Where should the balance point be?

[Squirrelloid]

I realize this is likely to get a lot of discussion, but this is really a request of someone with power to do things (likely Jason).

What balance point is 3.P aiming for? The best possible way to do this is to name a class which you believe is the paragon of balance. For example: Rogue. Then we know what we're comparing other classes to, and which ones are too powerful or lacking.

Without that information, one of the two conclusions are possible:
(1) The balance point is whatever the most powerful class is, and everything below that is lacking (because that's the balance point you'll find through play - ie, people will gravitate to where the power is).
(2) Feedback is useless because there is no metric by which to evaluate abilities. I can't tell you if feat X or spell Y is over or under powered, because we don't even know what those concepts are.

[Jal Dorak]

This is a difficult assertion to make, because D&D is designed as a team game. Classes might shine at one thing and be terrible at others. That is part of the fun of playing. Sure, there might be some classes that are "balanced" with everything, but making everything balanced according to that class could just make the game dull, and I don't think it is achievable with backwards compatability.

Now, what I would agree is that we could come up with some target numbers. For example, what does the game assume for to-hit, hp, damage, saves, AC, etc. Then try to have each class be successful within their focus.

[Squirrelloid]

Jal Dorak wrote:

This is a difficult assertion to make, because D&D is designed as a team game. Classes might shine at one thing and be terrible at others. That is part of the fun of playing. Sure, there might be some classes that are "balanced" with everything, but making everything balanced according to that class could just make the game dull, and I don't think it is achievable with backwards compatability.

Now, what I would agree is that we could come up with some target numbers. For example, what does the game assume for to-hit, hp, damage, saves, AC, etc. Then try to have each class be successful within their focus.

I agree every class won't be good at the same things. That's not really what I was asking. The rogue, for example, lives rather comfortably at a particular power level. It doesn't do everything at that power level, but what it does well it does at that level. If that's the right level I need to know that. I can extrapolate from there. I can use information like rogue average performance vs. monsters and the types of other challenges a rogue can handle as a basis for other classes general performance.

I mean, target numbers only help if we also have some expectations about results as well. You could list off a bunch of statistics which represent balanced at some level. Or you could just point to the class you feel is best balanced now. (My money is on the rogue, its always been the best balanced of 3.x classes ignoring some stupidity involving UMD).

What I can't do is say 'X is balanced' without some standard of balance.