Search results

I've found that systems like RISUS and BASH lend themselves to this kind of play because there aren't as many rules governing the things that you can and cannot do. In RISUS for example, your description of your action can be as outlandish and crazy as you want it to be but you're not penalized...

IME a lot of people don't, especially if the campaign starts at 1st and doesn't seem likely to live past 5th. Past 5th, wizards and sorcerers are a lot more fun since their spells are both more useful and more plentiful (mostly more plentiful, b/c there are some really cool 1-2 level spells). I...

Yeah, or a crossbow. I see what others are saying now about HP inflation being part of the problem. If a wizard hit 30% of the time with a crossbow, and his 1d6 damage was signification relative to the monster's HP, then it wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, that's not the case in 3e. Things...

Ouch!

I think that, for better or worse, D&D has been moving more towards instant gratification since 3e (arguably since Skills & Powers). 4e is likely to further in this direction, with cool things at every level and the ability to always participate in the action at the table. I don't view this as a...

Hah, ditto :). I want to hear this one.

Precisely. And, perhaps as importantly, it feels much more wizardly to blast things with a ray of fire than to plunk them with a crossbow.

For me, cool = effective. That may or may not be damage. I think that outside of combat, this is currently possible. The fighter can put ranks in intimidate and play good cop, bad cop with the bard/cleric/wizard/etc. He's got an out of combat role. He's not great at it, but it gives him a...

Hey Quasqueton, hope things are going well. You make good points, why not just say something simple like: Well, the combat for the two PCs was a CR X, but the care that they took to conceal the camp helped them avoid (read overcome) a CR Y. That allows you to use the regular XP system without...

I think it's possible to have them both be able to make contributions to each situation and have those contributions be unique and at different power levels. The wizard will be better at defeating a magical threat, but the fighter won't be worthless, and vice versa for a melee threat. I could...

Er, I think you missed the point of the "fun" argument (at least the one I'm making). I don't think that high level fighters should be able to cast spells, or that high level casters should be capable of being as good as the fighter in melee (although this currently possible in 3e). My argument...

Wow with the negativity, but OK I'll bite. How is sleep any different? It means the wizard gets one shot the entire combat to be cool. And the ogre could make his save. It still means saving the spell in the hopes that it works, and doing nothing with a crossbow until then. I've been there and...

Yar, everything is speculation at this point. I doubt that everyone will be equally good at doing everything, I just hope that there's a reduction in the number of times where a player feels like they have no options.

I agree, and therefore my above 100% agreement is a little off. There are lots of things that I don't like, and therefore disallow, but I always work with my players if they really want some sort of replacement. Compromise is good.

QFT. ;)

Why does the wizard have to suck in order for the fighter to shine? Sure, that may be the way it's been done traditionally in D&D, and most everyone accepts it but not many people really like not being able to do anything. I would argue that it's possible to make it such that the wizard has...

Right, but firing into melee (in 3.5) is harder and requires specialized feats. With fighters up front, the opponent is usually in melee (-4 to hit) and may have cover. Many wizards have point blank/precise, but many would rather spend their precious feats elsewhere.

Nope. What I've been doing recently is asking my players, "Why do you want to play this character." If the answer is, "He'll have some cool abilities and I really dig the concept," then I OK it. If the answer is, "Because at 7th level, I can do 18,796 damage! OMG!!!!!!1111," then I deny it. Of...

Heck yeah!

Ditto, at this particular moment. Since my next campaign idea would do really well in either of those settings.