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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fuzzlewump" data-source="post: 4333164" data-attributes="member: 63214">Surely you jape. But I suppose this makes sense, because as a DM you are able to use all of the spells that you want. Perhaps if you played as the classes which were at the low end of the balance bracket in a combat oriented game. Now, I'm sure you're going to say that you have and you loved being underpowered and still do, but what about magic, an undefinable force, makes it defined as more powerful than constant dedication to martial practice?After all, that's what this argument hinges on. You say that if broken casters don't exist then the game doesn't appear real. Perhaps it's better to imagine not a low magic world, but a world in which magic is not easily harnessed in the heat of battle. This is why spells are perhaps no more powerful than the steel of a highly dedicated melee fighter. Perhaps you're asking, 'why should I bother having to imagine things in a different way?' and the answer is you don't have to. But, just because magic is different between the new editions doesn't mean one is simply more believable than the other. This would be different if we were talking about something that's supposed to model physics, like one edition saying that an object takes 5 seconds to fall a meter, and the other saying it takes less than a second. But this magic, something that's completely fictional in the first place.That said, I would suggest playing the game before saying the game lacks ingenuity. If you have, what about the play lacked this feeling? I will say now that from first level there are enough choices and combinations with the rest of the group in combat that our group has used more ingenuity than ever before at low levels, which is all I can speak for in 4th edition.</blockquote>

Verification