Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3880271" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, you have to ask, why was the fighter contributing?&nbsp; Or, rather, how.&nbsp; Was the fighter contributing based on what his class allowed him to do, or his toys?Yes, the oft mentioned fighter with no toys is useless probably almost never comes up in actual games.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because, no DM is going to screw over the fighter player so hard by stripping away all his magical goodies that make him, not better than the mage, but, at least competitive.The problem is, strip away a wizards magic items and he's still good to go.&nbsp; Heck, he can replace pretty much any item in the short term just with a few spells.&nbsp; This has been an issue long before 3e.&nbsp; Hopefully, bringing the fighter up and the wizard down levels the field a bit.&nbsp; Thus the whole idea of spreading out the &quot;sweet spot&quot;.&nbsp; The sweet spot is sweet because its the range of levels where no one absolutely dominates.&nbsp; After about 13th level, fighters are baggage.&nbsp; Sure, they contribute, but, if the fighter goes down, it's not a big loss.Or, think about it from the other side for a second.&nbsp; Which would your 17th level party rather fight?&nbsp; A 17th level fighter or a 17th level wizard?&nbsp; I'm thinking that there's certainly a higher chance of a TPK with the wizard.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3880271, member: 22779"] But, you have to ask, why was the fighter contributing? Or, rather, how. Was the fighter contributing based on what his class allowed him to do, or his toys? Yes, the oft mentioned fighter with no toys is useless probably almost never comes up in actual games. Why? Because, no DM is going to screw over the fighter player so hard by stripping away all his magical goodies that make him, not better than the mage, but, at least competitive. The problem is, strip away a wizards magic items and he's still good to go. Heck, he can replace pretty much any item in the short term just with a few spells. This has been an issue long before 3e. Hopefully, bringing the fighter up and the wizard down levels the field a bit. Thus the whole idea of spreading out the "sweet spot". The sweet spot is sweet because its the range of levels where no one absolutely dominates. After about 13th level, fighters are baggage. Sure, they contribute, but, if the fighter goes down, it's not a big loss. Or, think about it from the other side for a second. Which would your 17th level party rather fight? A 17th level fighter or a 17th level wizard? I'm thinking that there's certainly a higher chance of a TPK with the wizard. [/QUOTE]

Verification