Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How Important is Magic to Dungeons and Dragons? - Third Edition vs Fourth Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 4785494" data-attributes="member: 80487"><p>I don't remember all the details of 3E (in which I played a barbarian), but I'm pretty sure it made life easier for magic-users/wizards in a lot of ways. And although it was not exactly a rule, I saw a tendency to make sure that "The Party" was all pretty nearly the same level.</p><p></p><p>(In AD&D, "an adventure for characters levels 9-14" means that the party members might reasonably encompass that range at one time. As I understand it, that note on a 3E module means that the party should <em>start</em> at the low end, and <em>reach</em> the high end by the adventure's conclusion.)</p><p></p><p>In 4E, "leveling up" is so nearly an entitlement, a reward for merely marking time, that the DMG goes so far as to suggest that even players who <em>don't show up to play</em> could get it "on schedule". (DMG, p. 121) It notes that "there's nothing wrong with" characters getting XP only for encounters in which they participate. On the other hand, it is claimed that: <em>The game works better in a lot of ways if you just assume that the characters all gain experience and advance levels at the same rate, even if their players miss a session</em>.</p><p></p><p>In AD&D, one had to score points by accomplishment -- and defeating monsters was at best icing on the cake. The cake, the goal, the home run, the perhaps literal gold ring ... was securing treasure.</p><p></p><p>Success required not "skill ratings" on a character sheet but actual skill on the part of players, not least of which was knowing how and when to minimize reliance on the luck of the dice.</p><p></p><p>There was a balance of risk and reward, great defeat or great glory for those who dared great undertakings. A first-level character joining an expedition of 4th-level heroes (actual level title for fighters) was very likely to get killed -- but survival would probably mean gaining 2nd level in a single session. (And if he's able to keep up, then by the time he's 4th, they'll at most be 5th.)</p><p></p><p>In that context, choosing to play a magic-user was to choose a strategy of high risk commensurate with the potential great reward down the line. It called for a more demanding skill set than playing a fighter or cleric.</p><p></p><p>The cleric might have an edge over the fighter in the early game, but in the "late game" of high levels and military-political strategy that tended to reverse. The cleric got a leg up in establishing a stronghold, but even the magic-user pulled ahead in hit points. Thieves were always fairly weak in straight-up combat, but gained levels rapidly (despite some drag in training costs) and were rather "jacks of all trades" even if masters of none but their own stealthy craft.</p><p></p><p>Non-humans started with advantages, but their chief one -- multiclassing -- slowed advancement (which was capped in classes other than thief, or assassin for half-orcs, and for half-elves druid). In the long run, humans outshone them. The limitations, however -- especially on halflings -- were ultimately matters less of game balance per se than of humanocentrism. That rationale was made quite clear in the DMG.</p><p></p><p>Paladins and rangers advancing to high enough levels acquired some spell-casting along with other powers. Besides the rarity of ability scores required, strict rules of conduct limited their frequency. Monks were both rare and -- like magic-users -- a challenge to get through lower levels to the ones in which they really stood out as powerful.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 4785494, member: 80487"] I don't remember all the details of 3E (in which I played a barbarian), but I'm pretty sure it made life easier for magic-users/wizards in a lot of ways. And although it was not exactly a rule, I saw a tendency to make sure that "The Party" was all pretty nearly the same level. (In AD&D, "an adventure for characters levels 9-14" means that the party members might reasonably encompass that range at one time. As I understand it, that note on a 3E module means that the party should [i]start[/i] at the low end, and [i]reach[/i] the high end by the adventure's conclusion.) In 4E, "leveling up" is so nearly an entitlement, a reward for merely marking time, that the DMG goes so far as to suggest that even players who [I]don't show up to play[/I] could get it "on schedule". (DMG, p. 121) It notes that "there's nothing wrong with" characters getting XP only for encounters in which they participate. On the other hand, it is claimed that: [I]The game works better in a lot of ways if you just assume that the characters all gain experience and advance levels at the same rate, even if their players miss a session[/I]. In AD&D, one had to score points by accomplishment -- and defeating monsters was at best icing on the cake. The cake, the goal, the home run, the perhaps literal gold ring ... was securing treasure. Success required not "skill ratings" on a character sheet but actual skill on the part of players, not least of which was knowing how and when to minimize reliance on the luck of the dice. There was a balance of risk and reward, great defeat or great glory for those who dared great undertakings. A first-level character joining an expedition of 4th-level heroes (actual level title for fighters) was very likely to get killed -- but survival would probably mean gaining 2nd level in a single session. (And if he's able to keep up, then by the time he's 4th, they'll at most be 5th.) In that context, choosing to play a magic-user was to choose a strategy of high risk commensurate with the potential great reward down the line. It called for a more demanding skill set than playing a fighter or cleric. The cleric might have an edge over the fighter in the early game, but in the "late game" of high levels and military-political strategy that tended to reverse. The cleric got a leg up in establishing a stronghold, but even the magic-user pulled ahead in hit points. Thieves were always fairly weak in straight-up combat, but gained levels rapidly (despite some drag in training costs) and were rather "jacks of all trades" even if masters of none but their own stealthy craft. Non-humans started with advantages, but their chief one -- multiclassing -- slowed advancement (which was capped in classes other than thief, or assassin for half-orcs, and for half-elves druid). In the long run, humans outshone them. The limitations, however -- especially on halflings -- were ultimately matters less of game balance per se than of humanocentrism. That rationale was made quite clear in the DMG. Paladins and rangers advancing to high enough levels acquired some spell-casting along with other powers. Besides the rarity of ability scores required, strict rules of conduct limited their frequency. Monks were both rare and -- like magic-users -- a challenge to get through lower levels to the ones in which they really stood out as powerful. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How Important is Magic to Dungeons and Dragons? - Third Edition vs Fourth Edition
Top