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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet-7" data-source="post: 8716489" data-attributes="member: 7025282">I think I’m all of this we miss something.  Some people want to play a non magical warrior.  Or a priest.  Or whatever.  That something can do more does not mean I want to necessarily.What you are saying is that action surges, extra hit points, generally heavier armor and strength and more attacks at higher level are not worth as much to you as spells.I get it!  I can’t argue with your preferences.But I can say that I don’t necessarily want to play that.  There is a role playing element to the game that is a bigger proportion of fun for some over others.If you want say you fighter to cut a path through enemies as big as a fireball every round, I can see where you would be disappointed.  You’re right.  Not everyone does the same things.And yet…people keep playing fighters.  Unless the argument is “they just don’t know better” I would say the need for better balance is a personal preference not indicative of the game’s quality or sustainability.And you freely said balance is more fun for you.  I cannot argue with that.I do think 1e did better here.  Magic users could lose a spell when hit for 1 pt of damage.  The fighter was very necessary.  Or at least men at arms that were hired.There was no tie to toe success for magic users in my groups.  We seemed to have more of a football team experience: we need the linemen and wide receivers with our quarterbacks.  That has admittedly changed.By trying to balance things out there are no true critical roles.  People do fine without healers and to be honest, vanilla fighters.</blockquote>

Verification