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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5831613" data-attributes="member: 59082">Good point. My feeling--and this is just my personal taste--is that 4E took it too far, both with the "superhero-ness" of what non-spellcasters could do (probably influenced by wuxia), but also in making all classes feel the same underneath superficial differences.But let's also look at how the hero warrior defeats the evil sorcerer - it is usually guile, heroism, luck, the blessing of the gods, or what have you. Let us also remember that the archetype of the hero defeating the bad guy always includes a less powerful hero and a more powerful bad guy; this is the "Underdog Principle" - we always root for the little guy or gal. (Imagine how ridiculous it would be if  Darth Vader was a little shrimp and Luke some badass jedi master; Luke only becomes a badass jedi master after he defeats Darth Vader).I also like what [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] said, that fighters and wizards can be better or worse in different situations, whether in or outside of combat. To take that a step further, I've always liked the idea that wizards are more powerful in terms of the total impact they can have, but more vulnerable in terms of how easy they are to kill.That said, when there is too much balance, and in all ways, something is lost, something magical. I would like to see the rules reflect the idea that the warrior hero cannot defeat the evil sorcerer except through indirect or heroic means. This could somewhat be accomplished by a level difference between the two--and maybe that is enough--but it doesn't quite get there, imo.</blockquote>

Verification