Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6069030" data-attributes="member: 95493">First, I just want to say I know there is a full page between the post I'm responding to and the reply itself. To that end, if any of this has been covered I apologize but I have limited time to cover what I want to cover.First, I just wanted to say that if any of your post is sarcasm then that drastically changes what you mean - and you should let me know.Second, Yes I have seen the incredible. That also isn't what I said or meant though.Third, if all cops had the powers of superheroes, then there would be no superheroes. And by cops I mean the regular NYPD (or w/e) and not a special army division in case you were wondering.Fourth, it is muddied when a fighter's power level is no better or worse than any other "defender". Or to give another example. If two classes in 4e - both filling the same role - were to fight the same opponent would they be expected to have the same outcome? If so, how does that make any class different from another EXCEPT by role and specific powers selected. Say what you want about 3e but the fighter never felt like the wizard.I don't understand this comment, especially in relation to what I posted. I said that people who play fighters do so to be mundane, that they wouldn't want the cosmic powers of wizards even if that was a direct choice. More power - that is fairly split - but the same level of cosmic power as the wizard - that would probably come down on the "no, thanks". Again, they play mundane to be mundane. You can't be a mundane cleric, paladin, ranger, bard, druid, monk, wizard, sorcerer, bard... and even rogues and barbarians have random seemingly semi-magical powers (rage and evasion). So, yes fighters are the mundane choice when you WANT mundane. I don't know what the comment about HP was meaning.This is what I meant earlier about the sarcasm thing. So, all I can do is reply to what you said.No, most fighters can't create fire by snapping their fingers. BUT with the invention of things like CaGI they are clearly doing some form of mind control and therefore must be magical. That is what I meant by "If fighters are now as magical as wizards (a necessity to explain them in 4e)".Again, I hate to disagree but the problem is they want these cosmic powers to be available. But very few people who prefer the "broken" 3e would say that they aren't a problem how they are. As you correctly diagnose later - the problem is having these kinds of powers available to a PC full time.Also, this isn't the first time you (I think it was you anyway) suggested Ars Magica. I may just have to take a look at it. Not that I'm displeased with my current version of DnD or anything but apparently it doesn't have the stuff I can't stand in 4e so at least its worth examining. But also, since I'm not familiar with Ars Magica and have no way of checking or evaluating it, for the purpose of these discussions would you mind leaving it out as my "preference"?This confused me (where it was) but I later understood it to mean the following. Please let me know if I'm wrong. You are proposing to play 3e where the "best" wizard is a bard and that all fighters are warblades?Having played 3.5 (not as familiar with 3.0) I can say that you don't even need the warblade to outpace the bard. But even so, I wouldn't have a problem with this idea .. mostly. The problem would be the current powers of the bardic wizard and less that wizards should have less high level spells. I have seen MANY houserules where wizards are simply stripped of 9th, 8th and sometimes 7th level spells. So I have seen how it can work.But even so .. that WOULD be to do what I said. Fix the problem if the overly high-powered wizard while not completely changing the fighter. And it certainly wouldn't do anything to bring the fighter in line with the bard - which is what 4e did. Also, this all assumes you keep the weaker fighter along side the weak bard.Find me one reference to Tolkien calling Gandalf an NPC and you win.And? So?Agreed, but not for the reasons you seem to suppose.The problem you are putting forward is that Merlin has magic. That magic > mundane. And that because Merlin (magic) > Arthur (mundane, technically mundane+ but I'll get to that). And that Arthur is somehow a "Second class PC".The problem is you can't let Merlin, or the Lady of the Lake or Gandalf, break out ultimate cosmic powers every day without fail. The solution isn't to remove those powers from the game. Nor is it to somehow "fix" Arthur so that he has more powers LIKE Merlin.I don't see that this is accurate either. Mosly because I don't see any classes to be the "star of the show".I also don't see how you put that back into the box - making all casters into "NPCs" again.The obvious solution - to the problem of overpowered casters - is to reduce their power. That can be done by fewer spells slots, different spells, different durations, inability of stacking, different components, longer casting times, unreliability (chance of failure in each casting) or many more solutions. Or as you say "a minute to cast" works too. All of these reduce their power, but very little of these reduce the potency.Also, show me where I went wrong in my example of Supernatural? The highest level mundane fighter might be ... the max level of any class - say 20 or 30 or no max. If the fighter is more defined by power, accuracy, health and ability to perform maneuvers (something I dislike but again I don't see how we repackage that box either) then why do they need MAGIC on top of that?Or, no save or die spells belong to regular - in combat - spells? What if you have to get a target to drink poison. That would resemble reality and require no one to actually have magic. If the wizard is able to brew up a fancy and extra deadly poison then who cares? If they are able to conjure it from across the world - again what does that matter? If the person still has to drink it then there is the problem. And in that regard the fighter is going to be much more capable of manhandling them into the act if it comes to it. The rogue might be able to cleverly (or through stealth) slip the poison into the regular drink and the wizard able to convince them that the poison is really a health potion. These all result with Dead Target, but they vary wildly on HOW. Why does the fighter need the ability to mind control the target into drinking the poison?Again, the problem is the "save or die" not the "fighter lacks these".I think you meant "mundane < magic" but I should talk... I honestly can't believe I put premise 2 ahead of 1. I must have been tired.The third premise wasn't a premise. It was a conclusion but that doesn't really matter either. IF it was a premise, what is the conclusion that was drawn from..Premise 1: Fighter is mundanePremise 2: Wizard is magicPremise 3: Magic > mundaneConclusion: ??? (possibly profit?[/sarcasm])I never said magic belonged to NPCs. You did, repeatedly. But I didn't. I said that the Lady of the Lake gave excalibur to Arthur because he could use it better. Which meant that she knew she couldn't use it as effectively. Tougher, Accuracy, HP, Maneuvers.. All of these are excellent base traits to have. Add in the magical weapon and Arthur (literally) becomes something of legend. Without it .. well we know what happens to the sword in the stone.Magic is the domain of casters, non-magic is the domain of non-casters. If it takes magic to create excalibur then there is no reason why it has to STAY with casters.Sam and Dean have gathered a lot of tricks so they can routinely defeat or at least stall all manner of magical creature. They also know how to defeat ALL of them with no magic in their body. They can do it more easily when they are jacked up on demon blood but that isn't their base trait. They know magic, but it is significantly ritual related. They kill ghosts by burning the ghost's bones. They can slay demons because of the demon-bane weapon they have. ALL of these things relate to mundane fighters, but with some magical tricks. I don't see anyone who objects to mundane+ in this way. Many of us complain when magic becomes the only explanation to explain something a supposedly non-magical class does.Sure we can. You said you were familiar with Castiel. He shows up and the bad guys die. Sam and Dean defeat them somehow when Cas is away, but Cas makes it so much easier. Even if the "caster" was more of a glass jaw, do you think Sam and Dean would be ONLY there to protect Castiel? I very much doubt it. To the same extent fighters can be in the same party with wizards without any issue. If wizards have less reliability in magic, or less power - as discussed above - then that evens out the playingfield while keeping both (casters and non-casters) as valid choices. And it keeps magic magical, without giving everyone magic.But more importantly the solution is GEAR.The party wizard has limited slots per day, or may prepare the wrong ones. Or maybe they just don't know those spells at all. Or (add in some of the stuff from above) they are otherwise able to do significant damage but they can't win things all by themselves all the time all day.The fighter on the other hand can be given a sword and fight with it all day. He may be less effective in that "nova" situation that the wizard tends to find himself in. That is okay though because he IS as effective all day. He can have tricks and maneuvers to argument this. Or some other form of expendable power but that isn't what the fighter is at the core. Those are bonuses. If he has a bag of sand he can throw it in an enemy's face but there is no reason to have a "bag of sand" ability to blind someone.Also, going back to supernatural for a second, give the brothers wrought iron and they can kill many things effectively (an entire brand of creatures - which currently escapes my memory). Without those implements they are useless. Easily torn apart. Without SALT they would be killed by ghosts before they had time to find the mcguffin of the episode. There are VERY mundane tricks that that show could show DnD about how to handle magical creatures. Make garlic more effective at repelling vampires and you may not need the cleric. You'll be happy when he is there and able to do straight damage to him, but you won't NEED him otherwise.Make things highly resistant but not overly immune (as 5e has mostly adopted last I looked) and this sort of solves itself. It make take a while but you can eventually defeat that creature. If you have a wizard then it goes faster, but the wizard is going to die alone so not everyone can be just a wizard. If everyone CAN then again there is a problem... but that problem has to do with wizards not the other classes.A. Covered both the 'NPC/kill the wizard' and 'specialness/muddied classes' above.B. Who says fighters are supposed to be in line with Hercules (unassisted)?C. High level fighters aren't the problem either. Fighters in 3e are linear. The problem is the quadratic wizards.</blockquote>

Verification