Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendant (3.5)

Belen

Legend
The overall picture for the casting classes seems to be grim. From what we have seen to date, the melee types are getting a significant boost in personal power, yet the casters, who rely on spells, are getting nerfed. In an attempt to balance excesses on the part of some powergamers, all casters seem to suffer.

Spells are a casters stock-in-trade, so why are the spells themselves being nerfed? I see a lot of people argue that fighters can do nothing except fight. This is blantantly untrue. Just because most people choose to turn their fighters into combat monsters alone, does not mean that a fighter cannot choose to be more.

Why can't fighters place a higher stat in Wis, Int, or Cha? They could certainly have more roleplaying reward by doing so. In my experience however, people who play fighters always place the highest stats in the combat stats, then whine because they can do nothing outside of combat. That is a matter of CHOICE! A fighter can have a 12 str, and a 16 cha and still be a very viable combat character with all their feats. Instead, we get a lot of people moaning about the casters doing everything while a fighter sits back behind the scenes.

A fighter can also choice to take items that are more rp oriented. Want to fly? Winged boots etc. They do not always have to focus on combat items. I just see no excuse for the moaners to play a fighter outside the box.

Spells are a casters entire existence. They pay for versatility with low hit points, lower AC, and less fort/ref saves. How often do those wizards save versus breath weapon? A dragon's initial attack will one round a wizard. In fact, surprise encounters can easily spell the doom of a wizard. By 12th level every other class can take 70 damage in a surprise attack, EXCEPT the arcane casters. Why? Because a arcane caster still has to prep for combat.

The wizard in my group is always the last person to be effective. Low hp means that the first thing a caster thinks of in combat is protection. Maybe all of the melee crowd should remember that it is the melee types who punish the enemy. It only looks like casters defeat the momsters because they get involved after the melee types have dished it out! Even with 3e haste, a caster is still not effective until round two. In my experience, a combat is over 60% of the time by round 3!

Now, let's look at the nerfing of 3.5:

Haste: Melee buff (sorry, but useless to casters)

Disintigrate: Harm now does more damage. Don't forget that it is a fort. save, so even in original format a melee type usually saves!

Polymorph self: Sucks if the party has no rogue now. Duration to short to be useful outside of combat or a quick getaway.

Bull's Str- Useless now. Unless the melee types want a caster to not get into combat until 4 or 5 rounds later. Don't expect mages to enter melee for that touch spell! How can you expect a 3rd level mage with 12 hp to survive entering a fray in order to touch an ally!?

This list can be continued, but I just find a very disturbing trend here. The designers want to emphasize personal abilities huh? Yet mages have NO personal abilities outside of spells and spells seem to be nerfed! The spells are being designed to be useful in combat only and then not as useful as a sword wielder.

Finally just remember that an anti-magic field turns a mage into little more than a high level commoners, while a fighter always has a sword and their non-supernatural feats.

Am I the only person to have the feeling that casters are no support only rather than a viable PC that could shine just as much as a melee type?

Please feel free to discuss. I do not mind if some of you think me wrong...let's just keep it civilized.

Dave
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Nope. In my opinion, Dave, you're really jumping the gun, leaping to conclusions, and.. err.. hurdling the flumph. There isn't going to be any mass exodus away from spellcasters. They're still as viable, and fun to play, as ever.
 

Belen, you are absolutely right. What to do? Vote with your wallet. DON'T BUY IT!! It is your right not to accept a product you're not happy with. $$$ is the only language WoTC (or any company for that matter) understands.
 
Last edited:

My wife is building a new character for our game because her old character got up close with a barbarian grimlock crit.

Anyway, for her first 3.5 char she choose a cleric.

And this is a person who almost exclusively plays rogues, fighters and paladins.
 

I really don't see the problem. All of the spells you listed as being "useless" now are hardly useless in 3.5. I never liked Haste bestowing an extra casting per round on spellcasters- it simply seemed like too much (esp with those two fireball a round wizards). I like the new disintigrate too- save or die spells have always been game killers, and too random IMO. Polymorph has been reduced in power quite a bit, but the old duration of 1 hour per level was far too long and lead to characters treating the spell like a crutch. And I'm SO happy that they reduced the stat buff spells to 1 min per level. IMO people abused those spells like crazy- having all-day buffs in place. The spells are better guaged for power now- you just cast a stat buff before you enter combat (although it could be troublesome in a surprise situation, but then again, being ambushed should be dangerous, not an inconvenience).

Of course, if you don't like the ways the new rules are written, simply house rule them they way you like them. No one is stopping you.
 


Dave, did you start playing with 3rd Ed? If so, I think I can understand your concerns.

Because 3.5 is actually taking a step backward in "feel."

In 1st and 2nd Ed, the rules were written so that low level, and even some mid level, mages were 5th-wheels in a fight - it didn't really matter if they were there or not. But high level mages (and in 1st and 2nd, high level was actually about 9+) had absolutely no equal. In combat or out of combat, they ruled the roost, because their higher level spells could not be matched in damage capability, even by extremely competent warriors with massive Str boosters.

So spells being nerfed are having an effect of relegating low and mid level mages to the lower echelons. High level mages - replete with tons of save or die spells, still rule the roost. Especially if they are well prepared with a good spell selection.
 

BelenUmeria said:
Am I the only person to have the feeling that casters are no support only rather than a viable PC that could shine just as much as a melee type?

Probably not, since this exact same topic (with the same "Melee Ascendant" title) came up a month or two ago.

First, I think that it would take an entire book (not just a post or even a thread) to do a serious analysis of balance issues in 3E and 3.5E. It's just too big an issue to handle; usually it's better to just playtest, which we can't really do until the new books are released.

As for the spells you mentioned...

The damage done to Haste in 3E has been repaired, in my opinion. There's a feat for casting two spells in a round. With this spell, a wizard could conceivably cast three, which is just not fair to anyone else playing the game.

Disintigrate was always a little too powerful (certainly in comparison to non-spellcasting classes).

Polymorph self? Get a druid.

Bull's Strength (and others) are not "useless." These spells are just no longer the default all-day buff.

The trends I see so far are:

1. Attenuation of magic's superiority (and hopefully a return to 'magic as mysterious force' rather than 3E's 'magic as science').

2. "Balancing" of wizards with other classes.

I think it's short-sighted and half-baked to declare wizards powerless or "the last to be effective" because they can no longer abuse the rules with "must-have" spells. The sheer variety of spells available to casters, and the myriad combinations that can be devised by any spell-casting PC worth his salt, make the wizard a very powerful and effective class to play.

"Nerfing" half-a-dozen spells doesn't pull the wizard's fangs--and only thinking could make it so.

And as for that anti-magic field...I believe in 3.5 your wizard will still be able to step outside the field and teleport away. Where's your fighter then?

Fondly,
Thomas Cashel Fitzmaurice O'Boyle O'Flynn
 

You know, it's only natural. The number of dudes that whined constantly that "magic is too powerful" was impressive. Usually, their argumentation revolved around the fact that a wizard that would know all spells, have them all prepared, and may cast them all an infinite number of time; is unbalanced. Duh.
 

Remove ads

Top