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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 5521789" data-attributes="member: 762">The "solo the game" post was phrased in way too general a manner. It's pretty obvious that any one class can or can't "solo" the game solely at the wim of the DM. The question isn't (or shouldn't be) one of character against the world but character relative to other characters. Not in a PVP perspective but in a "does this character overshadow the others" if the answer is no - then there's not much of a problem. But if yes, then a deeper look is needed. Is it the mechanics? Is it the group dynamic and playstyle? Or, as is quite likely, is it a combination of factors, and if so what can be done to swing it back to "everyone at the table is having fun." (as at the end of the day, that's what matters).Throwing out these kinds of examples doesn't help much because they are so context dependant. For example, no wizard player with any tactical knowledge is going to take an attack of opportunity due to easy 5' steps. Spell resistance is really relative in 3e/3.5 because it depends what the DM allows in the game, if it's later 3.5 supplements spell resistance is a bit of a joke, and even core a smart player can get around it easily. And counterspelling, while perhaps a good idea initially is such a clunky awful mechanic thay I saw it used maybe once in a 6 year campaign.Again though saying a wizard can or can't solo a game is the same as saying a fighter can or can't do it - it's up to the whim of the DM. Frankly if you have a solo player then it becomes quite a bit more like a novel and the thread OP question becomes quite relavent. In a party context, however, not so much - because it's the relationship between the players that matters not so much their relationship to the world (from a balance perspective anyway).Again I think the "solo the entire game" tangent is a bit silly. The correct question is does the wizard step on the toes of the other classes to the extent that the players of the other classes are having less fun. You'll note, if you care to slog through many of the responses, that the answer tends  to be "yes the class can, but we don't let it" which is not the same as "no the class does not."  Also your responses have been from a 1e-3.5e perspective. The problem is 1e and 2e did not have some of the same issues 3e spellcasters can have: in particular the easy (ridiculously so) access to scrolls etc. which (IMO of course, but it's backed up) ramps up power level considerably.It is not the least bit disingenous to say WoTC got carried away with some of the spells they gave the wizard. For example, the cheesy conjuration "ball spells" (added around complete mage?) that do decent damage and completely ignore spell resistance. Even some of the core spells are a bit much. Just because the problem is easy to address, does not mean it shouldn't be pointed out. You're painting with too broad a brush here (not that everyone else, likely myself included, isn't also being overly broad), saying the problem isn't world shattering is not the same as saying there is no issue period. For what it's worth BTW, my favorite 3.5 class happens to be the wizard (well right next to the crusader for Bo9S which is just a fun awsome class but that's neither here nor there). It's just that having played one, seeing many of these issues arise (and having to constantly restrain myself from overpowered play) I tend to be vocal about it.To those pointing out the thread has realy wandered. Yes it has, but the orignal point was answered pretty well (and succinctly) several times by about page 3.</blockquote>

Verification