D&D General Weapons should break left and right

[Not a Decepticon]

I don’t even understand the reference.

 

[loverdrive]

Re: wizards

Ideally-ideally, I think wizards are aesthetically at their best as complete non-combatants, relying on rituals and strong magicks to do stuff from their towers, but that's for obvious reasons a pipe dream in dnd.

 

[Koloth]

Or just a gun, like Avatar in "Wizards".

Luger summoning 101. An old trick his mom taught him, IRC.

Hobbit and Disney Sword in the Stone for me. Which inclines me to think wizards use either a big sword or pull a rocket launcher out of their beard.

Bored Flack from Fineous Fingers fame. The metal minis had Bored Flack wielding something like a bazooka.

 

[James Gasik]

I don’t even understand the reference.

Ralph Bakshi's "Wizards"

Oops, Ninja'd.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Ralph Bakshi's "Wizards"

Oops, Ninja'd.

Never seen that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That sounds like you want the game to be badly designed and just offload the task of fixing it to homebrewers.

I want my game to care about reasonable simulation more than PC vs PC balance. That is not the same as badly designed, and I won't accept that claim at all.

There is a difference between being on plan B and being forced to stop playing the wizard you came to play and instead become something you never agreed or wanted to play. I suck at puzzle solving and mapping and would never want to be forced to do either of those because game mechanics told me I am no longer allowed to play wizard I came to the table to play, on my limited leisure time.

Does "playing your character" mean the same thing to you as casting constant spells at all time? It doesn't to me. Like I said, that seems more like a sorcerer thing, I class I always associated since 3.0 with Marvel's mutants.

That really feels like forcing caster to stop playing their character the moment they run out of arbitrary number, instead of making Fighter actually a good class that can do stuff other than swing sword.

Again, I don't believe running temporary out of magic equals no longer being able to play your character. Thst idea honestly mystifies me. And both fighters and wizards should IMO be able to do stuff beyond their primary combat function.

This is a mindset that is not fit to a collaborative storytelling an rpg is, but to a wargame. If your character is literally useless rando and you can throw them away once it breaks with no emotional attachment and they have no story you want to tell with them...then what's the point of playing an rpg? If I wanted to play a wargame, where I control pawns and pieces, I'd play a wargame.

As both I and @Lanefan have said, to you, previously, we don't believe collaborative storytelling is the primary purpose of RPGs. If we can't at least agree to disagree on that we're not likely to get very far.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So why should your very limited preference be the deciding factor in how the game is played or designed? I grew up with Slayers and Baldur's Gate 2, other people playing this game could grew up with Malazan Book of the Fallen or Avatar or with Doctor Strange comics or Harry Dresden books. Why is your nostalgia supposed to get preferential treatment?

Why should yours? Why can't multiple options be presented?

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Why should yours? Why can't multiple options be presented?

Because the way you are framing your position of what the game should be gives off strong "my way or highway" vibe to how the game would have to be designed to accomodate it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because the way you are framing your position of what the game should be gives off strong "my way or highway" vibe to how the game would have to be designed to accomodate it.

From my perspective you were doing the same. The fact that the current game apparently leans more towards your preferences doesn't change that, or make those preferences more valid than mine. That's all I've ever had to say on the subject, but people keep telling me I'm demanding everyone play my way. I want equality and evenhandedness.

 

[Umbran]

I want equality and evenhandedness.

No single game/product can handle all the commonly desired styles of play well - there are too many priorities that wind up in conflict.

Designers must make choices about what they want their games to do well, and what they are willing to sacrifice to get it.

It is not unlike cars - the engineering for carrying loads and towing large weights and the engineering for speed and maneuverability are fundamentally at odds, which is why you don't see hybrid engine Lamborghini sportscarminivanpickuptrucks.