Last week we asked about Worldwide D&D Game Day. 68% said that did not go (yours truly included), 28% went and enjoyed, while 4% of attendees went and had a bad time. This week we’re going to look at the state of D&D now that the dust has settled after the release of the PHB2.
In the heyday of 3.5 I’d browse every new splat book, not for intriguing new play options (many, many sucked), but for the overpowered Prestige Class de jour. After all, who didn’t want to dip into a single level of six prestige classes for awesome abilities? With a few exceptions, the poor original DMG prestige classes were forgotten, unless of course something new came out that made a dog suddenly viable (Duskblade -> Dragon Disciple). Now, with the PHB2 out I was curious to see if this newer, more-balanced D&D suffered the same fate as its predecessors: Power Creep.
Having perused the PHB2 myself, but not really having played with the classes too extensively, I have to say that it’s a very tightly balanced book. If anything, some classes come across as too bland and conservative rather than new and powerful. With that in mind, we come to this week’s Inquisition:
[poll id=”119″]
The only thing that feels like power creep to me from PHB2 are the Backgrounds. When a skilled DM and a suitable group use them, they add to the role-playing experience while also granting a mechanical benefit to the character. However, I fear that too many players see them as just another way to enhance their character.
trolltastictalk´s last post: [D&D4] The depths of Emerald Cavern
I chose None of the Above, because I don’t think anything in the PHB2 is so overpowered that it represents something close to “power creep”. The closest thing to me is the Weapon Expertise / Implement Mastery feats, which essentially just become the must-have feats so every char. is effectively -1 feat.
The backgrounds I haven’t read extremely thoroughly, but it looked to me at MOST you got +2 to one skill, or an extra trained skill. Neither of those, even when abused by bad players / DMs, isn’t a huge advantage and doesn’t really represent power creep so much as additional bonuses.
To me, Power Creep means when a new option becomes available that makes taking earlier options WORSE, which backgrounds aren’t really an example of rather than just more customization for characters and in that sense is why I voted for None.
I agree on backgrounds.
The expertise feats don’t sit right with me. I just threw them away and adjust defenses on monsters. I really don’t want feats granting broad attack roll bonuses. I think such things should’ve been more conditional than they were (awarding attack roll bonuses for certain tactics or actions, rather than just for sticking to a weapon).
Wyatt´s last post: Touhou Is My Kind of D&D
After running 3 sessions for WWGD at the FLGS, I only felt like some of the new classes needed extra paper & pencil for math. The Barbarian is like the Battlerager Fighter–as I DM I make that player keep a running tally of HPs, etc.
As with any of the classes for 4e, I found that in the hands of someone who understands the Class Role and synergy, they all rock. I keep hearing on the boards how Wizards suck, yet every Wizard I have played, or coached a little, in 4e, almost rules the battlemap and the other players tend to love him!
I think the only Power Creep/Broken thing I have found so far in 4e is a Bugbear PC with an Executioner’s Axe. Even the Battlerager is fine, if you don’t just try to hit him with melee minions. I thought Dark Spiral Aura was broken, until we carefully realized that interrupts and reactions don’t happen on your turn, so you can’t charge your DSA and go running thru the enemies trying to provoke OAs and blow them up.
3.x thinking sometimes makes things broken, or also gives people the “this is too weak and sucks” complaint. Only when even we experienced players & DMs stop and really read the rules and know how they work, do we find some pretty smooth mechanics.
For the first time in 4e, I’ve had a lot of success running home & FLGS RPGA events, and because of the wonderful, usually-correct Character Builder, I can allow almost anything to enter my games, because I know it will be official, generally balanced and playable. So far, I am very, very satisfied and am much less “Show me that!” as a DM.
GrecoG´s last post: Controversial Trek
The backgrounds I haven’t read extremely thoroughly, but it looked to me at MOST you got +2 to one skill, or an extra trained skill.
Actually, I could have misread it, but it seems like the choices were +2 to one skill, an extra language, OR add a skill to your class skill list. It doesn’t even give you a “free training” in a skill – it just lets you add a skill to your skill list at character creation time. And even if you take multiple backgrounds you only get the bonus from one of them. That doesn’t really feel like “power creep” to me – it’s a nice bonus, but not something that is suddenly a must-have. (I haven’t seen what the “Regional Benefits” backgrounds in places like the Forgotten Realms Player’s Guide give you though – those could be power creepy).
I’m still not sure about the Invoker – at first glance he appears to be a bit power creepy in comparison to a Wizard. Other than that, I haven’t seen too much to trip my “power creep” radar in the book yet.
I haven’t checked them out in the PHB2 yet, but the items in the Adventurer’s Vault were definitely power-creepy, and I’m assuming the items in PHB2 are as well. It’s hard not to be, with the items in the original PHB being pretty bland and generally useless.
I’m not worried about background bonuses upping the power level of the games. They don’t affect combat and the bonuses they grant are akin to circumstantial bonuses anyway. The minimal power boost is offset by the (hopefully) increased role playing potential you have when even your dullest, least imaginative player has a decently developed background to work off of.
I’ve used the backgrounds in homebrew since the Dragon “Scales of War” article, and then added in the FR when that came out. I had those in-hand from the LFR RPGA guide early.
In “official” sanctioned games, I current stick with either FRPG or PHB2, since the SoW are not sanctioned for LFR. However, none of them, nor any of the magic items, have added Power Creep to my games. They just added…well… magic items. LOL
GrecoG´s last post: Controversial Trek
@Jer –
Yeah, the Invoker is somewhat better than the Wizard. Unfortunately, that’s more to do with the Wizard being somewhat substandard than anything else.
Not that Wizards are objectively bad. As GrecoG said above, they can be played very effectively. Their issue is that they’re too easy to make non-controller-y, and verge heavily into “crappy striker” mode. Especially if you follow 3e-isms, and stick to the powers like Magic Missile that damage better than the others, but not enough to be a good striker, and don’t control the battlefield well.
The Invoker, on the other hand, seems to be more solidly in the controller role.
Graham´s last post: 32 hours of D&D gaming party!
No one of the listed above are power creep.
The races are not so awesome!
The classes are complementar to PHB and no one of them are fantastic!
Backgrounds? Forgotten Realms has backgrounds and it don’t make the character powerfull!
And Feats, Itens and Rituals are not spetacular…very good but nothing to worry about.
franciolli´s last post: Sessão 3 – 28/03/2009
i chose feats and backgrounds — but only slightly. I mean… compared to the splat books of editions past; the power creep in the 4EPHB2 is minimal imho.
jonathan´s last post: The Half-Empty Glass: What is missing in 4E D&D
I don’t see any real power creep, although I do have the nagging feeling that bards might be able to pull off some really jaw-dropping things with the right multiclassing. But even then, it’s not as though they could pull off that trick all the time…
Also, I prefer the background bonus to be something the DM assigns to a worthy background, rather than something the player picks. Not a problem, though; I’ll just keep doing it like I’ve been.
I think you should have provided some of your own research & examples to make a better article.
The only thing worth reading here are the comments really. And the decision seems quite unanimous.
Funny, I thought doing a poll WAS research.
Also, the post itself comes to the same conclusion that the poll is showing, but thank you for contributing something insightful and worthwhile to the conversation Nerd. Always appreciated!
I don’t think PHB2, on its own, has led to too much power creep, but I think things are starting to lean that way as a whole. I never played 3.5, but from the sounds of it, I don’t think 4e is anywhere near that.
So far in 4e, there are a couple of things that stand out to me:
1) Orbs of Ultimate Imposition
2) Half Elf 11th Feat which makes their extra power At-Will (without having to give up a Paragon Path)
3) Weapon/Implement Expertise feats (feats aren’t supposed to be necessary, I though)
4) Dual Strike and Twin Attack at higher levels… once all those feat, item, crit, etc bonuses start stacking up.
Of the classes I have spent a ton of time studying/making/playing, I can honestly say that the Shaman, Druid, Barbarian, and Warden all kick some serious ass. To be honest, PHB2 has gotten me back into 4e. I thought all of the classes from PHB1 were just boring and too specialized. Its no secret that I haven’t been happy about the multi-classing in 4e, but the PHB2 classes feel like multiclassing already. The best part is, you don’t have to give up a Paragon path to do so.
The only evidence that I can supply about the classes in PHB2 arguably being a little overpowered compared to the others is that you don’t really need defenders and healers any longer… not through 8th level at least (I’ll be playing paragon with a Druid soon).
Some examples? Wardens, Barbarians, and Druids all have innate healing abilities… for themselves. That isn’t so bad except that when you consider that by running a Warden, Barbarian, and Druid, you are essentially running: Defender, 2x Strikers, 3x Self-Healers, 2x Controllers.
And the Shaman is just an absurd addition to any group – even at 8th level. You can dump armor proficiencies onto a Shaman and essentially have a 2nd or 3rd defender in your party… not to mention AE heals and some of the most powerful OAs in the game, imo.
On their own, is it power creep? Probably not. But, the hybrid nature of the classes (which is way more fun, imo) does allow for some rather odd group make-ups which, as a whole, can be power creep… at least it seemed like it when I played 8th level stuff.
The only evidence that I can supply about the classes in PHB2 arguably being a little overpowered compared to the others is that you don’t really need defenders and healers any longer
The minor self-healing of the classes you mention is no worse than the Paladin already had. It helps a lot, but it’s no substitute for an actual leader class.
As for the ability to run without a Defender, we’ve actually been trying that for a while. Not having an actual defender (meaning someone who can mark, not just someone with a high AC and HP) is a huge disadvantage. The Shaman’s “Spirit’s Shield” power helps, but isn’t really enough to substiture for an actual defender class.
I mean, just like the PHB1 classes, all of the classes verge into a secondary role. The Paladin has a bit of Leader, the Cleric has a bit of Defender. But they can’t fill the role well enough to completely substitute for a full class.
None of the roles are 100% required, at any rate, and the secondary roles help out as always.
But making one completely unnecessary? Not that I can see.
Graham´s last post: 32 hours of D&D gaming party!
Each class gets a 2nd wind and your party healer has another 2-3 heals per encounter (depending on tier of course). At most, a single character in a group of 4-5 gets to spend 2-3 healing surges an encounter.
The self-healing, not to mention Saving-Throw defenses, of some builds of those classes goes way beyond that, imo.