Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 7041850" data-attributes="member: 284">Well, the example you used was an evoker wizard - they are the damage specialists of the wizard class.&nbsp;&nbsp; They should do good damage.&nbsp; Thing is, the game isn't just about the amount of damage you can output every round.&nbsp;&nbsp; The wizard has to expend more resources on defense than the fighter - their precious spell slots.&nbsp;&nbsp; Mage Armor, Shield, Absorb Elements, Blur, Mirror Image, Counterspell, etc.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Even then, if they don't have time to prepare they may get mauled before they have a chance to cast their defenses.&nbsp; A fighters defenses are (mostly) always on and available.&nbsp;&nbsp; All things being equal, most fighters will be more durable than most wizards - and the wizards who are tanky types tend to expend more resources than the fighter to achieve it. The fighter is always going to be more gear dependent than the wizard.&nbsp; It's the cost of being mundane vs. magical.&nbsp;&nbsp; They have to invest more up front (buying expensive armor, weapons, etc.)&nbsp; but in return their defenses and weapons are passive and permanent instead of dynamic and resource intensive.The balance may not be perfect, but it generally works out. Which one comes out on top depends a lot on the DM and how they structure their encounters, as well as what type of support they get from the rest of the group.&nbsp; One campaign may be set up to favor mages, one to favor archers, and another to favor melee tanks.&nbsp;&nbsp; The DM may not even be aware they doing it, they are just setting up encounters in the way that makes the most sense to them, or is more interesting for them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Caliban, post: 7041850, member: 284"] Well, the example you used was an evoker wizard - they are the damage specialists of the wizard class. They should do good damage. Thing is, the game isn't just about the amount of damage you can output every round. The wizard has to expend more resources on defense than the fighter - their precious spell slots. Mage Armor, Shield, Absorb Elements, Blur, Mirror Image, Counterspell, etc. Even then, if they don't have time to prepare they may get mauled before they have a chance to cast their defenses. A fighters defenses are (mostly) always on and available. All things being equal, most fighters will be more durable than most wizards - and the wizards who are tanky types tend to expend more resources than the fighter to achieve it. The fighter is always going to be more gear dependent than the wizard. It's the cost of being mundane vs. magical. They have to invest more up front (buying expensive armor, weapons, etc.) but in return their defenses and weapons are passive and permanent instead of dynamic and resource intensive. The balance may not be perfect, but it generally works out. Which one comes out on top depends a lot on the DM and how they structure their encounters, as well as what type of support they get from the rest of the group. One campaign may be set up to favor mages, one to favor archers, and another to favor melee tanks. The DM may not even be aware they doing it, they are just setting up encounters in the way that makes the most sense to them, or is more interesting for them. [/QUOTE]

Verification