Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6193602" data-attributes="member: 22779">Umm, we posited a 100 or so lizard folk.  A single, lone, medium sized fighter at 10th or so level.  If the DM isn't winning this fight, the DM is lobbing some pretty easy softballs over the plate.  "If the fighter has a light weapon", "If the fighter can choose the location of the fight" "If we stack the deck entirely in the fighter's favor" then the fighter will win.Well, not really.  We're saying that in our games, high level casters take over the game for a number of reasons, most of which are mechanical in nature.  The basic response is that the GM should be stacking the deck (taking away caster abilities, remove spell books, deliberately choose opponents that target casters, etc) to bring casters in line with the non-casters.Which, of course, simply proves the point.  If there wasn't a disparity, then you wouldn't have to fix anything.  You wouldn't have to target the casters.  You wouldn't have to stack the deck and choose interpretations which specifically reduce the effectiveness of casters.IOW, if there wasn't any power disparity, what are you trying to fix?  Why are you (those who claim that there is no problem) continuously tweaking the rules?</blockquote>