Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9650084" data-attributes="member: 7030563">Ok I have a few issues with this.&nbsp; First the inequality is very much level specific.&nbsp; We keep talking about classes (or more accurately class categories) but ignore that the relative power changes drastically based on the specific level you are talking about.&nbsp; Saying &quot;full-casters&quot; are stronger than &quot;non-casters&quot; (classes with no spells) is just simply not true across the board, it is not even true for most levels when comparing some &quot;full-caster&quot; classes and some &quot;non-caster&quot; classes.The Rogue, Monk and Fighter are not &quot;penalized&quot; at all at some levels.&nbsp; At some level they can be better than any Wizard or Sorcerer you can build.Further when it comes to characters that are &quot;penalized&quot; for weak thematic choices, that is more true for casters than it is non-casters based on spell selection.&nbsp; Full Casters who choose weak spells for thematic reasons are weaker at all levels than Martials or other full casters who make more powerful choices.&nbsp; I agree that at high levels Wizards and Sorcerers can be much more powerful than Fighters, Monks, Rogues and Barbarians can be ... but if and only if they choose the best spells.&nbsp; If they choose the weakest spells (for thematic reasons) then they are far weaker than Fighters and Monks can be.&nbsp; Aren't those caster players then being penalized in the same fashion as you claim martials are penalized?At the end of the day it boils down to choice.&nbsp; The Wizard player who makes a choice to choose weak spells for thematic is not being penalized and likewise a player who chooses to play a Barbarian at level 17 for thematic reasons.&nbsp; Those are just gameplay choices.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9650084, member: 7030563"] Ok I have a few issues with this. First the inequality is very much level specific. We keep talking about classes (or more accurately class categories) but ignore that the relative power changes drastically based on the specific level you are talking about. Saying "full-casters" are stronger than "non-casters" (classes with no spells) is just simply not true across the board, it is not even true for most levels when comparing some "full-caster" classes and some "non-caster" classes. The Rogue, Monk and Fighter are not "penalized" at all at some levels. At some level they can be better than any Wizard or Sorcerer you can build. Further when it comes to characters that are "penalized" for weak thematic choices, that is more true for casters than it is non-casters based on spell selection. Full Casters who choose weak spells for thematic reasons are weaker at all levels than Martials or other full casters who make more powerful choices. I agree that at high levels Wizards and Sorcerers can be much more powerful than Fighters, Monks, Rogues and Barbarians can be ... but if and only if they choose the best spells. If they choose the weakest spells (for thematic reasons) then they are far weaker than Fighters and Monks can be. Aren't those caster players then being penalized in the same fashion as you claim martials are penalized? At the end of the day it boils down to choice. The Wizard player who makes a choice to choose weak spells for thematic is not being penalized and likewise a player who chooses to play a Barbarian at level 17 for thematic reasons. Those are just gameplay choices. [/QUOTE]

Verification