Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Fighter vs. Wizard - what's your preferred balance of power?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5833980" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Good DMing 101: No Bottlenecks. There should be multiple valid solutions to any problem, and you shouldn't "force" the players to do any one thing in order to proceed. Assuming the game is built to encourage good DMing, this is a non-problem. DMs don't have preconceived notions of how their scene should go. The game educates DMs to not have these notions. </p><p></p><p>Of course, we can always have a particular "style" of campaign (say, a campaign focused more on interaction/roleplay than on combat), but these styles, assuming the DM is upfront about them, can help influence class choice. If a DM says that he will blatantly prefer one pillar to another, players can choose classes skilled in that pillar (paladins and bards instead of fighters and barbarians). </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It resolves it because if the players control their approach, they don't feel like their abilities are under-utilized, or that they constantly suck. If they did go into a situation they weren't good at for some reason (perhaps the reward for peace with the orcs might be better than the reward for killing them all), they could prepare for their failings, shore up their weaknesses, and head in fully aware that they need to be careful. </p><p></p><p>"Viable" is different than "equal." Viable can be the difference between -5 and +5, which is still a significant mechanical divergence. "Always Wins" and "Always Looses" are extremes that it's smart to avoid, but there's a lot of room between those for people to have legitimately different odds of success in a given encounter. A bard SHOULD have a higher rate of success in social encounters than a barbarian. A fighter SHOULD have a higher rate of success in combat than a wizard. That doesn't mean barbarians can't grunt (even at -5), and that wizards can't have more than 1 hp (even if they are very frail), but it does mean the success levels can be measurably different.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5833980, member: 2067"] Good DMing 101: No Bottlenecks. There should be multiple valid solutions to any problem, and you shouldn't "force" the players to do any one thing in order to proceed. Assuming the game is built to encourage good DMing, this is a non-problem. DMs don't have preconceived notions of how their scene should go. The game educates DMs to not have these notions. Of course, we can always have a particular "style" of campaign (say, a campaign focused more on interaction/roleplay than on combat), but these styles, assuming the DM is upfront about them, can help influence class choice. If a DM says that he will blatantly prefer one pillar to another, players can choose classes skilled in that pillar (paladins and bards instead of fighters and barbarians). It resolves it because if the players control their approach, they don't feel like their abilities are under-utilized, or that they constantly suck. If they did go into a situation they weren't good at for some reason (perhaps the reward for peace with the orcs might be better than the reward for killing them all), they could prepare for their failings, shore up their weaknesses, and head in fully aware that they need to be careful. "Viable" is different than "equal." Viable can be the difference between -5 and +5, which is still a significant mechanical divergence. "Always Wins" and "Always Looses" are extremes that it's smart to avoid, but there's a lot of room between those for people to have legitimately different odds of success in a given encounter. A bard SHOULD have a higher rate of success in social encounters than a barbarian. A fighter SHOULD have a higher rate of success in combat than a wizard. That doesn't mean barbarians can't grunt (even at -5), and that wizards can't have more than 1 hp (even if they are very frail), but it does mean the success levels can be measurably different. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Fighter vs. Wizard - what's your preferred balance of power?
Top