Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dragonblade" data-source="post: 5798622" data-attributes="member: 2804">Excellent analysis, UK! <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=":)" />Damage really is the best way to guage effects like this. Its simply the easiest and most universal guage of class combat effectiveness since all classes do damage. When a wizard casts a spell like Charm Person in lieu of a combat spell like Magic Missile, they are paying an opportunity cost to cast that spell.What the designers need to do is look at those spells and analyze that opportunity cost. If a particular non-damaging spell is so good that a wizard would consistently rather cast it then a spell that straight up does damage, then that is a big red flag that spell is broken, or overpowered for its level. Likewise, if its more advantageous for a caster to always go for damage and never cast one of these other spells then thats a red flag its underpowered.The trick is to balance spells such that the wizard player has to make a meaningful choice as opposed to a no-brainer choice most of the time. Given the breadth of spells in the game pre-4e and the situation specific usefulness of many of them, this will definitely be more art than science.But the fact that it appears to be somewhat of a design consideration tells me the designers are approaching this in the right way.</blockquote>

Verification