Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6964355" data-attributes="member: 996">Your belief is mistaken.&nbsp; There were certainly a few powers within a given source that were virtually-duplicated between two classes, but nothing near the number of spells classes had traditionally shared outright (and do so to an even greater extent in 5e).&nbsp; While 4e used a smaller number of mechanics, conditions, &amp; damage types than 3e, the many possible combinations of them, along with exception-based additions, produced thousands of unique 'powers' - which could be further cosmetically customized by changing flavor text (which may be what you're thinking of).4e was better-balance than D&amp;D has otherwise been, but no where near either the ideal/perfect state hypothesized for the sake of discussion by the OP, nor the degenerate state of total imbalance that you postulate.&nbsp; (Yes, imbalance, because meaningless cosmetic-only choices are as imbalanced as meaningless obvious-best choices make all others.)Well, OK, there is.&nbsp; But you can powergame other aspects of the game than just combat (cf 3.x 'Diplomancer' builds!). That's quite another issue, and it's debateable whether the preference is innate, or driven by how poorly D&amp;D has generally handled (and balanced PCs in) non-combat challenges.Y'know, it occurs to me that the OPs question was personal, and you're speaking for all 'powergamers.'&nbsp; There's not even a definitive meaning attached to it (for instance, I consider a powergamer to be like a 'power user' in the 90s, someone who can get the most out of a system - a label denoting ability, not motivation).Indeed, the desire to approach a game involving several other players in a way that allows only one of them to have fun with it is not amenable to balance in any sense.You don't have to dis-empower the rest of the table to get this bit, though.&nbsp; The fantasy genre offers many such opportunities.&nbsp; It did, but only for a few years - and you hated it.&nbsp; ;P&nbsp; &nbsp; (Actually, I know it's highly debatable, but I feel like 5e can work for a bit beyond 10th... and so could 3e, unmodified, if you had a strong DM and players who exercised some consideration and restraint.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6964355, member: 996"] Your belief is mistaken. There were certainly a few powers within a given source that were virtually-duplicated between two classes, but nothing near the number of spells classes had traditionally shared outright (and do so to an even greater extent in 5e). While 4e used a smaller number of mechanics, conditions, & damage types than 3e, the many possible combinations of them, along with exception-based additions, produced thousands of unique 'powers' - which could be further cosmetically customized by changing flavor text (which may be what you're thinking of). 4e was better-balance than D&D has otherwise been, but no where near either the ideal/perfect state hypothesized for the sake of discussion by the OP, nor the degenerate state of total imbalance that you postulate. (Yes, imbalance, because meaningless cosmetic-only choices are as imbalanced as meaningless obvious-best choices make all others.) Well, OK, there is. But you can powergame other aspects of the game than just combat (cf 3.x 'Diplomancer' builds!). That's quite another issue, and it's debateable whether the preference is innate, or driven by how poorly D&D has generally handled (and balanced PCs in) non-combat challenges. Y'know, it occurs to me that the OPs question was personal, and you're speaking for all 'powergamers.' There's not even a definitive meaning attached to it (for instance, I consider a powergamer to be like a 'power user' in the 90s, someone who can get the most out of a system - a label denoting ability, not motivation). Indeed, the desire to approach a game involving several other players in a way that allows only one of them to have fun with it is not amenable to balance in any sense. You don't have to dis-empower the rest of the table to get this bit, though. The fantasy genre offers many such opportunities. It did, but only for a few years - and you hated it. ;P (Actually, I know it's highly debatable, but I feel like 5e can work for a bit beyond 10th... and so could 3e, unmodified, if you had a strong DM and players who exercised some consideration and restraint.) [/QUOTE]

Verification