Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="erleni" data-source="post: 5954873" data-attributes="member: 69422">I don't think Tony wants magic users only (but I guess he'll come back on that).&nbsp;On my side I think that saying that magic-users can do anything because they have magic and fighters cannot because they don't, is really the root of the worst things we have seen in D&amp;D so far.And saying that magic resistance or incredibly low saving throws are what is needed to challenge wizards is silly too. I saw that happening in 2e where the only thing that kept my fighter on par with the spellcasters was that it was a drow and had an incredibly high magic resistance. Well I hated that. It was like playing a trump card. That's the same reason I hated many 2e spells that were &quot;I win&quot; buttons unless your opponent had the right &quot;trump card&quot;, turning combat into rock-paper-scissors stuff.&nbsp;Fighters should be able to stand up on their own. They did it in 4th edition so we know they can do it, and they even partially did it in 3rd edition albeit under the form of the Warblade class.&nbsp;If you want a high &quot;ceiling&quot; on magic-users power then you need superhuman fighters to make them worthwhile. In 2e I've seen our wizard forcecaging an enemy (with the &quot;bars&quot; version), surrounding the cage with a wall of force and then conjuring water to fill up the wall-of-force container to drown him. That was really sad and reall showed the dichotomy between casters and others.On the other hand you can pull the reins on the wizard, but that will mean stripping down its abilities quite a lot.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="erleni, post: 5954873, member: 69422"] I don't think Tony wants magic users only (but I guess he'll come back on that). On my side I think that saying that magic-users can do anything because they have magic and fighters cannot because they don't, is really the root of the worst things we have seen in D&D so far. And saying that magic resistance or incredibly low saving throws are what is needed to challenge wizards is silly too. I saw that happening in 2e where the only thing that kept my fighter on par with the spellcasters was that it was a drow and had an incredibly high magic resistance. Well I hated that. It was like playing a trump card. That's the same reason I hated many 2e spells that were "I win" buttons unless your opponent had the right "trump card", turning combat into rock-paper-scissors stuff. Fighters should be able to stand up on their own. They did it in 4th edition so we know they can do it, and they even partially did it in 3rd edition albeit under the form of the Warblade class. If you want a high "ceiling" on magic-users power then you need superhuman fighters to make them worthwhile. In 2e I've seen our wizard forcecaging an enemy (with the "bars" version), surrounding the cage with a wall of force and then conjuring water to fill up the wall-of-force container to drown him. That was really sad and reall showed the dichotomy between casters and others. On the other hand you can pull the reins on the wizard, but that will mean stripping down its abilities quite a lot. [/QUOTE]

Verification