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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 4333080" data-attributes="member: 7635">I guess our experiences differed. 2nd edition was worse than 3rd!Unless your DM severely hamstringed the mage by keeping his spell access minimal, most mages got the spells they needed to dominate. Disintegrate. Finger of Death. Improved Invisibility. Telekinesis. Fly. Teleport. Stoneskin. A wizard with access to most if not all of these spells was no longer a puny acranist any fighter could put to the sword. He was flying 60 ft in air, invisible, with immunity to 1d4+1 2/caster levels worth of non-magic (including vorpral) weapons, hurling lighting bolts, green-rays of doom, and the omnipotent magic "always hits" missile. What, exactly, was the guy in plate mail with a longsword and shield (even +5 magical ones) going to do against that?And if the fighter was screwed, least he had that 18/% str and extra attacks to rely on. What did our 2e thief get? Oh, 8 skills with % chance of failure, 5dX damage if he could sneak up on a foe (not merely flank) and a 15% chance to kill the party with an arcane scroll. Right...And the only reason 2e priests didn't rule the day was sphere access and the typical need to devote 2 out every 3 spell slots to cure X wounds or something similar. Sure, 3.0 went overboard on clerics, but it was probably a reaction to the 2e syndrome of clerics being walking medicine chests or holy-spinning-wheels-of-death (when faiths and avatars "fixed" them)</blockquote>

Verification