Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrankTrollman" data-source="post: 1150830" data-attributes="member: 14225">Paladin has always been on the list - just that it sucks at level 6 instead of sucking at level 3. That's a big difference in many games - although of course in the long run it's not.Two reasons:1> It is always easier on a gaming group to add power than it is to take it away. That is, if you give a character too much bonus it's not a big deal when you have to take it away. When you nerf someone too hard it just breeds hard feelings.2> It is easier to modify the non-spellcasters than it is to modify the spellcasters. A warrior class has 20 levels which can have their abilities adjusted. The Spellcasters have hundreds - even thousands of spells available to them - each of which is available to be plugged in to a spellcaster at any relevent level.So it's easier on the gaming group and on the designer to increase the power of the single classed warrior rather than decrease the power of the single classed spellcaster. Really, once the infinite power loops are all closed for the spellcasters and their buff-tastic crap goes away - I'll be happy.That's not entirely true. While it is true that a Wizard continues to get more spells and that his spells become more powerful - there is a whole seperate issue where his lower level spells don't. A wizard experiences spell obsolescence, and a Barbarian's Uncanny Dodge never goes away.What this leads to, is the wizard spending a higher and higher proportion of its spells on buffs - because the spells become useless for anything else. That's also a problem - but one that I don't think can be as easily solved as the current basic power inequality.A Wizard keeps getting power at every level - but the rate of that growth is not itself expanding in any kind of regular fashion. However, when compared to warriors - whose rate of power growth decreases - it certainly seems to.-Frank</blockquote>

Verification