evaluate things.
Tony Vargas 11-06-06, 08:39 PM	I think an important question that must be asked before determining a class to be balanced or not is: what is the role of the class? That is a good question. You could define roles broadly, though (warrior, archanist, divine, skillz) or narrowly (ranged damage, melee damage, melee damage, melee tanking, trapfinding, face, etc...). I think broad roles probably make a bit more sense, unless you're thinking in terms of larger parties (6 or more PCs), in which case narrow roles become quite viable. I consider a class to be unbalance it does something outside it's role more effectively than a class that was designed for that role. If a class is superceded in its role by another class, then it's unbalanced (too weak).So classes are always unbalanced in pairs? What is the role of a wizard? Don't say "to cast arcane spells." That is it, though. Arcane spells do quite a range of things, some of them /very/ specific. Some challenges can only be addressed with the expected level of dificulty for thier CR, if you have access to the right spell, and, that spell may only be in the sorc/wiz list. If you don't have a sorc/wiz, or a UMD scrollmeister with that spell, you'll have more trouble than you should with the challenge. In that sense "making the arcane list available to the party" /is/ a big part of the arcanist role. What is the purpose of a rogue's 8-skills/level and large skill list?The stereotypical rogue 'role' is trapfinding (which encompasses two skills) and scouting (at least 4). To retain some effectiveness in combat, Tumbling and Escape artist are also a big help, and Bluff can be helpful as well. That's 9 skill, and still pretty bare-bones. How does the role of a barbarian compare to that of a fighter?In the broad sense, they're both warriors. In a basic sense, thier role is to take pressure off rest of the party by engaging in melee so others can avoid it ('tanking'), and putting damage on the enemy, so others don't have to expend as much limitted resources (like spells) on offense. Here are some categories that I would consider as important roles: I'd say those are generally too narrow - and some of them are at least a bit redundant.
theotherdraxen 11-06-06, 09:02 PM	so why not get rid of the balance idea and just go with what you want to play? They tell us not to play warriors for a reason. Classes are supposed to be balanced. If you really believe this, then in your next game, play a warrior, spend all your feats on toughness and put all your ranks into swim. Then watch as everyone has to pull you along at high levels. It'll probably be fun for a while, but mainly because your character is a running gag, which is not the kind of fun that D&D is supposed to bring. After 20-40 session, you'll get bored and want to play something that's stronger. Please read this thread before continuing. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=603724) I really disagree with this thread's argument. Sure, its sound from an overhead perspective, but this is not chess. If we got to play all the classes, then this analogy would be fine. But we are locked into one character from the beginning of the game. Therefore, the Knight, the Rook, and the Queen need to be balanced from levels 1-20, or at some point, someone is going to end up a deadweight. Imagine chess, only you are just one piece, and everyone else has to work to make up for your weaknesses, because you are just a pawn or knight.