Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fieari" data-source="post: 3921315" data-attributes="member: 16221">Balancing monsters against a party that is "fully rested" via per encounter abilities has me excited, as challenging my party was always difficult before... either they'd use resources but the fight itself would be easy, or I'd have to raise the challenge, and it's always tricky gaging how far to go.  So this has me really excited.Having the math work out to level 30 has me excited, and I can only hope the do as much play testing at the higher levels as they do at the lower levels to ensure this.The flavor... has me worried.  I don't like flavorful names for what should be generic character options.  I don't want golden wyvern whatevers, I want bland.  When the default is bland, flavor can be added easily.Removing, for most intents and purposes, the concept of spells... or at least spellbooks... that bothers me a lot.  On the one hand, I agree that wizards shouldn't take the shine away from, say, rogues.  On the other, taking away the concept that wizards can do anything if they just learn how... I don't like it.  There are better ways to make the rogue more worthwhile, not the least of which is to make the rogue better than the level equivalent magic.  Make spells usefulness the equivalent of a rogue much weaker than the rest of the party.  That sort of thing.  Weaken spells, buff the rogue.. don't take away spells entirely!And yet, I'm withholding judgment, because I like the concept of niches... balancing with psionics in mind in the future sounds like a good idea, and if that means enchanters have to be weaker... well, maybe.  I'll have to wait and see.</blockquote>

Verification