Most balanced

Correct, it has enough classes of each tier that you can make balanced parties

Nerf wizard spell list, and they can still bend reality and not take away the super hero feeling from other classes. Best of both worlds.

>tiers balance the game
>not WBL

It actually doesn't, because per default everyone gets the same amount of money. If you create a party going for consistent tiers, you don't have to change the system itself

>Druid outclasses monk in absolutely everything and that's a good thing

Anima BF

What is 'D&D 4e'?

It actually is, ttrpgs aren't competitive games, you don't need to be the very best, you don't even need to be good, it's a roleplaying game, you know, as in roleplay, try doing that.

But core 4e sucks, you need the later monster manuels and erratas

Nope, tiers mean nothing in a game with a GM who by default introduces the encounters and actual content of WBL.

There is no actual reason you can't provide good encounters to a party consisting of classes in different tiers. Everyone basically doing the same thing only really works in a video game, not tabletop.

>meaningless conjecture is an argument

How is meaningless that Cleric and Druid do everything better than other classes and more? If i want to play a monk I should deal with the fact that if another player pics Druid or Cleric they're going to make me unnecessary? why?

>There is no actual reason you can't provide good encounters to a party consisting of classes in different tiers.
You know, except for wildly disparate competence.

see How about you engage in this thing called "roleplaying" and ignore being "necessary" or "useful" or whatever that means.

Roleplaying does not make being shit at what you're supposed to do fun.

>I can't have fun unless I'm meaningless
Cry me a river

You can roleplay in good systems too

Actually, it very much can, but I generally dislike playing characters that perform inadequately in their respective field, as well.

>it makes no sense for a reality-bending Wizard to be balanced against a guy who can just kind of swing a sword around.
Because you absolute wankstain, when you make shit that is the same LEVEL (i.e. a supposedly objective measure of power) you expect they will be of similar power. This is not a difficult concept for anyone with two braincells to rub together.

It's not fun being irrelevant after a certain point, it's not fun having being forced into certain choices because otherwise you will become a non-entity, it's not fun having the book lie to you about how powerful you're going to be and literally set traps to spoil your build in the feats section. This backtracking logic can only be the result of sunken cost-induced madness or trolling so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and call it bait.

>I can't have fun if I'm not relevant
You and all like you are pathetic, nobody is forcing you to play these "weak builds".

>"Balance" is 100% unimportant in a cooperative TRPG, and is in fact counterproductive.

If this was the case then games would let players run wild at character creation and just make whatever they want. I've never known a game to do this except pure freeform, though I'm sure it exists somewhere it's not clearly not a popular approach.

No, but I had a lot of fun because you can build each class in at least 3-4 decent ways and you have many options.
Core +B1+B2 was one of my best moments of RPG.
APG is great, but you read stuff like persistent spells and cry. Or the falcata and you understand they suck at math harder than you suspected.

>he hasnt ever played dungeon world

>>Wizard can cast Wish
Low effort here. Really low.
Wish is essentially "help DM" or "fuck me in the ass DM" or "well I am a bit more flexible with spell slots, at a cost".

No but they are tricking new players into them with their shit game design.

Really narrative driven games can always work regardless of system, and those are the only ones where a character specifically designed to be shit at everything has a fair chance of being entertaining rather than obnoxious

Of course, trying to salvage a weak character via RP has been a thing since forever, but the gap in power between a "weak" and a "strong" character is not as wide as in 3.5, practically anywhere but in 3.5

Technically, all the monster manuals and erratas are core.

Because what everyone really wants to do when they sit down at a table is be irrelevant.

Well, no, because you could like a class becoming, for the sake of consistency, more powerful more easily.

When I play Star Wars, I don't want to play a jedi.
But I fully expect jedi to be more powerful than me with less efforts. That's just how this universe is and I'm completely ok with that.

ugh. you are the worst thing about your generation.

...

read this

projects.inklesspen.com/fatal-and-friends/alien-rope-burn/pathfinder-roleplaying-game/

Does this bait catch salt water catfish? If so where can I get more.

If you think there is any shred of homophobia in that statement you must be terminally retarded

Pathfinder is DnD 3.5 and thus sucks.

> Rogue and Bard exist in the same book
literally why

is there even such thing as a balanced RPG?

Are you just trying to bait someone into saying 4e?

4e is garbage because it’s so balanced

Even if we accept that, it's still a balanced RPG.

Board Fun Police and nu/tg/pol/.

...

Not the most balanced but the most fun. Moat other systems are for brainlets anf gurps is just not fun.