Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMKastmaria" data-source="post: 5912176" data-attributes="member: 6678082">Somehow, we all managed, for decades, to play D&D without this grinding the game to a halt. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />Someone always wants to play the MU. Just like someone always wants to play the Fighter. Someone always wants to play a thief. Someone always...Allright, the Cleric can be a tough sell. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Once upon a time, in the late 90's and near the end of 2e's reign, rpg boards would be rife with ridicule, at the suggestion that anyone, but anyone approach PC creation from a min/max, powergaming, optimization perspective. "How dare you not put roleplaying first!" <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />Now, I've never had an issue with someone being a little powergamey. And my gaming aesthetics are far and away closer to 1e than 2e. But, thanks to 3.x, Character Optimization is Game #1, for many people. And heaven help their group, if someone 's PC isn't as Baaaaaaad as their buddies'. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/yawn.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":yawn:" title="Yawn    :yawn:" data-shortname=":yawn:" />For most of the gamers I've met and played with, from my own age group, this whole "single spell" thing was never an issue. It's a game. This is part of the game and part of the challenge. It makes for some interesting, intriguing situations. Handicaps, by their nature, make things more difficult. But they exist for a reason and skilled players don't shirk from a handicap in any game, merely because it exists. Arguably, the weakest AD&D class is the Thief. Yet, I've had players who'll play nothing else. Because they enjoy it. Because they bloody well know how to play the class and play it effectively!  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious    :]" data-shortname=":]" />And this is why so-called "Old Schoolers" tend not to get all in a tizzy about "balance." Because in the face of player skill, that balance just doesn't mean as much as it does in other versions of the game. Now, I'm sure that WotC will address as many 3.x and 4e players' concerns about the Wizard, as they can. I suspect they'll put out a game that at least some 3.x and 4e players like. As each L&L column makes clearer and clearer, it's highly unlikely to be a game I want to run. Which, is what I expected and which, is perfectly ok by me. As I've said on more than one occasion, I think WotC should stick with 4e and not shove their fan-base under the bus. Again! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused    :confused:"  data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /></blockquote>

Verification