Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Larcen" data-source="post: 742641" data-attributes="member: 2406">Funny you should say that.  It reminds me of another thing I noticed between the various editions.  If things have more HPs in 3E, why were damage spells not changed to keep up?  A fireball still does what is was doing back in 1E.   Less actually, since now there are dice caps.  Same thing to some extent for the Powerwords.In fact, it used to be that you could do more damage with spells and spellcasters were the heavy hitting artillery of the group.  I think it's now very easy for fighters to do more damage in a round, albiet to a limited amount of targets, than the group's spellcaster.  An example of this powershift is the PC I am currently playing.  My cleric has no spell available to him that has better damage potential overall than his greatsword.  Which suits him just fine actually due to his background.Sure, he is a cleric and so hasn't much in the way of flashy high damage spells, but if the game world got tougher in terms of HPs, then at least arcane damage spells should have too.  No?So now we have: "Ah, the good old days when a wizard-rushing fighter actually feared the inevitable Lightening Bolt that was to follow.  Now he might as well try shocking him with static."</blockquote>