Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jalkain" data-source="post: 935331" data-attributes="member: 2473">Has 3.5e really made the evoker non-viable?&nbsp; You're sure of that?Wonderful theory. And, I agree that it usually is more advantageous for a wizard to use save or effect spells than direct damage spells. However, if the 3 round firework display is less advantageous than a combination of Slow and crossbow bolts, I don't why you're so jubilant that the option is going away. If it sucked so badly, what do you gain from its cesation?I'm not jubilant, and I gain nothing.&nbsp; The thread title (and others like it) seem to suggest that all is doom and gloom for spell casters.&nbsp; I'm simply saying that I disagree, and explaining why.In 1e and 2e, however, they got to toss d6/level fireballs and cones of cold against monsters with unmodified d8 HD. I think high level wizards were too overpowered in those earlier editions; people miss not being able to destroy everything by themselves.&nbsp; 3e and 3.5e are much more balanced than those earlier editions.2e fighters fared rather poorly in comparison to wizards.&nbsp; Not to mention the fact that they were inferior to paladins and rangers.&nbsp; Now people have a reason to play a fighter, since they know that no-one can match the damage they can do against a big monster.And spellcasters still inflict the most total damage on groups of foes, using AOE spells.&nbsp; 3.5e won't stop you from inflicting substantial damage on groups of foes, it's just been toned down a bit.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jalkain, post: 935331, member: 2473"] Has 3.5e really made the evoker non-viable? You're sure of that? [B]Wonderful theory. And, I agree that it usually is more advantageous for a wizard to use save or effect spells than direct damage spells. However, if the 3 round firework display is less advantageous than a combination of Slow and crossbow bolts, I don't why you're so jubilant that the option is going away. If it sucked so badly, what do you gain from its cesation? [/B] I'm not jubilant, and I gain nothing. The thread title (and others like it) seem to suggest that all is doom and gloom for spell casters. I'm simply saying that I disagree, and explaining why. [B]In 1e and 2e, however, they got to toss d6/level fireballs and cones of cold against monsters with unmodified d8 HD. [/B] I think high level wizards were too overpowered in those earlier editions; people miss not being able to destroy everything by themselves. 3e and 3.5e are much more balanced than those earlier editions. 2e fighters fared rather poorly in comparison to wizards. Not to mention the fact that they were inferior to paladins and rangers. Now people have a reason to play a fighter, since they know that no-one can match the damage they can do against a big monster. And spellcasters still inflict the most total damage on groups of foes, using AOE spells. 3.5e won't stop you from inflicting substantial damage on groups of foes, it's just been toned down a bit. [/QUOTE]

Verification