D&D 5E cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?

[Argyle King]

Being lazy, and not feeling like doing a lot of quotes, I just have this to add:

You did not need to worry about damage as a wizard (I personally highly preferred the sorcerer, but the wizard was mentioned by name so...) I typically used spells which would effectively bypass the HP system. You could also bypass SR if you were creative. One of my favorite examples at higher levels was to create a planar gate to a plane which would be harmful to the intended target. Afterwards, cast reverse gravity and force them into the gate. "See ya later."

At this point in time, my memory of 3rd Edition isn't fresh enough to recall other examples, but I remember there being other similar ways which I liked to use my spells.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But, OTOH, if you look at virtually every high level module out there, the first section you're going to see is how they nerf casters. That, right there, shows to me that there is a problem that should have been addressed a long time ago.

Such as, I dunno ...

"It is impregnated with strong anti-magics which prevent its detection or removal or change to another form or substance."

"It cannot be magically detected, nor will it open by physical or magical means . . ."

"Detect invisibility or any other sort of searching except by careful feeling will be useless."

"No form of magic will detect it, save the gem of seeing."

"Anybody poking around the Tomb in Astral or Ethereal form has a 1 in 6 chance of attracting a Type I - IV demon."

You know, modern module design.

 

[Dice4Hire]

The designers scrapped the system and made one with balance as the primary goal, because the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Once again I never had a problem playing fighters. Pathfinder fixed the disparity as well, and did what I consider a better job of it.

If you saw no problem with fighters, there was nothing for pathfinder to fix.

However if you did, Pathfinder fixed nothing. That was one of the big things I looked at in the Pathfinder rules, but it was not there. Fighters got more tricks, they might be better, but the base problems I saw in every group I ran in 3.5 was not fixed.


Of course your opinion and my opinion, but I'll bet a lot more people share my opinion fighters needed help.

 

[Pentius]

Being lazy, and not feeling like doing a lot of quotes, I just have this to add:

You did not need to worry about damage as a wizard (I personally highly preferred the sorcerer, but the wizard was mentioned by name so...) I typically used spells which would effectively bypass the HP system. You could also bypass SR if you were creative. One of my favorite examples at higher levels was to create a planar gate to a plane which would be harmful to the intended target. Afterwards, cast reverse gravity and force them into the gate. "See ya later."

At this point in time, my memory of 3rd Edition isn't fresh enough to recall other examples, but I remember there being other similar ways which I liked to use my spells.

Yeah, I remember when my Druid started getting powerful(7ish) and the Dm and I started the arms race. He'd throw out a CR11 enemy with Spell Immunity, I'd use Summon Nature's Ally. He'd do it again, I dropped it down a pit with stone shape. It wasn't long before I realized I kinda didn't want the rest of the character's career to be an arms race, so I just stopped being clever or creative at all, which was worse. It was one of those things that was never an issue before I saw it, but once I saw it, it never went away.

 

[Lanefan]

The issue gets exagerated when the noise on the internet often ran, that if you were the player that played the fighter you were having ABSOLUTELY NO FUN. It was HORRIBLE... EVERYONE else has fun except for me. It would have been more of an issue in a player vs. player game I suppose.

Heh. I beg to differ.

Best 3e character I ever had was an arcane caster, single-class; my attempt to make a 1e illusionist using 3e rules.

Party's about 10th-11th level, she pissed off one of the party's fighters once too often and he turned on her.

Losing that initiative roll was the last thing she ever did.

He put her down unconscious in one round, killed her in the next, and she never came back.

In the greater game she certainly had more answers and things she could do than he did, but when it came down to party infighting it was pretty much 50-50 - win initiative and you survive.

Lan-"RIP Appppil Pagey"-efan

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Losing that initiative roll was the last thing she ever did.

He put her down unconscious in one round,

He put you down unconscious in one hit?

Or were you standing right next to the meatbag when you decided to piss him off?

 

[Lanefan]

For the past few years, people have been telling us that WOTC was fixing something that didn't need fixing. In this thread you can see the same claims being made.

Not by me.

I've maintained for a long time that with 4e WotC took something that needed fixing and succeeded only in breaking it further.

Lan-"Pathfinder broke it further too, only they broke different bits than WotC did"-efan

 

[JamesonCourage]

Ok, fair enough:

In other words, the problem isn't with the system, it's with how the system is used.

Again, no problem with the system, it's a playstyle problem.

Again, the problem doesn't exist in the system, it's a playstyle issue.

There's three so far. Would you like me to find more?

So, if the problem isn't systemic, why isn't Paizo being criticised for fixing a non-existent problem, the same way that WOTC gets criticised?

As far as I can tell, they're saying that the problem doesn't exist with certain playstyles. How is that saying that "that there is no problem with the mechanics" as you claim others have?

As far as I can tell from those quotes, they're saying, "we don't have those problems." You're saying that they're saying, "those problems don't exist." Where did they say that?

Here's what you've claimed:

But, again, good fix/bad fix is not what's being argued.

Throughout this thread you and others have been stating that there is no problem with the mechanics. That every edition, other than 4e, the fighter has no balance issues with the caster.

Here's what the two people you've quoted have said:

Hmm, while I do not want to drag this into another Fighter/Wizard debate, the people who keep claiming this should realize that this problem did not occur for everybody.

It all depends on the campaign,adventure design, and group dynamic.

If the GM allows the so called '15 minute adventuring day' then it can be that the wizard is over powered.

[SNIP]

If not for that one store game group I would not even believe in the 'fifteen minute adventuring day', because otherwise I would never have experienced it. I would note it down in the same category as the golf bag of weapons, roll my eyes, and move on. And a lot of folks haven't experienced it. It is more commonly bandied about than experienced.

Both of the above quotes admit to potential problems in the very same quote you linked me to. They do not say, as you claim they do, "that there is no problem with the mechanics." If you can find me some quotes on that where multiple people have been saying that there are no faults with the mechanics (you said "Throughout this thread you and others have been stating that there is no problem with the mechanics"), I'd be interested in seeing it. So far, I haven't seen that.

As always, play what you like

 

[Lanefan]

He put you down unconscious in one hit?

Or were you standing right next to the meatbag when you decided to piss him off?

He had some sort of trick where he could move 20' or so to get to me and still get in a couple of attacks - which is all it took since my AC was kinda pathetic and he was something like +20 on damage...

Lanefan

 

[Mournblade94]

There's three so far. Would you like me to find more?

So, if the problem isn't systemic, why isn't Paizo being criticised for fixing a non-existent problem, the same way that WOTC gets criticised?

Pathfinder did not FIX it in the way 4e did. They made fighters cooler, where 4e nerfed wizards completely, and in fact made everyone a wizard. just some spells are called powers.

So if Pathfinder "fixed" anything they did it in a more acceptable way. Paizo did an acceptable fix. Wotc did not.* That is all there is too it.
* Not saying that as a universal statement