D&D 3E/3.5 4E Simulationism: Did 3.5E Really Do That Good of a Job?

[Kishin]

That is a positive factor, yes. I have an entirely new set of contradictory rules to justify.

Or you could abandon some of these wildly simulationist-gone-overboard notions that are wracking your brain and concentrate on telling a good story and presenting exciting challenges. It seems like you are just making things way too difficult for yourself.

The mechanical aspects of the world don't have to be its ultimate physical reality for the world to be immersive and for the players to delight in it.

 

[VannATLC]

Feyaday cages should keep those Eladrin in prison.

Kill yourself.

Finally.

Sheesh. Took long enough.

There are a very few issues that I think will require careful treading in 4ed. By acknowledging that the PCs are a level above the majority of the world, most of these go away.

Hopefully, they've dealt with some of the really world-breaking things from 3.5, like the economy >.<

 

[Celtavian]

re

I agree with you. DnD has never been a good simulationist game. GURPS is probably the best on the market. Hero System is better than DnD. I don't know Rolemaster.

But yeah, 3.5 didn't do any better job. I actually like some of the 4E mechanics. I just wish they hadn't changed so much of what I like about DnD.

The biggest problem I have with 4E is the dumbing down of the spell system. I have always loved the variety of spells that casters can use. It doesn't seem present in the new game. Maybe that will please more people than it will displease, but it was the major deciding factor in my choosting not to upgrade.

IMO, casters should be the most powerful class in the game. I liked how they progressed from being a weak class at low level, to being the arcane bad ass you expect a wizard to be at high level. I look at the fantasy books I have read and rarely are the warriors the equal of casters. I like it that way. I would have preferred it stayed that way.

 

[DandD]

I look at the fantasy books I have read and rarely are the warriors the equal of casters. I like it that way. I would have preferred it stayed that way.

That's good for the books you like. But for a game, that absolutely stinks and has no place to stay. Wizard-players having to terribly suck early levels and Fighter-players not having any fun later anymore is something that is detriment to the enjoyment of everybody at the game table.

 

[Kishin]

IMO, casters should be the most powerful class in the game. I liked how they progressed from being a weak class at low level, to being the arcane bad ass you expect a wizard to be at high level. I look at the fantasy books I have read and rarely are the warriors the equal of casters. I like it that way. I would have preferred it stayed that way.

So what do you say to all the people playing non casters?

Sorry, you guys don't get to have fun or be as meaningful anymore, the wizard and the cleric will take it from here?

Making sure everyone has a meaningful role to play is important. In fact, its probably the most important thing.

Also, casters are never a weak class. Even at 1st level. Not with things like Sleep available.

 

[Ahglock]

I agree with you. DnD has never been a good simulationist game. GURPS is probably the best on the market. Hero System is better than DnD. I don't know Rolemaster.

But yeah, 3.5 didn't do any better job. I actually like some of the 4E mechanics. I just wish they hadn't changed so much of what I like about DnD.

The biggest problem I have with 4E is the dumbing down of the spell system. I have always loved the variety of spells that casters can use. It doesn't seem present in the new game. Maybe that will please more people than it will displease, but it was the major deciding factor in my choosting not to upgrade.

IMO, casters should be the most powerful class in the game. I liked how they progressed from being a weak class at low level, to being the arcane bad ass you expect a wizard to be at high level. I look at the fantasy books I have read and rarely are the warriors the equal of casters. I like it that way. I would have preferred it stayed that way.

I agree with half of what you said. I do like the variety of spells in previous editions. I just don't want caster to be the most powerful class. In previous editions until really high levels they weren't more powerful in my games. I wanted something different from 4e than it seems to be delivering. Instead of the epic nerf smack of wizards I wanted the epic buffing of every other class. I wanted warriors to be cutting castle walls in half at the heroic level as a per encounter ability. Instead I get trip and weak wizards.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I wanted warriors to be cutting castle walls in half at the heroic level as a per encounter ability.

With the possible exception of truly epic-level play, D&D's never been about that--nor should it be, since setting the baseline power level so high would dramatically reduce the sorts of games that could be played.

But that said, it sounds like you might have a blast with Exalted. If uber-high-powered fantasy is your style, that game might be more to your taste than any edition of D&D.

 

[Simon Marks]

IMO, casters should be the most powerful class in the game. I liked how they progressed from being a weak class at low level, to being the arcane bad ass you expect a wizard to be at high level. I look at the fantasy books I have read and rarely are the warriors the equal of casters. I like it that way. I would have preferred it stayed that way.

Have ... you played Ars Magica?

By the by, in a "Class n' Level" game one of the ideas (I guess) is that for an equal amount of XP each class should by roughly equal.

Want Casters to be the most powerful class in the game? I have 2 simple houserules that will work for any game, at any time.
1) Cap non-casters (in 4e at 10th level, 3.5 at 6th)
2) Give caster twice the xp

Same result.

 

[Celtavian]

re

So what do you say to all the people playing non casters?

Sorry, you guys don't get to have fun or be as meaningful anymore, the wizard and the cleric will take it from here?

Making sure everyone has a meaningful role to play is important. In fact, its probably the most important thing.

Also, casters are never a weak class. Even at 1st level. Not with things like Sleep available.

Kishin,

When I say most powerful, I mean that a prepared wizard can defeat almost any other class in the game in a toe to toe fight.

In a standard run of the mill game, the lion's share of the damage comes from the inexhaustible melee damage that a warrior type can output. That becomes quite poweful at high levels, especially with feats like Cleave and Two-Weapon fighting.

But a wizard should always be able to defeat a warrior type one on one, unless that warrior has a magic item or something to separate the gap. Magic should allow them to defend themselves and keep themselves clear of melee battle. That is the reason the caster will win.

Warriors can generally output damage on par with casters. It's the fact that casters can stay free of melee combat that gives them the advantage. So when I say wizards are more powerful, it doesn't mean in terms of raw damage or effectiveness. There are plenty of encounters where a wizard is nearly useless like against foes with high MR, energy resistance, or powerful immunities. Then the warrior shines.

The warrior usually does more raw damage than the wizard. So there is a balance. But in a one on one fight a wizard should win. They have more options available, and if you study magic, that is at should be. Just as a warrior should have alot more hit points and if it gets ahold of the wizard, should be able to rip him up.

 

[Celtavian]

re

That's good for the books you like. But for a game, that absolutely stinks and has no place to stay. Wizard-players having to terribly suck early levels and Fighter-players not having any fun later anymore is something that is detriment to the enjoyment of everybody at the game table.

Standard trope of fantasy novels. Gandalf was the strongest in Lord of the Rings. Raistlin in Dragonlance. Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk both ruled by wizards. Willow had a wizard as the most powerful figures. I can't think of many fantasy novels where wizards or wizard types didn't rule the roost.

I agree. Not real fun in a game, but I don't consider DnD a game in the normal sense of the word. I consider it an exercise in joint storytelling. Which means that the goal is not for every class to be of equal power, but for every player to have an equal part in defeating the antagonist. That is the job of the DM. I make sure to give every character a chance to shine.

Wizards need help as much as any other class. Though they may be able to win in a one on one fight, that doesn't matter much when a Balor or something of the kind of coming after you.