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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="machineelf" data-source="post: 7084456" data-attributes="member: 6774924">A lot of this argument about how wizards are stronger than martial classes is based on the presupposition that all classes should be as equally balanced as possible. Personally I reject that pressupposition.In my ideal world, wizards are puny and weak at low levels, but fearsome and powerful at the highest levels. I like that, to be honest.Back in the early days of D&D perfect class balance was not sought after. That mindset came later with online MMO's like World of Warcraft that had features like pvp arenas and such. They felt the need to balance classes for that reason. That's why, as someone said above, that 4th edition was the most balanced across classes -- because they we're following a design philosophy based on online MMO's.That in turn caused tabletop RPG players to believe all classes should be equally balanced.Now, I don't want one single class to be drastically more powerful. But some imbalance is OK in my book. When a high level wizard walks into a tavern, you should be in awe of their magic power. But they only got to that point by enduring level after level of being a weakling where the fighters shined.To me 5th edition gets it very close to right. A wizard at high levels can do amazing things. But they can also burn through their magic eventually, and they are fragile against attacks. A fighter may not be as powerful in one round, but they can go round after round of dishing out damage and absorbing a lot as well. That kind of "balance" is OK. Naturally this is just my opinion and opinions vary.Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk</blockquote>

Verification