Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 5522826" data-attributes="member: 17106">No.There are too many defenses against magic, and my players aren't in to the really abusive spells. I've always tried to push the nonmagic classes forward in my houserules, but even before I implemented most of them, I don't remember casters dominating. Players frequently didn't want to do the amount of work it took to research a caster, and the challenges I present are sufficiently unpredictable and reactive that it's hard to plan for them.My first 3.0 campaign, the most memorable character was a rogue; the others that were effective/interesting were a psion and ranger.My next campaign, the most memorable character was definitely a fighter, who was played into epic levels. There was also a sorcerer who later became a deity.My next campaign was all over the map with casters and fighters and had many characters overall. A cleric with a very generous prestige class did a lot, but so did several fighters, a sorcerer, a DMPC rogue, an invisible stalker, an assassin, and so on...Another campaign revolved around a cleric, a monk, and a multiclassed warlock/rogue/prestige character, all of whom were good.Since then, it's been a mix, people are taking hybrid classes or multiclassing. My current campaign includes what might be the first wizard I've ever seen played that wasn't weak, a beginner playing a druid reasonably well, and an effective two-weapon ranger.In my occasional exploits as a PC, my best character was probably a rogue, followed by a druid. The most powerful character I had (somewhat unintentionally) was a shifter.We've had a lot of good druids over the years, and one good cleric, and a couple of decent sorcerers, but by no means have casters dominated. In my experience, every character fills a role; fighters are weak without casters, casters are weak without fighters. The team is what is strong.</blockquote>

Verification