Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="triqui" data-source="post: 5519850" data-attributes="member: 57948">Yes. Lack of options. And no, selecting how much Base Attack Bonus I trade to armor or damage does not make for it.If you take a look at my 5th edition thread <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/303690-so-5th-edition-coming-soon.html" target="_blank">here</a>, in the opening post I explain a bit of what is not working of 4e for me, what I would change, and  how I would try (probably without sucess, I admit) to do so. Briefly:I do not want warriors and wizards to be *mechanically symetric*, but I want them to be balanced in power -something 3e does not try to achieve-I want them to have both viable options in and out of combatI don't want (some) magic to completelly trump over non-magic characters  (greater invisibility, fly, or reverse gravity come to mind)I don't want relying on magic to solve most, if not all, group challenges and encounters when the group reaches lvl 9+ (I remember my group casting Levitate to everyone to "climb" the magic beans, for example)And 3e has something that bassically exclude me to do what I want. To be fair, 4e has things that exclude me, too. Just that they are different ones, and not related to this thread (which talks about warrior vs wizards balance in fiction, where I find them quite balanced. Ulises wasn't worse than Circe. And 3e does not simulate that rightly, imho)</blockquote>