Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Banshee16" data-source="post: 5296285" data-attributes="member: 7883">What I'm pointing out is what happened in my games.&nbsp; And I'm feeling like certain posters are telling me that what I experienced didn't happen, because it doesn't agree with their perception of what is supposed to happen.Other posters have come online, and pointed out that the arguments being used seem to be ignoring tricked out martial characters, in favour of the XYZ combinations being used by full casters.I'll absolutely agree that there are many threads about this, and there *have* been over the years.&nbsp; But I've never seen any of these threads involve all of the posters saying the same thing.&nbsp; Usually, it's a bunch of people disagreeing with each other, and talking about their favourite build, and ways of making an unkillable character.&nbsp; The fact that people argue about it so vociferously tells me the issue isn't cut and dry.&nbsp; If it wasn't, there would be no debate.As to &quot;pulling out&quot; the vow of poverty monk example, that's no more extreme than &quot;pulling out&quot; the example of a wizard using a specific and exact formula for spell selection and the manner in which they are used, and then insisting on the &quot;nova&quot; tactic, which not everybody follows.&nbsp; Regardless, it was a real example from my game.So were examples I could think of, of fighters, rangers, and rogues slaughtering mages before they could get all their spells off, making effective use of grappling and tripping attacks, and all kinds of other tactics that limited the ability of spellcasters to defend themselves.Wizards can be very powerful if they have several rounds to prepare, and get the jump on the other characters via high initiative rolls.&nbsp; *In my experience*, if they didn't get those conditions, then they were often at a disadvantage.It's a weird feeling I get in this discussion.&nbsp; Some people seem to argue that casters are so much&nbsp; more powerful than other character classes.....but then when options and legitimate tactics to limit or eliminate the caster are suggested, they turn around and say a game that used those tactics wouldn't be fun.&nbsp; If you're going to complain the characters are too powerful, you should be happy if people point out ways to control that power <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Banshee</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Banshee16, post: 5296285, member: 7883"] What I'm pointing out is what happened in my games. And I'm feeling like certain posters are telling me that what I experienced didn't happen, because it doesn't agree with their perception of what is supposed to happen. Other posters have come online, and pointed out that the arguments being used seem to be ignoring tricked out martial characters, in favour of the XYZ combinations being used by full casters. I'll absolutely agree that there are many threads about this, and there *have* been over the years. But I've never seen any of these threads involve all of the posters saying the same thing. Usually, it's a bunch of people disagreeing with each other, and talking about their favourite build, and ways of making an unkillable character. The fact that people argue about it so vociferously tells me the issue isn't cut and dry. If it wasn't, there would be no debate. As to "pulling out" the vow of poverty monk example, that's no more extreme than "pulling out" the example of a wizard using a specific and exact formula for spell selection and the manner in which they are used, and then insisting on the "nova" tactic, which not everybody follows. Regardless, it was a real example from my game. So were examples I could think of, of fighters, rangers, and rogues slaughtering mages before they could get all their spells off, making effective use of grappling and tripping attacks, and all kinds of other tactics that limited the ability of spellcasters to defend themselves. Wizards can be very powerful if they have several rounds to prepare, and get the jump on the other characters via high initiative rolls. *In my experience*, if they didn't get those conditions, then they were often at a disadvantage. It's a weird feeling I get in this discussion. Some people seem to argue that casters are so much more powerful than other character classes.....but then when options and legitimate tactics to limit or eliminate the caster are suggested, they turn around and say a game that used those tactics wouldn't be fun. If you're going to complain the characters are too powerful, you should be happy if people point out ways to control that power :) Banshee [/QUOTE]

Verification