Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9334561" data-attributes="member: 7635">I am not advocating magic should be utterly riskless, just that I would hate to see every spell cast be a cost/benefit analysis beyond what it already is. The old fireball was usually worth the risk if you understood volume; the old haste with its mandatory aging/system shock roll was not.I actually think the 5e cantrip system more-or-less handles that well. The wizard gets a few repeatable effects like fire bolt they use as their fallback attack in between those limited bursts. Likewise, the fighter has a few &quot;limited burst&quot; abilities like action surge they can do between rests. In my perfect world, the wizard would have a few more at-will effects and the fighter a few more burst effects. Not perfect symmetry like 4e tried, but refining the notion that a wizard always has a few minor magics and the fighter his basic attacks, but both can do more remarkable things a limited number of times per rest. After playing almost 30 years, Ilong-term balance is an illusion of balance. People want their characters to be relevant at all stages of the game. They don't want to start out strong and grow increasingly irrelevant nor do they want to wait for the near end of the game to dominate. It's the same reason level limits for races were a bad balancing system. I'd much rather the fighter and wizard be closer in power at levels 1, 10, and 20, than the fighter to lose relevance as the wizard becomes the star of the show.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 9334561, member: 7635"] I am not advocating magic should be utterly riskless, just that I would hate to see every spell cast be a cost/benefit analysis beyond what it already is. The old fireball was usually worth the risk if you understood volume; the old haste with its mandatory aging/system shock roll was not. I actually think the 5e cantrip system more-or-less handles that well. The wizard gets a few repeatable effects like fire bolt they use as their fallback attack in between those limited bursts. Likewise, the fighter has a few "limited burst" abilities like action surge they can do between rests. In my perfect world, the wizard would have a few more at-will effects and the fighter a few more burst effects. Not perfect symmetry like 4e tried, but refining the notion that a wizard always has a few minor magics and the fighter his basic attacks, but both can do more remarkable things a limited number of times per rest. After playing almost 30 years, Ilong-term balance is an illusion of balance. People want their characters to be relevant at all stages of the game. They don't want to start out strong and grow increasingly irrelevant nor do they want to wait for the near end of the game to dominate. It's the same reason level limits for races were a bad balancing system. I'd much rather the fighter and wizard be closer in power at levels 1, 10, and 20, than the fighter to lose relevance as the wizard becomes the star of the show. [/QUOTE]

Verification