Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5884433" data-attributes="member: 35909">No.&nbsp; This post is so incredibly utterly wrong in every possible way.2E casting was not better balanced, the spells were even MORE powerful or vaguely defined.&nbsp; They just had some stupid random insane negatives that could hit you.&nbsp; Whatever.&nbsp; Till it hits, nothing's happened.&nbsp; After it does; roll a new character.&nbsp; You'll still be rolling new characters less often than the big stupid fighter who's job is to act as a speed bump to the monsters.&nbsp; Disruption was more common, but I've seen plenty of spell disruption in 3E if the other side is willing to use the ready system - which was designed partly FOR this purpose...Magic Items help the noncasters more than the casters, since casters actually have their spells to fall back on.&nbsp; Let's put this in simple terms: What is a more significant shift in power?&nbsp; A country going from 0 nuclear weapons to 25 nuclear weapons, or a country going from 25 nuclear weapons to 50?&nbsp; Magic items give noncasters access to stuff they simply DID NOT HAVE before, and they get the same wealth to spend on them as the casters do, and Use Magic Device does exist.&nbsp; The only problem with magic item creation is only casters can do it.&nbsp; I'd like to see feats to let mundanes craft magic items, at least arms and armor.&nbsp; Limiting or doing away with magic items is the single surest way to make the noncasters go from underpowered to completely unplayable.Such an initiative system would have its own drawbacks.&nbsp; Don't think anyone wants to see the mage/preist trying to heal an ally that desperately needs it get disrupted.&nbsp; Binary is not a balance solution.&nbsp; It just means the spell's either overpowered (binary = 1; casting went off) or completely worthless (binary = 0; it got disrupted, or if an all-or-nothing effect, was saved against).&nbsp; That's pretty damn unfun.&nbsp; I'd rather the spells just be toned down a bit/bunch instead.I agree with common sense and limits...but your example is the worst possible example of how to do that imaginable.&nbsp; First off; a wizard doesn't teleport somewhere hostile/unknown alone.&nbsp; The whole party's going with.&nbsp; &quot;The party teleports into the side of a mountain.&nbsp; You're all dead.&quot;Awesome balance there, d00d!Like I said above, this sort of &quot;balance&quot; is bs, and striking it from the game was a great decision 3E made.&nbsp; Especially since it is a game and thus death is meaningless (raise or make a new character), balancing spells with unlikely but horrifically catastrophic repurcussions is dumb.Fixed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="StreamOfTheSky, post: 5884433, member: 35909"] No. This post is so incredibly utterly wrong in every possible way. 2E casting was not better balanced, the spells were even MORE powerful or vaguely defined. They just had some stupid random insane negatives that could hit you. Whatever. Till it hits, nothing's happened. After it does; roll a new character. You'll still be rolling new characters less often than the big stupid fighter who's job is to act as a speed bump to the monsters. Disruption was more common, but I've seen plenty of spell disruption in 3E if the other side is willing to use the ready system - which was designed partly FOR this purpose... Magic Items help the noncasters more than the casters, since casters actually have their spells to fall back on. Let's put this in simple terms: What is a more significant shift in power? A country going from 0 nuclear weapons to 25 nuclear weapons, or a country going from 25 nuclear weapons to 50? Magic items give noncasters access to stuff they simply DID NOT HAVE before, and they get the same wealth to spend on them as the casters do, and Use Magic Device does exist. The only problem with magic item creation is only casters can do it. I'd like to see feats to let mundanes craft magic items, at least arms and armor. Limiting or doing away with magic items is the single surest way to make the noncasters go from underpowered to completely unplayable. Such an initiative system would have its own drawbacks. Don't think anyone wants to see the mage/preist trying to heal an ally that desperately needs it get disrupted. Binary is not a balance solution. It just means the spell's either overpowered (binary = 1; casting went off) or completely worthless (binary = 0; it got disrupted, or if an all-or-nothing effect, was saved against). That's pretty damn unfun. I'd rather the spells just be toned down a bit/bunch instead. I agree with common sense and limits...but your example is the worst possible example of how to do that imaginable. First off; a wizard doesn't teleport somewhere hostile/unknown [i]alone[/i]. The whole party's going with. "The party teleports into the side of a mountain. You're all dead." Awesome balance there, d00d! Like I said above, this sort of "balance" is bs, and striking it from the game was a great decision 3E made. Especially since it is a game and thus death is meaningless (raise or make a new character), balancing spells with unlikely but horrifically catastrophic repurcussions is dumb. Fixed. [/QUOTE]

Verification