Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5503298" data-attributes="member: 1210">Whoa there Tex, you're assuming an awful lot about my playstyle here. I'm neither advocating gritty nor high magic (and in my experience it IS possible to have both with a good dm and any edition of the rules as your skeleton).The thread title addresses the wizard vs. warrior balance in novels, not in games. This whole discussion has moved pretty far afield- which is fine- but let's not get all rowdy about the topic unless we are actually talking about the thread topic. (To summarize my thoughts on the actual thread topic in a sentence: You don't have balance problems in a novel, because it is a novel.)I want both warriors and wizards to play fairly gritty, even when the wizards do have awesome reality-warping spells. And somehow for the last 30 years, I've pulled it off.  Again, you can do it with a good dm. My campaign has had fun fighter-types from 1e through 2e through 3e and 4e; I have never had a fighter player feel like he doesn't get his chance to shine. 3e was where the balance was most precariously tilted, but even then the party's fighter really shone quite often.  I'm not trying to tell anyone else how to play. I'll repeat my question from upthread: why are there those who insist that I'm doing it wrong? It works for me, it works for my players, and it works well enough that I always have a waiting list of players longer than the actual list of players in my game at any given time. Clearly asserting that it cannot possibly work to have the mix of high magic and gritty is simply false, as my own experiences demonstrate, so perhaps rather than telling me that I can't possibly have a working campaign that's fun for fighter players and wizard players, it would be more constructive to ask how I pull it off.Which, frankly, I wouldn't know how to answer, since I appear to have been always doing it. I think the wizard's weaknesses balance his strengths very well in 2e and earlier and in 4e. I understand the whole "narrative control" issue some people have, but I think they underestimate the ability of a high level fighter to throw his weight around the campaign. (Or maybe a lot of dms just don't let them play with armies?) A lot of old sandbox campaigns culminated in a fighter becoming a king or warlord, with an army of followers and a massive castle ready to withstand assaults. Just as the wizard can, albeit very differently in style, a fighter can change the campaign world map for all time (at least in a persistent, lasting campaign).</blockquote>

Verification