Is GAME BALANCE really important? in 5e Dungeons & Dragons - Web DM

[@WebDM]

Thanks for watching! Want more Web DM in your life? Get our podcast here: www.patreon.com/webdm

[@LibraGamesUnlimited]

I just discovered you channel and I swear everytime I see the name, for a second, I think it says Web MD. I think I'm disletctic.

[@franzluggin398]

You people really made me confident enough to start DMing my first game! So far, we've tackled about half of the Mines of Phandalin adventure and it's been reasonably smooth, all things considered. And people seem to be having fun, which is what matters, in the end. Thanks for all your videos, to the whole team!

[@JPruinc]

Glad we could help and glad you're enjoying the game!

[@insektl0gic]

Hope you're keeping at it. These vids are getting me itching to come out of DND retirement too. One day.

[@braxtonrasmussen2110]

I'm about to start that module later today

[@PorterPickUp]

This show is great and these guys deserve more subs. Still waiting for some more of those Class summaries. They are the best.

[@Elsunkisto]

I totally agree! I have been waiting to see what they do with sorcerer/warlock/wizards.

[@Kydoodle12]

This show is amazing

[@mithrildice6936]

Josh B Good they have done Wizard

[@Shelf_Help_ca]

They are great! Try and share it with friends and new dm's!

[@pragmat1k]

I concur, I am a very happy subscriber. :D

[@chaddixon9764]

Well your first mistake as a new DM is going to Reddit.

[@recursivecoin359]

Chad-Solomon Dixon, all the more reason for a video like this... to tell them not to worry about that Reddit crap

[@Matt-md5yt]

Chad-Solomon Dixon Reddit is funny to read sometimes, but other times it's Crenge worthy.

[@TheRicksterr]

I got yelled at by reddit for having an archers bow break on a nat 1. Fuck those guys.

[@RocksYourFace44]

Jay Tuffer why would an archer ever use strings so weak they break one in twenty times? Punishing past automatic fail for nat 1s is something that to me few people enjoy, especially players.

[@chaddixon9764]

Roxurface My answer to that question is "his players." If they are still playing in his game then they don't mind that kind of punishment. I agree, having to restring a bow after a nat 1 is harsh.

[@g3xe49]

I think of LOTR. Gandalf adventuring with hobbits? Def not same power level

[@anadice9489]

And yet they get the same amount of spotlight. That's one of the things I love about LOTR.

[@ltericdavis2237]

To be fair, Gandalf didn't use his full power most of the time. A lot of players don't have that kind of restraint

[@francescospuntarelli7369]

Factoid Gandalf and Saruman duel in Two towers movie (I don't remember really) was so boring ... they seemed to me more psions with only 1 telekinetic power instead of mages.... I really prefer modern writers like Ericksson or Gemmel ... no comparison. I recall Malazan's book of the fallen is based on Gurps thats a system with no super h.p.

[@moiseman]

I don't know... Gandalf is roughly equivalent to a level 1 D&D wizard to be honest. A little bit a of light and fire and that's it.

[@Peech55]

Gandalf has to deliberately not use his full power... it's part of his existence. He has a lot more up his sleeve than a bit of light and fire. :P

[@imdorgat]

The only thing I ever try to balance is ability scores between players in your party. I just don't want people to be all-around better or worse. It's much more fun if players have specialties and niches when compared to their peers.

[@mikegould6590]

I've certainly found the 5E "CR" system a bit wonky. There are character-ending low CR monsters (Intellect Devourer, Sea Hag, Ghoul) and monsters with a CR above their weight (Shield Guardian, Galeb Duhr, Ettin, Hill Giant...) can easily be taken down by lower characters. I think it really comes down to two questions: Does one (party or monster) have the potential to end the other fast? Does the monster have a "wild card" ability (petrification, ability reduces to 0hp, high chance of paralysis or stun, etc.) If so, give either side the chance to reconsider engaging. Give the players the agency to decide their fate. Surprise happens- it's part of the game, but when thats not on the table, let your level 2-3 party choose whether or not a nest of Cockatrices is worth it. I had a group of level 3s attack just ONE cockatrice aboard a sinking vessel (their choice to board, their choice to attack), and not one rolled a save above a 3. It happens. Balance is tricky, but try to remember that the world at large isn't "balanced for the players", but the players also have the choice when to engage a lot of the time. Allow for creative solutions, and your players might surprise you. Or that Sea Hag will frighten your 5th level Sorcerer to death in two actions, or your Rogue might willingly suck face with a disguised Succubus. It happens. Then it's not about balance. It's about a memorable story.

[@JPruinc]

We had a party of 4-5 level characters stumble upon ONE cockatrice. Everyone rolled shitty and one by one we turned to stone. There was one player left and he decided to fall on his own sword. You can't make this shit up.

[@Robeadactyl]

JPruInc Not sure if you knew this at the time, but if you're playing 5e then a cockatrice's petrification only lasts for about a day. Now whether your DM decided to buff the monster or just didn't agree with the curse as written, that's up to them, but I just thought I'd bring up that little tidbit. Personally I dislike the cockatrice in 5e, they seem too weak on their own; I much prefer the Dragon's Dogma/Witcher way of representing them, and feel they should be much closer to wyvern stats than a dumb chicken. What do you guys think? Also, have you guys considered streaming your sessions? The way you two talk about your past games, I feel I'd enjoy watching very much.

[@JPruinc]

3rd edition. That shit was permanent until dispelled.

[@mikegould6590]

Robeadactyl Yeah, the Cockatrices petrification is only temporary, but the ship that was sinking was a little more permanent. So they would be statues at the bottom of the sea when they returned to normal. So it wasn't "Petrification as an end". It was more like "Petrification as a delivery system to that end." I reworked the story so that a tribe of Sahaugin worked for the villain and collected these statues for the bad guy. They would then transport them to a "James Bondian Villain" base where these statues would be crated up and placed on a dock. When the players returned to normal, they would have a chance to escape whereas commoners in this situation would be sold into slavery. The escape turned into a tense scene of planning and execution. That lead to an attempted sea journey in what amounts to a dory, which lead to them being lost, which lead to a fully random encounter (hand on heart) with a friendly Bronze Dragon who carried them to safety. So in the end, a TPK lead to a great scene, an amazing random encounter, and a possible ally for later. At the table in which I play, we had 3 of 4 level 5 characters fail their saves on a Medusa. It was a full on Save Or Suck situation, but given I've been playing since 1980, that was the norm for me. Making characters is something I do to relax, and the DM knows it. He knows I can pull out 2-4 characters out of my backpack in an instant, or write one up in under 10 minutes, back story and all. That's where Blunderpuck the Goblin Bard comes from... the death-by-petrification suffered by Luxxor the Protector Aasimar Light Cleric....who came from the retirement (long story) of Veritas the Teifling Paladin....who came from the death-and-swallowed-by-purple-worm of Gutwrench the Half-Ogre Barbarian.... The Underdark is a tough place to earn a living.

[@bibbobella]

Is it really a TPK when they don't die? Whatever great way to rewrite the story so you don't just kill them and make them role new characters. Nothing beats a good old prison breakout.

[@Prononano]

I guess having been raised on 2nd Edition, I've always had a very different cultural concept of what "game balance" means. For me, I've never cared whether or not my characters are doing as much damage as everyone else, or whether I have just as many special abilities as they do. I've played characters on both ends of the spectrum, behind and ahead, and in all the years I've found only one thing matters at the table - Did everyone have a chance to help make the game fun? Did everyone get an equal chance to share in the spotlight over the course of the night? And did we all have the opportunity to affect the narrative that we're helping to weave? If the answer is yes, then the game is balanced. But, as I said earlier, I find that I have a very different view of Role-Playing games than most players who started with 3.x or later. I don't look at RPG's like games with some story, but as a shared narrative between players with rules that exist only as a way of preventing "Bang, bang, I shot you - no you didn't!"

[@chaddixon9764]

Monsters that punch above their weight? Freaking Beholders! If a character gets all the wrong beams on them in one turn? Dead man.

[@MastertheGamerpg]

Balance is overrated. Something I have been preaching for years. Thank you for jumping on this train.

[@JPruinc]

Choo Choo

[@beneteus3833]

just ceep it in a way that your group and you have fun and that the battles are still interesting as well as the social interactions and exploring.

[@mordet2]

cool, I'll play pun pun.

[@steveejohnson7932]

My new name is going to be "quadratic wizard"

[@ryanspringer2702]

You guys need to upload more than once a week :P I need my fix

[@shanem8145]

Ryan Springer yes.. yes they do

[@brettboudreau8563]

I don't know I'm afraid of their quality dropping if they upload more.

[@shanem8145]

Brett Boudreau that's very possible. I think they can do it though. They are MUCH more entertaining and informative than other DM focused channels.

[@ryanspringer2702]

Shane Beeman Its seems like they could pump out 4-5 videos in a 2 hour recording session. Im sure these guys have tons of topics they could share their opinions on.

[@shanem8145]

Ryan Springer Of course they can. lol. Any avid experienced players can go on. They are passionate and knowledgeable! They deserve more subs (which they are quickly gaining) so they are able to put more time into it. :)

[@Azetchki]

Game balance discussions only considers a fight on Final Destination with no items, but in d&d, there's so much factors influencing The action.

[@blakebailey22]

from driver's ed to fox only, final destination, no items. if anyone gets that reference

[@Akravator12]

Great video guys! On the topic of Game Balance: I just did a silly one-shot for my players where they were all level 1 Goblins. I rolled to determine a random magic item and gave them a +2 scimitar of speed (well they "acquired" it after massacring a village of Bunny People). I was expecting balance to go to hell, but it really didn't especially at lvl 1. Multiple characters went down, and even the fighter with the scimitar did when he got charged by a Unicorn (an awakened warhorse with a fake horn strapped on). Ended with the Deck of Many Things...lots of fun. Balance really isn't that big of a deal unless you follow the CR system religiously - which you shouldn't. I use it as a guide especially in early levels and quickly throw it out once I get a feel for what the players can handle.

[@LokNWykLeer]

Now that you mentioned the Tome of Beasts, I'd like to know your opinions about the Kobold Press 5E supplements (Deep Magic, Heroes etc.). Would you make an episode about those, like with Volo's Guide?

[@Jgosse]

would love to see a more indepth review of new races in Volo's

[@timothymcallister7230]

Jgosse indeed. I just made a kenku sorcerer and would love to hear their opinion on the new races!

[@Summerfast]

Started playing dnd a month ago, now I'm dming for 3 groups. Thanks for the info web dm, dnd has gotten me back in touch with many old friends.

[@JPruinc]

Thanks! Glad we could help.

[@chaddixon9764]

Jim giving props to the Dopplerat... Have yet to use some, really really want to.

[@TrueMaskGames]

I have been saying this ever since I started running D&D 5e! Balance is only a problem when player start being unhappy with their character. And CRs are mostly useless. Instead most DMs should just go what sounds fun and makes sense storywise. As long as everyone has fun everything is ok. Very few things are truly unbalanced enough to destroy that! :)

[@grantkrueger2225]

I love the cliff plus chandelier comment. I now feel the need to set up that encounter

[@JPruinc]

I know Jim is going to use that soon. I'll now play a swashbuckler in every campaign until that glorious day...

[@johnpi314159]

You should visit the Yawning Portal.

[@DaPsychocat]

such a memetastic thumbnail much internet wow

[@JPruinc]

I love it! We've gotten some criticism that our thumbnails are "click-baity". So we thought this was the perfect show to make a thumbnail that is pure click bait. Glad you enjoyed.

[@shawnames6832]

I don't understand how people find them "click-baity" when they represent what the video is actually about. I love em! They are easy to spot so I know just when you upload.

[@JPruinc]

Same here. We don't get it and don't really care about the criticism. I mean, you can't make everyone happy and most people seem to like them just fine. Buuuut, this particular thumbnail was a joke that just kept going until we finally decided to use it.

[@pieter8491]

Hey guys, I always wondered, do you guys improvise on the spot and just say what comes to mind or do you prepare a lot? Because it feels so natural when you are talking, but very well structured and a lot of information. Natural(20) speakers probably;)

[@JPruinc]

Jim usually writes notes and I'll write some questions on the subject, and then we match up question to info in a loose structure and start rolling.

[@laurelhill3505]

I had enough of balance while raiding in WoW for 10+ years. I have left that behind and could care less about "damage" balance. Are the classes fun? That is all that matters, and can you get some good role playing and out of combat stuff to do? After a 15 year absence from D&D I am glad to be back.

[@JPruinc]

Welcome Back!

[@darthsonic4135]

Video games are a very different beast to TTRPGs.

[@JangboFett]

Where is this weeks upload? *not so patiently waiting for sorcerer video* :)

[@AJ-kj1go]

Anyone else listen to The Adventure Zone? Just finished listening to the live shows, so amazing.

[@2Cubic]

I actually just found them like a week ago when I caught up with Critical Role and Thrilling Intent. Taako really makes that game for me. Good shit.

[@AJ-kj1go]

ill have to check out those shows you mentioned. im hungering for more dnd content

[@2Cubic]

I hope you like them. Thrilling Intent has a rather small fanbase for it's exceptional quality. Critical Role on the other hand may be the most popular live game of D&D right now.

[@qutini]

you could check out Rollplay, it's my favorite roleplay shows, it's on itmeJP channel here on KZbin. He got loads of different shows, some DnD, but a lot of other stuff too :)

[@robmongar7933]

The point that you make 5 minutes in, about the players with the simpler and more complicated characters happens ALL the time at my table. (some of) My players get really unhappy when they feel they are not able to contribute because they have made suboptimal characters. The whole point of having a system in the first place, rather than just making things up, is to level the playing field and make it worth doing different things and allows players to experiment with role-playing different characters without having to worry about over optimising. And I really think it is the responsibility of WotC to take this seriously. So yeah, game balance does matter.

[@recursivecoin359]

I totally agree! I get so tired of Game Balance scrutiny... the only thing I hate more is Edition Wars.

[@isabellemccarthy7712]

The main argument for "balance" is making players not feel neglected in games, no matter the system. If one player is doing EVERYTHING, what is the point of the other players and characters even being there? I have run into this issue a couple of times, where a few players don't feel like they are doing anything, so it drags away from their fun. That is really it, for me Balance means 'An even playing field for all players"

[@obsolete18]

Pan M in another word Rogues

[@SolarFlairIsBestPony]

Ehhhh.... I think balance is really important in that it can be unfun for some people if another person is broken. I had a DM that let spellcasting out of some of it's limitations, particularly extra attack being used with cantrips, which let someone eldritch blast like crazy, doing damage competitive with melee fighters from waaaay far away with no cost whatsoever. But that's on the DM themself, not the general rules of the game. If the ultimate judge is broken then the game itself gets unpleasant really fast.

[@russeshe001]

I agree that game balance isn't as important as people sometimes argue. However, it still makes me horribly sad when a really cool character option just flat out sucks, or is *so* much stronger that it's never allowed. This coming from someone who hates how PF has so many garbage feats and how people are so scared of the Summoner that it's never allowed in most games.

[@Damalon01]

I agree with what you're saying in this video to a certain extent but disagree in many other ways. For example I think balance from one player to another is very important because I myself hate it when one particular player is hands down stronger than everyone else just cos they rolled better or found some broken combo that the GM wasnt aware of. I was once in a group where one player was a one man slaughtering machine, so much so that the rest of the group (Me included) existed solely to provide this guy with ways to get his full attack every round so that he'd reach maximum damage potential. It sucked! The funny thing is that it was a Dnd 3.5 game and he was a Fighter/Kensai/Exotic Weapon Master and we were spellcasters! In this very video you were talking about how Fighters became second fiddle to the casters as the game progresses in 3.5 but thats not my experience! Fighters rule, casters drool! Of course part of the reason why was that the GM preferred to run a single big bad monster in all his encounters (he used to say it was easier and more challenging) but that just made it easier for the Fighter! Once he was next to the target hed usually kill it in one or two rounds.

[@mangakadanieru]

4:39 I am that player. I'm still in my first DnD campaign (2 years in, lvl 17 atm), having picked Barbarian so I could talk a lot about Norse mythology which I love. It was fun until around 10-12 level when the wizard eclipsed the rest of the party and never looked back. My DM was kind enough to give me a pretty powerful artifact (a maul crafted by Thor so I could kill Thrym, god of frost giants) basically giving me access to some Fighter Battle Master maneuvers, and now combat isn't as boring. However, I don't see myself ever picking Barbarian again because it's too simple, and I wish I knew it was "the noob class" as I was told a year in by the more experienced players. It wasn't about being "effective" as much as having some more options in combat other than "I hit him with my axe" or "I throw my javelin" or "I grapple him". With all this said, you've inspired me to DM myself, and I'm so far 4 sessions into running Curse of Strahd and having a blast! Thank you for your videos!

[@KaldwinUnderscore]

Honestly I would love an episode on how to handle the wish spell. One of my players is a hyperactive CN bard who has fantastic ideas for fights (she used Tasha's Hideous Laughter on a werewolf boss and then used polymorph to turn him into a puppy) and she has Wish prepared constantly just in case and I have no idea how she's going to use it, but I don't think I'll be prepared when she does.

[@DurandCompton]

Counterspell is your friend.

[@jibbles88]

I really love all of the outtakes and setup that has been getting included at the end of these videos haha

[@scabbynack]

Thank you! I try to tell people this and they react like I'm nuts. I enjoy high fantasy. I think characters should be essentially demigods with powerful artifacts by the time they're in their teen levels. But very few gods' iconic abilities are about dishing out damage. Let your rogue or bard be a trickster god, let your paladin be a god of justice, let your fighter be god of war. Challenging a party of demigods can be pretty difficult, but it's still totally possible. And yes, sometimes the party should overwhelmingly defeat an enemy--there are a lot more goblins in the world than high level demons, after all.

[@JPruinc]

We've gotten 'godly' in a couple of campaigns, but mostly we play High-Fantasy. Good amount of magic items, and plenty of wacky shit to get up to. Though, it is fun to play a gritty, low-magic game from time to time. Let's you appreciate the good times.

[@scabbynack]

Yea, I also really like low magic campaigns. I had a lot of Dark Sun books back in the day and loved them!

[@a7699aaa]

In my experience with 3.x D&D, the fighter was always envious of the mighty wizard.

[@fishinatube9028]

Unbalanced encounters can be the most fun. Case and point, a combat that still lives on in infamy within my group: the Wendigo Encounter. I found a homebrew wendigo 5th edition stat block, CR 7. The party was 3 lv7 characters. Throw in some envitonmental hazards. The party barely survived, but that was the most memorable encounter I've ever run.

[@EricBrockway]

It's a matter of degree. I heard them talking about people that "do eight more points of damage per round." Yeah, that's not necessarily game-breaking. But some violations of game balance, made possible by problems in the rules, are a big deal. It was really bad when I played back in the 1980's. We had a (1st edition) elven fighter/magic-user that specialized with swords then dual wielded them after casting haste on themselves. They got eight attacks a round in a system where most characters never got more than one. In another (1st edition) campaign I played a 8th druid and was able to successively cast three "Call Lightning" spells (which entitled me to a total of 24 lightning bolts for 10d8 damage each, in a system where an ancient red dragon as at most 88 hit points) and in so doing single-handedly ended an invasion/siege by humanoids that was was to be the campaign's main focus. Minor stuff like an extra 5 or 10 points of damage in a round are trivial in a well-run game but when one player can essentially replace the entire party, finishing entire climactic combat scenes on their own, it's an issue. 5th edition seems to be pretty good in terms of game balance. My only real complaint is that some of the feats are "no-brainers"; either a player takes that feat or their concept is not viable. Imagine if there was one spell that was noticeably superior to all other spells... so that every wizard takes it; such a spell would lead to wizards that lacked diversity. In the same way, these "must have feats" make all the characters I've seen while DM'ing Adventurer's League indistinguishable in combat. How many ranged fighters have you seen without Sharpshooter? How many "tank" style fighters have you seen without Shield Master and Heavy Armor Master? How many druids actually take the circle of the Land (my wife did, and was ridiculed by other players for not playing a druid right because she couldn't shape-shift like they expected). When there's one feat or class option that's superior in all ways, so that it's foolish not to take it, then all the characters start to look alike after awhile. That's not good. While none of the feats are so broken that they're game-breaking, better game balance would lead to more viable character types and more diversity. Not game-breaking but still not something to dismiss out-of-hand.

[@EnvisionerWill]

I think the reason why arguments over "tiny points of damage" happen is because it's the aspect the players have control over. You make choices about your character's build, and if you're dealing 1d8 damage while another player is dealing 2d4+2 damage, the game is telling you that you chose wrong, which is a problem if you had a reason for making the choice you did. I don't like it when the game rules tell me I was wrong to make a decision which I made based on my personal preferences.

[@PedanticTwit]

Firstly, you are absolutely right about the garbage cr rules. Second, the answer to the question of balance is schizophrenic. You say balance doesn't matter and then give multiple times that balance matters. I think you are actually answering a different question: whether 5e's balance is problematic.

[@Sophaurus]

i understand and share most of their points.Unbalances can be well tolerated and dealt with during the game, they depend on the situations and for most of the playtime they don't get even noticed. But having a (closer to be) balanced game is far far better as you would avoid the issues rather than solving them, which is sometimes a bit harder, especially when it comes to player feeling like their class features choice is limited by some options being too good or bad. Why would i pay for a book with new classes and items and spells if they are not balanced? i can make stuff up too, for free.I expect whoever is selling them to make all options viable and roughly equivalent.

[@ChristnThms]

In general I agree. Extreme mismatches can be a problem, though. But I’d imagine that usually comes about as a result of player choices. In the extreme though, when an encounter is challenging to the strongest member of a party, the enemies can steamroller the weaker members. Or conversely, if the weaker characters can compete, then the stronger characters are not even challenged. I don’t think any of the classes as written are too mismatched. But a player who consistently makes nonproductive choices is overall diminishing the ability of the whole party.

[@shanem8145]

My biggest barrier to enjoying 5th edition is scheduling. we get a group going online and are set for schedule.. then after 2-3 sessions people want to change it up. i feel like just doing a 1v1 campaign with someone to avoid 'wasting' time

[@RealRedHotSteele]

I agree for the most part, but in my new campaign I have been having some problems. First, my DM let the paladin reroll his stats until it he had outrageous stats because his first rolls were a bit below the Matrix. Then, the first mission he gives the party like 39000 gold (me being a firbolg druid of the forest can't really use upgrade my armor/weapons being my focus) and then he let the paladin get a +3 sword and shield. Guess what his AC is at level 5? 22. Mine? 11. So I focus on RP and creative fighting, but with our 7 person party, my plans that take multiple turns can't take effect because not many things can survive 7 people. Also, the argue that the maim reason to play is NOT fun.

[@WickedNPC]

Oh! seven players is a terrible idea. Maybe it's possible to splinter the group in to a smaller one with some players that has a playstyle more similar to yours?

[@ryanrhino2318]

No phones allowed at my D&D table.

[@JPruinc]

We've had to institute that rule from time to time. Most of the time our group uses restraint.

[@shanem8145]

JPruInc thats the way to do it. Only do that if it becomes a real issue

[@Killdozerr]

Is it harder to roll dice with hands bound?

[@nogedoge]

Same - no phones. I prefer it that way.

[@bibbobella]

I don't mind it as long as they are still part of the game. Sometimes one of the people go out shopping alone and want to buy something the party might not need to know about. More often than not the other players will be on their phone not really paying attention because well "We aren't part of it so no reason for us really hear about it when our characters don't" The second we get back into group stuff or someone else takes the lead then they will cut down on the phone use or completly stop with it.

[@brycenerdstrom567]

So, balance is important, but 5e is mostly really well balanced, and minor "imbalance" is not a big deal? I coulda told ya that. :D

[@stickman2699]

Okay a question to WebDM. You say the CR system doesnt work, fair enough. My question is how do you award XP after these fights? Do you use the CR system for their XP or something else?

[@shanem8145]

stickman2699 Good question! It depends on how fast you and your players are looking to grow. if you're taking out higher cr monsters and awarding that number out.. well they are going to level quite quickly.

[@shanem8145]

What I've done before (In games like that) is too just level up after x amount of sessions or when feels right. But i also discussed this with the players first.

[@ryanrhino2318]

Yeah i got a good group we play every two weeks about 4-5 hrs we got a good pace, usually level up every 2-3 secessions only Lv 4 now, hope tto keep this pace.

[@shanem8145]

ryan rhino thats a great pace in my book!

[@stickman2699]

excellent idea ill see if i can implement this into my game.

[@JohnathanGross]

DMed a final boss battle with a CR14 half-dragon sorcerer, a CR9 necromancer, and a mind controlled lvl 8 party member. Their solution: banish the necromancer, polymorph the sorcerer, and spend the rest of the encounter trying to pin down the party member.

[@nerfyinyang8810]

Johnathan Gross No legendary resistance?

[@InfiniteRolePlay]

I agree with the overall message to GM's, and feel like the message is directed to newer GM's. With that said, I would have to disagree with game balance not being important, as a game without proper balance is bad game design & makes it more difficult for a GM (especially newer GMs) to run the type of games they want. But that's purely from a mechanical design standpoint and should not be an issue when running an actual game. and a comment on imbalanced games . .. check out RIFTS (the original 1 not the SW one)

[@shino4242]

What they are saying is that balance is only as important as you and your players want it to be. So if YOU find it important, more power to you. they are just saying you shouldn't feel compelled to keep things balanced if you and your players don't really care that much about it. I mean in videogames there are cheat codes and game save editors for a reason...because plenty of people LIKE unbalanced stuff again, if you prefer balanced, thats cool. I'm just saying that you saying 'no balance = bad 100% of the time' is just as incorrect as saying "games should never ever be balanced". its far too subjective and personal to use such generalized statements like that.

[@danielpayne1597]

As someone who usually likes game balance, I'll fully confess that most RPGs aren't balanced even though they try to be or pretend to be. Tales games (Berseria, Vesperia etc) are hella awesome and fun and they don't even TRY to be balanced. Your characters can 1-combo kill anything in the game. This is countered by having enemies who can do that to you if you screw up (on harder difficulties). It's a blast. So, balance isn't EVERYTHING.

[@Zachpi]

In my first dnd game, I realized cr was useless and have never used it as a DM

[@shaynicholson8779]

i love seeing you boys grow been with you since 100 subs

[@JPruinc]

Growing stronger.

[@terencehoughton5734]

For Tyrell!!

[@felltactician]

My character uses daggers, so im definitely not the highest damage dealer, but they're family heirlooms so it fits his backstory. I find the roleplay aspect more important than the balance.

[@AnotherDuck]

I know it's an old comment and video and all, but definitely. I like playing sub-optimal builds for roleplay, and then trying to play moderately efficient from that basis. It's also easier to get away with weird shit (read: fun stuff) if your character isn't that strong.

[@mikecondo]

The episode on "Wishes" sounds really sweet.

[@JPruinc]

Find the first star (make sure it's not Venus) tonight and maybe it will happen.

[@calvinballaka8905]

Love the video as always! Thanks for the reassurances about game balance; as a new DM, it's helpful to hear that I don't need to sweat balance too much. I had worried about it, because I just reeeally like giving my party cool magic items, so now they're pretty loaded and they're only level five! Like you said, I'll try to keep trusting my gut and what I see at the table in order to make the encounters continue to be fun and memorable.

[@benhayward2597]

The moment I stopped using CR and started focusing on curating encounters I found my games got so much better

[@frankrobinsjr.1719]

I had this discussion with others and explained my position and everyone thought it was funny, until they thought about it. Everyone, every character, is epic until you roll the dice.

[@MC-gj8fg]

As a DM of 29 years, I can say that I've seen very unbalanced parties that make other, level power game experienced players at the table unhappy. Now, admittedly, this was 3.5 experience where matters could go entirely off the rails. However when rules in 5E are such that cantrips are based on character, rather than class, level and a Sorc who takes only 2 levels of Warlock can eventually be dishing out up to 8d10+40 damage per round with the expenditure of 2 spell points.. that's pretty damn powerful. Of course, it's right to say that the more experienced player at the table may be willing to share information with the other players. However, this can all cause a headache for the DM. When a party is far more powerful than they should be for their level, and you need to challenge them (otherwise combat is very unsatisfying for everyone involved) then you're left with a few awkward outs. #1: attacking the OP character's Achilles heel. Every character has one, but constantly targeting it will get very old, very quickly. #2: adjust the difficulty of the encounter to compensate for the party's greater level of power. The problem with this is...who cleans the toilets in their world? How is it that these super rare and powerful creatures keep popping up like you could populate a small city with them? It's immersion breaking. I also don't feel it's correct to downplay the relevance of combat in D&D. While it's true that there is far more to D&D than that, and every few session you may not see any combat at all, it is a principle part of the game. A well run combat where the party is victorious by the skin of their teeth and through creative play as much as their stats are some of the most memorable and rewarding moments for players, with high fives going all around. I feel like this has been downplayed in recent years and I've sat in on quite a few games where it seemed like combat encounters were these soul-less obligatory foregone conclusions, and I'm not sure what's shifted the D&D culture in this unfortunate direction.

[@Birbucifer]

Michael Covello You could also just scale up regular enemies to be up to par with the party. Whos the say that bandit captain and his bandit clan didnt get a few spellcasters that know some level 4 spells? Or give the bandits magic weapons and armor. Or you could just buff the stuff they already have. You just gotta be creative and don’t be afraid to homebrew some creatures that are not only challenging, but also make sense for YOUR world.

[@DRakshasa]

What Traps said, and to add to that I would like to point out the importance of environment. Something can be happening that causes a battle/objective to have a time limit, something can be happening that forces your players to decide whether to split the party or not or to force them to overextend. You can make some enemies difficult to reach, while they can easily attack you. I feel like your example kinda falls into the "White room" encounter that was mentioned in the video. There are so many factors that can contribute to a fight.

[@jordanhoke9025]

One easy way to get rid of a house of 75 goblins is fist stealth kill the ones on the out side then have the wizard throw a bunch of fire to burn the the house down after the fighter has barricaded the door.

[@jaykstah]

Just found your channel from slightly older videos and they are really inspiring for setting up my new campaign. I usually don't DM, but I feel like I've learned enough to where I could run a decent campaign for my friends. Keep up the awesome videos, this content is super entertaining and useful!

[@blugobln85]

There are situations where balance matters. The first and foremost is in game mechanics designs, including combat, such as homebrewed content. Why is it important? Because the game must be perfectly balanced at all times? No. No it does not need to be balanced perfectly at all times. However, if you start with something unbalanced, and unbalance it further with magic items, other game mechanics, feats, differing races, and so on, things can get pretty out of balance. The important part is that you start as balanced as you can so that things remain somewhat balanced later on, rather than going crazy.

[@AGrumpyPanda]

A very recent example of the 'white room'-esque discussions that go on: I was looking up ideas for a Pathfinder Arcane Trickster. The character board denizens suggested I multiclass rogue with sorcerer, and focus my build on- get this- SNEAK ATTACKING WITH SCORCHING RAY. Not sneaking, not sleight-of-hand-ing, not disabling devices. Shooting fire out of my hand to alpha-strike people.

[@CrazyConnor2]

Oh man I love the outtakes at the end

[@peribabbles8603]

THANKS for making this video. As a new player in D&D (started with 5th ed.), I am ALWAYS so concerned about the battle planing, checking the CR, and ending up with either ridiculously easy battles or TPK (which I try to mitigate by dropping the enemies HP). And people always talk about "balance" and "character optimization" etc. This video relaxed me a bit and made me feel more assertive about myself as a DM. *thumbs up*

[@danielpayne1597]

As someone who usually likes game balance, I'll fully confess that most RPGs aren't balanced even though they try to be or pretend to be. Tales games (Berseria, Vesperia etc) are hella awesome and fun and they don't even TRY to be balanced. Your characters can 1-combo kill anything in the game. This is countered by having enemies who can do that to you if you screw up (on harder difficulties). It's a blast. So, balance isn't EVERYTHING.

[@andrewbeauman]

SWEET LORD! Jim at 19:10 what the heck is that beast. I must have it!

[@jaysw9585]

I know my concern with game balance is for the modules I am running. I am currently running 2e Ravenloft with 5e rules. I am planning to run 14 Ravenloft modules in the course of my campaign. Most are between levels 5-10 level and i am worried that the party will out level the campaign before I get half way through. I am considering level capping at 12 or alternatively ramping up the difficulty. Currently I am being very sparing with the exp, in hopes to level them slowly, but this is very difficult for me to judge so early in my campaign. I am currently on 3/14.(btw, I managed to get all 14 modules and all Ravenloft box sets in one continuous campaign without break or retread.)

[@Smeagolthevile]

"Balance" Im running out of the Abyss, there is an area where there are drow statues, they are reskinned animated armor. My party could not hit them, the monk couldnt, the bard missed her spell attacks. The ranger cast spike growth. By the time the encounter was over, he had done over 300 damage THREE HUNDRED DAMAGE, and it was only about 4 rounds of combat. He is level 6. He is in NO WAY overpowered or unbalanced. I am also running a game of Curse of Strahd with mostly brand new people. Some players thought their chars were semi useless, since they were new and didnt understand. I spent the time and made a write up, explaining what their stuff did and how to use it in situations. Wouldnt you know, the next session they were the standout of the session, in combat, out of combat, everywhere. Another edit, heh, any chance you guys can do a video for players am DMs about roleplaying your characters DISADVANTAGES? Not in the dice roll, but stats and skills. For example, I'm trying to RP up the fact that my out of the abyss warlock has a charisma of 20, but a strength of 4, due to her pact with the demon lord of Succubi being her patron. I'v found it hard to roleplay strength being weak as opposed to constitution, because most things like 'oh, muscle disease' or 'look like they have an eating disorder' are all con things, not str things.

[@thenovicedm7966]

I agree with the premise of "not worrying" about game balance as a DM...for the most part in games I run (I tend to focus on narration and individual PCs equally). BUT....if there exist an issue "among player(s)" as to limelight or PC build imbalance then there is an issue worthy of attention. Rarely have I found in a group set where players aren't comparing stats/abilities to their party counterparts as the game progresses. As a DM I take time to focus on each PC (before/during games) in order to mitigate any such perceived imbalance in terms of character build or RP styles that may come to light. Some DMs ignore party dynamics altogether and are not very skilled in creating scenarios that maximize (& shares) each PCs strengths (or weaknesses) in the game. Combat-oriented DMs are the worst when it comes to this. Optimization-focused players tend to exacerbate issues when the DM fails to deliver a balanced game in terms of focusing on using each PC's build. Shine the light equally on each Player's PC and imbalance of build/attributes should be mitigated by the attention/opportunity that the game gives to each player. If a player chooses not to engage or utilize those chances....then that player needs more DM attention (out of game) to ensure that player is getting "what he/she needs" from the game.

[@WIDBx]

I can't wait to see what you guys have to say about the paladin and sorcerer !!

[@WisdomThumbs]

My second time DMing I threw a buffed cyclops (Chief) at four 5th level characters. It was backed up by a dragonborn lightning monk hiding in water... a squad of dragonborn soldiers (veterans reskinned)... a bunch of human slave slingers... and a really buffed kobold kommander. The warlock/rogue player used stealth and Pact of the Chain to oneshot the cyclops chief with a dragonling familiar. One tail attack and a failed CON save (failed with a 1, so it failed by five points and went unconscious). Then the party *trounced* all the additional enemies. Just decapitated them left, right, and center. It was awesome. And it was intended to put those players into either a last stand, or escape-mode. Because it was a oneshot and I’m a newb DM.

[@goroshi1000]

You could say that game balance is not THAT important, but if you make a pc to do something, like a rogue to stealth and stuff and you compare it with a shadow monk or a druid that picked thief's tools proficiency (which could even be "free" using in-game time to train)... invisibility and/or pace without trace is really more effective than just getting twice proficiency. That's not a problem exactly, but if you are that rogue and think "man, I'll sneak a lot" and the druid that got literally one spell (+10 and full party buff) that can choose when to prepare beats you on your specialization... sucks... a lot... Also happens when one choice is way better than the other on almost every way, including the thing that they should be better at. Balance is not THAT important, but without it, you end playing D&D 3.5 at level 20 you suck and should be ashamed of even trying if you are not a caster.

[@TheTdroid]

I do think internal balance can be a problem in 2 main areas: Classes (and playstyles) that have fundamentally similar combat roles and internal party balance. As an example, martial classes should not differ too much in their combat effectiveness because they are all martial in nature. That doesn't mean they need to be within 0.5 DPR of each other in all circumstances, but they all need valuable and unique additions that feel impactful on the combat at hand. And while I think Rangers weren't as bad as they were made out to be in the PHB, they did lack the tools to truly set themselves apart in effectiveness until more options were added. Two-weapon fighting is in a pretty bad spot and has been since release. Not because it isn't viable, but because they are competing with 2handed for being a damage oriented melee fighting style without getting any of the feat support needed to be competitive. Dual Wielder is pretty low impact, while Polearm Master (PAM) and Great Weapon Master are playstyle defining. TWF is also more dependent on having access to fighting style than 2handed is. Then there is party balance. I ran a game where we had a few fairly optimized builds born from roleplaying ideas. A goblin Lore Bard pretending to be a halfling, a stock shield dwarf Fighter, a human Land Druid... and a v-human PAM Devil Sight Pact of the Blade Hexblade Warlock. It was an absolute nightmare trying to balance combat encounters for the group because one member was so far ahead of the others in terms of optimization.

[@the1dean]

Absolutely agree. Balance is the easiest part of design to fix, but 95% of what you'll find in online forums. However, I don't find the CR system useless. Strictly following the system leads to problems, of course, but that seems to me to be clearly an interpretation problem instead of a system problem. CR, like most things in D&D, should be interpreted according to the Barbosa method of interpretation: "It's more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules."

[@bobgoblin5328]

5e is about as balanced as can be without homogenizing the classes. If you truly want to see 0% balance and 100% do whatever you want, pick up a copy of Rifts or Heroes Unlimited 2nd Ed. The system is dated, plus 30 years of power creep, but really fulfilling as a player if your DM can calculate math at the speed of Deep Blue. Btw would love to hear your thoughts on some of the better Unearthed Arcana, particularly the ranger revised.

[@whyamihere2k]

I give a few shits about balance, but I realize that it is relatively unimportant. I kind of like to optimize my characters, but when I do I always end up optimizing for memes. My favorite meme so far is my Super Reach Ranger who just uses multiclassing and the tree mode from the UA to get as much reach as possible (about 35' if I remember correctly). That was the most ridiculous thing I have ever done. And it kind of worked.

[@evilgod2]

How do I find a DM like you guys? seems like every DM i play with is obsessed with things like balance and there narrative over and above the players agency. ESPECIALLY the whole "this is OP issue. I had a Story teller running Exalted ban an entire martial arts style out of core due to his opinion of it being OP...so frustrating. keep up the good work guys I often enjoy watching this show just from the entertaining value but I still learn stuff from it two now and then.

[@Sean-ne3gx]

This came with perfect timing for me, I was freaking out a few days before my first real DMing experience about how to handle monster groups "What do you mean it's a gut feeling? My gut isn't saying anything, my players are going to murder this group of mephits or get TPKed and there goes the campaign!" Now... I'm still nervous, but less so about the actual situations that I'm going to be building.

[@killcat1971]

Balance WITHIN a party is no totally necessary, but BETWEEN the party and the "world" can be, 5th's a lot more forgiving than some systems, but missing certain critical skills or abilities can make life a lot harder.

[@Cxdfc]

I definitely agree with the Errata Contagion! Touch the monster and it is vulnerable to allllll danage within that combat for at least 3 round OOF Now it is poisoned, and get super debuff after 3 failed CON rather than at that first touch~ MUCH BETTER :)

[@bradtimmons6041]

My DM loves Kobolds, but it's mostly due to Deekin from Neverwinter Nights. On top of that there are some hazy rules with Dragonwrought Kobolds from what I'm to understand. My DM told me something about making yourself a great wurm, which would allow for epic feat selection at early levels.

[@TheMrVengeance]

I don't think the argument works, when you say Perkins and Mearls aren't using CR, therefore it's garbage. CR is there as a guideline for beginner/inexperienced DMs to build an appropriate encounter, Perkins and Mearls know 5E inside out, for obvious reasons, so they don't need the "training wheels". Doesn't mean it's complete garbage.

[@fhuber7507]

Game balance is required to make the adventure a challenge but not a guaranteed TPK. Don't toss a bunch of level 1 to 3 PCs vs a 5e Lich. The lowest level lich should wipe the party with ease. (there is a module that puts a lich in front of 3rd level PCs... its stupid. To make the party live the module says only use the lich's 1st level spells.) I TPK'd a 8 member 2nd Edition party of 25 to 29 level PCs with a 2nd edition lich (2nd Edition lich was much weaker then 5e lich...) made from a level 11 Wizard... Liches are evil, smart and they have had time to prepare their lair t be a deathtrap. They had the time the mage was working to become a lich to build up equipment, then as a lich they have plenty of time to play alchemist and spell scroll scribe. You WILL eventually fail saving throws when the lich is tossing 4th and 5th level spells at you from a concealed location round after round... Then he dimension doors to a new concealed spot as you try to get through the magical traps to where he used to be....

[@theoriginalfarouk]

Balance is important in one way - how it affects whether everyone is having fun at the table. Every group is going to have a different perspective, so sometimes it's an issue and sometimes its not. As an experienced DM, I keep balance in consideration with the focus being keeping things relatively balanced between the players so they have equal opportunity to be heroes. Sure there's a lot of speculative and unnecessary debate about balance (particularly combat balance) but D&D is not exclusively (or IMO even majoraly) a combat game. Balance in non-combat abilities is just as important, when it gets out of whack. On the one hand you try encouraging newer DM's to push forward and not obsess about it - and that is good advice. Same applies when you're running modules, which are fairly well balanced (in general). But to suggest its nothing to ever worry about is to glaze over something experienced DMs can and should keep in mind.

[@VaGuS343]

Another thing about monsters being nerfed. Well I can see that but the way I interpret it is that the monster in the book is a typical one. A boring vanilla version (OK nothing wrong with vanilla but you get what I mean). Like if you had the entry 'human' in the MM. So all my cool monsters like demons and dragons etc I add modified character classes, armour, items etc. I treat them as PCs so they become more fleshed out... Sometimes I just change the rules a bit cause it fits my world reality better. I get this is time consuming but as a dm doing this for the big bads etc is so much fun for me. Think of strad for example, he's no simple vampire. I like how they simplified the rules and think it's a good wholesome base... At times I miss 2e 3e complexity I just add it in. For example my stone golem last encounter is not resistant to non magical items only but all non magical items due just 1+str bonus DMG only. Non magic bludgeoning does half. Magic items do half damage and magic bludgeoning items did full. Just to add to its staying power and awesomeness. F-balance I wanted moving bastion can't Ming to crush you effect!

[@TheSweetpoonanner]

Great videos. I'm a happy subscriber. I do have a request for a video/response. In one of the videos I remember Jim mentioning you guys ran a game in years' past that only had 2 PCs. I'm new as a DM, and in the area I live in there aren't a lot of people interested in playing. I have a couple of friends that are interested, and I was wondering if you could share your experiences DMing for only 2 or 3 PCs, and some ideas for how to make combat fun and challenging, even if all of the party roles aren't covered. Obviously it would be a heavy roleplay/social game, but I struggle coming up with interesting encounters for an inexperienced, unorthodox group. Again, great videos. I patiently await more from you guys. Best of wishes.

[@thegeneralscall]

Honestly, game balance versus creativity for spells annoy me. Like, I get it, it's for balance, but I want to be able to use shape water to create make-shift handcuffs on an enemy. I want to hand a man a metal pole and electrocute him from a distance with shocking grasp. Transmutation also extremely disappoints me because everything takes fucking 10 minutes to make and then ONLY last an hour and IF you maintain concentration. Imagine if you would, being able to take your magic book and turning the paper (which is made from trees and therefore wood) and turning them into stone to prevent the pages from burning. Imagine taking some wood, carving them into long strips before transmuting them into copper, coiling them around a rotor, and then using shocking touch to create a literal electric motor. I feel like if one can be creative enough with their magic to use it in unpredictable, reasonable, and clever ways, they should be rewarded for it, whilst less creative people don't, instead of being withheld and forced into a rigorous, diluted rule set for simply balance sake. The No-Child-Left-Behind Magic School policy.

[@Rankerquat]

It's a shame they didn't really touch on the flipside of the whole "balancing" discussion... While a savvy DM can make an "over-powered" character function in the game, if you roll up with a _vanilla beastmaster,_ that's a much taller ask.

[@KevinOutdoors]

You are clearly a Koboldist!

[@davidburisch9937]

Hello fellow web DM's! First things first: I love your videos. I am currently watching one after another and it is great. Second: I honestly never saw it that way you described here. At my table balancing was also never a big discussion, even though some players have much more powerful builds when it comes to combat. The only issue I am facing is that the CR system is complete crap. Especially if you are also considering the enviroment. But as you said the players do not really care if the balancing is on point or not. It is the DM's that are disussing about it, even though it is not even needed.

[@CautionCU]

I've played in online games where certain players are optimizers and I was not. It made the game very unfun. Was the game unlikely to be fun anyway? Probably. That said, bad game balance makes bad games much much much worse.

[@wesleyrobinson4532]

Seems someone skipped a week.

[@tideoftime]

Game Balance is very, very overrated/overwrought. The only time it is a real "issue" is when pwrgmrz focus on... well... _pwrgming_ ... and as a consequence overshadow the other players at the table (and even this has less to do with game mechanics, as such, and more so to do with said pwrgmrz being dicks in general...).

[@estebanrodriguez5409]

Regarding Shadowrun, in 5th Ed they kinda changed how the Matrix (the internet/virtual reality) works. The farther you are from the thing you are trying to hack, the harder it gets. And if you can connect directly to the device, hacking becomes more easly. And as many devices can be in a sort of master/slave relationship, you can exploit vulnerabilities in the system by hacking something like a camera or a bending machine. Still is crazy dungerous to be a decker/technomancer, but mages also have their spotlight when they go astral. And things like street samurais, riggers, physical adepts are all about combat (they all got their different styles in how they fight).

[@joearmyguy]

I agree, I thought we could have a decent debate, but as the show went along you discussed all the things I would have brought up. I do think that severe balance issues need to be brought up to WOTC though. (ranger) However, I think the core books are pretty well balanced with a few exceptions. 1) The beast master pet was more of a liability than fun 2) The bard "can" be very dominant in all three pillars of adventure, allowing a player to steal the spotlight 3) The warlocks eldritch blast is very good, unfortunately it also makes it the go to action choice, which limits fun. Also, you didn't bring up one of the easiest ways to disrupt party balance; which is to allow your players to roll stats.

[@xandermoore9119]

I used to have a lot of issues with "Oh X is unfair so I changed it, Y is too good so I changed it", but I rolled a lot of that back, let the mechanics function as they were designed. The only things I have meaningfully changed and kept, were turning class based immunities into resistances, and making a successful dex save with evasion 1/4 damage instead of half. I changed those specifically with the idea that they limit in combat design space. The party has a monk? Well he can solo my adult green dragon at level 9 (not hypothetical, actually happened in rise of Tiamat). But that's where I draw the line. If immunity would fundamentally change and neuter an encounter, then something else needs to be worked out. At least in my eyes.

[@TalespinnerEU]

I'm honestly not sure how balance issues are for 5th edition, and you have already mentioned the balance issues of 3rd. I personally consider game balance to be incredibly important within its own context. The game system does not exist to grant players options; it exists first and foremost to take options away. Roleplaying is great. It's a way to create a story together, with a bunch of people. Using your imagination, you create and survive encounters. But if we could just do whatever, these encounters become trivial, and surviving them becomes just as trivial. The game's rules, when it comes to the encounters themselves, serve only to create the illusion that the players -could- lose. Of course: That's not what you actually want to happen. You want the story to continue, after all. But without that excitement, the story itself becomes phony, empty. When it comes to player interaction, however, balance is far more important. And balance can take several forms. Some people might suck at combat but offer great utility otherwise. The important thing about balance is to not make people feel useless. You describe that as 'it's important that people get the spotlight,' but game balance is an integral part of that. When you are a fighter, and your fellow adventurer is an immortal, and both of you exist to hit things, then your fellow adventurer is just you, only better at everything. Why would you be there at all? In 3rd edition, I experienced this when I played a sorceror. Another person played a psion, and they literally did everything better and more often than I did. I was redundant. I contributed nothing to the group. And because I was already a sorceror, there was no way I could ever get on even grounds with the psion. Continued failure and underperformance due to game mechanics is grating and incredibly off-putting. Again: Nobody wants to feel useless. A dedicated assassin that is out-assassined by a less dedicated class that also does other stuff well will be understandably and rightly upset at their character being made redundant or irrelevant by the rules.

[@arceom07]

I really enjoy your show, you guys are the only d&d-related youtubers who give me the impression you actually played alot of d&d and talk from experience rather than "what if..." suppositions.

[@sk8rdman]

I'd like to say a few words in defense of the theory crafters who throw around their arguments about white room combats that take place primarily on spreadsheets. I've often been that person, for a couple of reasons. For one, I like math and using it to solve problems, so even if knowing the numbers is not the most meaningful thing in practice, the process of analyzing the problem and trying to solve it theoretically is fun for me. Another main reason is that it's like a downtime activity for me. When I'm not playing D&D, I'm wishing I was, and diving into the math is one of the ways that I scratch that itch. I think you're absolutely right that most of it doesn't matter in practice when you're at the table, but there's not necessarily anything wrong with having those theoretical discussions and devoting a lot of time and effort playing D&D like it's a math problem if that's what's fun for you; provided that it's not having a negative impact on the real table time and other players' experience with the game. Also, as you briefly mentioned, balancing encounters isn't as important for mid to high level play, but it certainly is for low level play, especially with new players. I'm currently DMing for a group who have mostly only played RPGs in video games, where enemies are artificially scaled to your level, and if you do charge in blindly to your death, you can just try again. In D&D, it can be hard to teach new players those hard lessons about choosing your battles and combat strategies without killing a PC or two in the process. I long for the day when my players are high enough level that they can deal with most encounters, without me worrying too much about PCs dying.

[@mistresshattrix1385]

I'd say game balance matters to a degree, but not in that super white room damage numbers only thing. Rather the class design of DnD has traditionally been kind kf lopsided. I mean, just look at how Wizard gers these abilities that span utility-support-damage and command so much sheer options and flavor. Versus the fighter, which both EK and Battle master are constrained by rules, the maneuvers of the Battle master don't scale as well, and honestly I'd love to see higher level maneuvers much like spells almost. The utility side of all three feels lackluster. There's an imbalance in how much flavor and meat the two classes have. That's the real issue for me.

[@juanmavet5779]

Hey guys, I think I´ve gone through most of your 5e videos by now and they are all equally fun and enlightening! I have a question about this immortal class you´ve mentioned several times, what is it? I´ve read most of the books and I don´t remember seeing anything like it. Cheers from Costa Rica!