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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 5501729" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>There is a difference here between <em>karma</em> and the hypothesised <em>karma points</em>.</p><p></p><p>There is no issue for simulationist play if fighters have powers like "Cleave Mountain: when you use this power, the top falls off a mountain." This would resemble many traditional D&D spells.</p><p></p><p>When the fighter starts to have karma points, however, that the player of the fighter may use to start changing the ingame situation in various ways, then it becomes a potentially different matter. If all the karma points do is eg provide a temporary bonus to defence or attack, it's probably not a big deal - and in fact these probably wouldn't be metagame mechanics in the relevant sense, as they would represent the fighter in question exering a heroic effort, or perhaps being the beneficiary of the forces of luck in the universe.</p><p></p><p>But the more open-ended the karma points, the more the threat to simulation, as they allow the player to control ingame events in a way that fails to respect hitherto-established ingame causal logic. Come and Get It is 4e's poster-child for this.</p><p></p><p>In practice, Come and Get It has produced widespread calls either to reintroduce ingame causation as modelled via probabilities (the frequently-mooted attack vs Will), or to allow the GM an override in order to preserve the integrity of the ingame situation (so Come and Get It works as written most of the time, but the GM will exempt, for example, the unarmed mage with only ranged attacks, on an ad hoc basis).</p><p></p><p>I think that even Hussar's mooted idea, in which the resource in question has an ingame rationale (high level fighter's attract the interest of supernatural forces) would be likely to produce widespread hostility. After all, the uniform skill progression in 4e could easily be explained in such terms (although I personally prefer to treat it as primarily a metagame-driven thing), but has nevertheless been widely criticised. Just the same as there are widespread calls to be able to play a wizard who knows nothing about swimming and has no friends among the waterspirits who help out with it, so I would expect there to be widespread calls to be able to play a fighter who has know supernatural allies but relies purely on his/her own mind and body.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5501729, member: 42582"] There is a difference here between [I]karma[/I] and the hypothesised [I]karma points[/I]. There is no issue for simulationist play if fighters have powers like "Cleave Mountain: when you use this power, the top falls off a mountain." This would resemble many traditional D&D spells. When the fighter starts to have karma points, however, that the player of the fighter may use to start changing the ingame situation in various ways, then it becomes a potentially different matter. If all the karma points do is eg provide a temporary bonus to defence or attack, it's probably not a big deal - and in fact these probably wouldn't be metagame mechanics in the relevant sense, as they would represent the fighter in question exering a heroic effort, or perhaps being the beneficiary of the forces of luck in the universe. But the more open-ended the karma points, the more the threat to simulation, as they allow the player to control ingame events in a way that fails to respect hitherto-established ingame causal logic. Come and Get It is 4e's poster-child for this. In practice, Come and Get It has produced widespread calls either to reintroduce ingame causation as modelled via probabilities (the frequently-mooted attack vs Will), or to allow the GM an override in order to preserve the integrity of the ingame situation (so Come and Get It works as written most of the time, but the GM will exempt, for example, the unarmed mage with only ranged attacks, on an ad hoc basis). I think that even Hussar's mooted idea, in which the resource in question has an ingame rationale (high level fighter's attract the interest of supernatural forces) would be likely to produce widespread hostility. After all, the uniform skill progression in 4e could easily be explained in such terms (although I personally prefer to treat it as primarily a metagame-driven thing), but has nevertheless been widely criticised. Just the same as there are widespread calls to be able to play a wizard who knows nothing about swimming and has no friends among the waterspirits who help out with it, so I would expect there to be widespread calls to be able to play a fighter who has know supernatural allies but relies purely on his/her own mind and body. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?
Top