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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5838270" data-attributes="member: 87792">The thing is lots of people do pick the first three because that is the character they want to play.  However many, many more do not because what they want to play is a character who is cool in his own right - and is not Robin the Boy Hostage or Sidekick Man.  And there are those of us who stay away from the top tier options because, much as we love the concept, the execution would be bad for the game.  I'm a fan of the Batman Wizard, pulling out spells for contingencies.  I love the concept.  But last one I played was in a 4e game - and I retired him because he was running the DM ragged with his versatility.  The 3e magic users above all just makes the concept for me non-viable because it's far too strong.So because of the imbalance of 3.X, many so-called possible character concepts become highly undesirable.  I like the concept of BMX Bandit.  I like the concept of Angel Summoner.  But having one in the game makes playing the other ... undesirable.DPS does not break 3.X.  DPS takes work for minimal return (other than Hulking Hurlers - 50,000 damage per attack being possible with one of those at L20).  And over the years I've put a lot of work into optimising my favourite class.  The Bard.  Which isn't too much trouble because Bards are ... Bards.  (And actually pretty solidly in tier 3 - ahead of the non-casters).For that matter it's not exploits like Pun-Pun or the Locate City Bomb that break 3.X either.What it is is the sheer overpowered nature of some spells, and the spammability of items.  Oh, and the druid having two incredibly powrful class features (Wild Shape and a Pet).  Direct blast-mage damage is looking the wrong way.</blockquote>

Verification