Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jasamcarl" data-source="post: 169532" data-attributes="member: 1251">Eh...This debate is horribly campaign specific, but on the question of massed warriors and high-level characters..Arcady laid out the position that a large number of grouped archers could have a field day with ranged damage, and in this he is right. So an Army has a comparative advantage in raw damage dealing power, but its ability to make use of that ability would be curtailed by the magic possessed by high-level characters.But the assumption is that 'power' either tactical or strategic can be measured in competive matches; this is like that pathetic argument that a wizards is superior to a fighter because in a one-on-one. The key then is to bring out the advantageous traits of the army, either through counterspelling or abjuration magic. Now the question to ask is, in the case, in which we have two offending high-level mages, who would the counterspelling wizard/sorc prefer to be at its side, another mage, or those massed archers? Given arcady's breakdown, i'm thinking massed archers.So where does this lead us? Well, like every other 'class', an Army's effectivness depends heavily on the context in which it is placed; while is ability to SUBSTITUTE for magic is probably poor, its ability to COMPLIMENT magic is perhaps high enough to make it worth wild.By the nature of this analysis, all this is of course left to the individual campagin....</blockquote>