Quote Originally Posted by Ravens_cry View Post
Forgive this newbie, but why is balance so darn well important? I agree that every character should feel useful, contributing to the party. But Dungeons and Dragons is not primarily player verses player, but player's verses enviroment.
In PvP, balance is all important because the idea is to win by beating other players, and so skill of said player should be the only consideration. In PvE, winning is much fuzzier. There will be goals, but it will be a team effort. As long as each player is contributing to that goal, all is well in my view. There is no win condition. I agree 3.5 has issues with contribution balance, but too much of a obsession with balance, in my view, implies too much sameness.
D&D shouldn't be measured on a PvP scale, but the real problem is exactly when you consider PCs Vs Enviroment.
A pure meleer could be fine, lookin' the spellcasters doing cool things, if only he were the king of the fight. Sadly, the spellcaster have tons of options to render the meleers almost useless also in what is supposed to be their field. It's sad to be largely surpassed by the other pcs in your only little niche of competence, expecially if outside of combat you cannot contribute at all.
THIS is the problem.
Luckily, this is often a moot point, 'cause many groups play D&D the way it was intended by the "playtesters": sorcerers with fireball, clerics that heals in combat, etc., and the big holes of the rules don't show.