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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 4443077" data-attributes="member: 5834">Now you're misquoting. Vastly more powerful? I doubt that unless there was a substantial level difference. Vastly more more verstilte I agree with, vastly more powerful I do not.The warriors and priests were far more durable and could hold their own in any dungeon. Why there is this perception that warriors were weaker when they did truckloads of damage easily equal to or greater than a wizard on a round by round basis is a gross falsehood.You could not have a wizard take over a realm by himself or mind control the king or what not. No, that is not possible in 4E.There are not permanent powers in 4E. Everything is a round by round or a sustained spell. Everything in 4E is temporary thus weakening the wizard even further.You hit another nail on the head. I cannot stand the fact that the enemy wizard is so much more powerful than my own wizard as to make me, the party wizard, look like a joke. As I said, if you made a 3E wizard enemy, he was still a wizard. He and the party wizard could go toe to toe and see who won. Now with the new solo and elite rules, if I ever did like I used to do in 3E, having the party wizard square off with the enemy wizard at the end of the dungeon, the party would be scraping him up off the ground.You used to have to devise a balanced party to challenge a PC party. The enemy wizard needed a solid spell list to challenge the mage in 3E. Now you design artificial powers that your party wizard can't access when creating NPC wizards.I can't even have the party fighter stand toe to toe with a fighter of legend. He'll get beat down if I design the NPC as an elite or solo. The elite and solo bad guys are designed to be a challenge for a whole party. I don't know about you, but imagining a party of six guys having trouble beating on one guy is not my idea of honorable or cool combat. That may work fine for giants and demon lords. But I hate it for NPC wizards and fighters. Forget that bunk. The party wizard and fighter is every bit as good as any fighter their level in all the land and better than most. They can go toe to toe with the main end level encounter fighter mob. And that's how it should be.You didn't see Launcelot, Arthur, Gawaine, and all the Knights of the Round Table beating on one guy at once. I don't want some endgame fighter being so tough he could paste any characer in solo combat unless he is vastly higher level. And I don't mean artificially inflated to be an appropriate encounter level, rather than just equal level.That's a matter of taste then. I liked the feel of Saruman being able to mind control King Theoden, and needing to bring Gandalf to challenge Saruman. I liked the feel of Rand blowing away armies while the guys who travled with him were just regular skilled swordsman. I like the feel of that.If I want to work something in and handwave it like 4E does, then I'll do that in 3E. But otherwise I want the players to feel as strong and powerful as their NPC counterparts. I want an NPC fighter or wizard to have exactly the same access to the same power as a PC and vice versa.If I believed that wizards were grossly more powerful than fighters, then I would buy into what you're saying. Since fighters seem to dish considerable damage and they themeselves are very dangerous, I don't think I'll need to. But I do prefer a game that requires wizards to be there to provide that versatility and edge against NPC wizards. In 3E wizards knew why they needed fighters, and fighters knew why they needed wizards. I like that dynamic.I have yet to see a book where the wizard blew off his power willy, nilly as 4E wizards do. I prefer the 3E model where the wizard sat on his power until it was needed and that is why he was the "turn the tide of battle" guy. Not because he could annhiliate everything alone while the poor fighter sat there on the sidelines wondering why he was there. That never happened in 3E, no idea why you perceive it as so.It is your opinion is that wizards are "grossly" overpowered. My opinion is that wizards are more powerful in terms of versatility and magical defense, which will ultimately lead to a victory for them in a one on one fight against a warrior or rogue, but probably not a priest. And even though a wizard's increased power that comes with magical versatility makes them potent one on one, it still doesn't obviate the role of fighters. Who themselves have tremendous hit points and do amazing damage with their melee attacks to multiple real opponents, not 1hp minions that pop like baloons.</blockquote>

Verification