High Level Play Ballance and Magic Items

[Starfox]

This is from the general forum and was discussing 4E, but my reply was so heavily off on a tangent that I wanted to make a new thread about it, and this seemed to be the place.

When we look at 3E, it seems an obvious example of brokenness was high level play in general, especially the reliance on magic items and the fact that spellcasters became much more powerful than other classes (although many folks didn't mind this).

My experience with this is that high-level balance in 3E depends very much on magic items, but perhaps not in the ways you'd think.

In a low-magic-item game, clerics rock. Their buffs are really relevant. Fighter suck because they lack enabler to do fun things. Wizards are powerful, especially damage-wise, but do not shine as brightly as clerics.

In a high-magic-item game, fighters rock. Physical attacks backed by many, many buff items combined with enough utility items to let them do cool things. Wizards are ok, but mostly in the field of utility and control. Clerics are reduced to healers, and with enough magic items, the fighters can even handle that themselves.

Arcane magic shines brightest somewhere in the middle (around the recommended level of wealth).

Views?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Just in case anyone is wondering what this is about:
Ballance
Neat game.

---

Okay, for the real topic: High level Clerics have access to the same magic items as Fighters. And they have a lot of buff spells that give them the same attack bonus than the fighter (or even better.)

 

[Dandu]

In a high-magic-item game, fighters rock. Physical attacks backed by many, many buff items combined with enough utility items to let them do cool things. Wizards are ok, but mostly in the field of utility and control. Clerics are reduced to healers, and with enough magic items, the fighters can even handle that themselves.

I refute your point thusly

 

[Starbuck_II]

In a low-magic-item game, clerics rock. Their buffs are really relevant. Fighter suck because they lack enabler to do fun things. Wizards are powerful, especially damage-wise, but do not shine as brightly as clerics.

No, even in low magic Wizards still get 2 free spells/level (even without scrolls to add extra you are a psuedo Sorc in known). Saves will be lower for warrior types so will saves are auto working (Glitterdust, etc).

So DD Wizard will be okay, but debuffs/sucks will rock.

In a high-magic-item game, fighters rock. Physical attacks backed by many, many buff items combined with enough utility items to let them do cool things. Wizards are ok, but mostly in the field of utility and control. Clerics are reduced to healers, and with enough magic items, the fighters can even handle that themselves.

High Magic is the D&D standard. And Fighters don't rock at higher levels... thus this seems wrong.
Fighters aren't bad if built right, but they don't rock unless you are expert (or DM has houserules changingg paradigm of the game).