Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="avin" data-source="post: 5781152" data-attributes="member: 6762">You describe a scene where the Fighter is the sidekick of a Wizard nuking the bad guy.You described what I should call tactical combat, not roleplaying (fighter flanking, wizard duking is not RP in my book). I can't agree with the notion roleplaying is "Wizards at high level are demigods and fighters must flank", because it was like worked on Lord of the Rings. I want Conan. I want 300. I want steampunk. I want Planescape. I want psionics. I want everybody being useful at table.I have no clue about what it's a CODzilla (really) <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I wanna tell you what happened around here.When 3E launched two friends of mine drop the game because their one-trick-wizards weren't as powerful as in 2E. They hate it. They hated Sorcereres being on PHB (go figure out that...). They drop the game.When 4E launched no friend of mine who played a Wizard like it, because they couldn't be the utility guy and best damage dealers in party, at the same time.They flat out told me that.I don't like the way 4E Wizards turned out, really, but the balance among classes is welcome at my table.See? A Dungeon Master is forced to create a monster immune to magic in order the Wizard don't play alone.Problem is: at high levels Gandalf don't shine "a lil too much". He owns enemies while others watch. I understand that some people are very fond of LOTR, Gandalf being "the guy" (he sure is) but there's more fantasy styles around, and D&DN isn't going to cater them all?No, this was not my point here.I will be glad if they play different.My point is: quadratic Wizards and linear Fighters is something I don't like it. I don't want to be the best, I want to be competitive. WIzards have all sorts of tricks, must they do the best damage dealers from a mile or Fighters can come just a little behind?And, please, damage? Tell me how many spells a Wizard or a Cleric have that emulate things Rogues and Fighters can do, better than them.And, by the way, I'm far from a D&D pro. I never did a min/max char, except for a STR 18 for a FTR or a CHA 18 for a Bard. One of my most known fighters was a cook <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />I'm looking for roleplaying in first place. If I'd want to min max I would run and grab a Wizard on 2E or maybe a monk in 3E, not a Fighter.I'm fine with different, heck, where do I sign? Let's just get rid of 2E and 3E level of power where casters solve everything alone at higher levels and don't push every effort to balance in DM's hands.But, let's get straight, IMO Wizards were overpowered on 2E and 3E, and a lot of people just don't wanna drop that bone.</blockquote>

Verification