Melee Ascendant! magic sleeping with the fishes?

[Numion]

Likewise. I hate the fact that Wizards overpower Fighters even more.

In previous editions, it was viable to play without a wizard in the group. In 3E, that is absurd. I know, we tried for over a year to a stealth/combat group like what I'd seen successfully done in 1E and 2E. It doesn't even work at low levels.

Having different classes balance differently at different levels is absolutely ridiculous. Even though Wizards are absolutely critical in 3E, at least the power curve stays consistant. Now, if they could just reign the class in a bit so it didn't constantly steal the show, I'd be happy.

Strange. I could say the excact same thing as you, except putting 'cleric' there instead of 'wizard'. In our games it's always a cleric that has been must-have.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that in 3e clerics can also blast stuff, and actually have some better utility spells.

 

[Storminator]

I am not sure where you get the idea that melee types take a back burner to the wizard. In my campaign, the swordslinger IS king and I run a campaign with heavy magic!!!! The 15th level mage is no where near effective at the fighter/ blademaster who can pull off +20 minimum damage with a lousy +2 sword!

And as for save/ die spells, most of those spells are fortitude saves. Good luck catching a melee character with one. You'd have to exist on luck to see a fighter fail one of those saves by the time that wizards get those spells.

As for hold, it is dangerous at low levels, but by high level play, even melee characters can make that save with little worry. The one time a melee type every got taken by Hold Person was the monk paladin (he rolled a one!) The WIZARD ran into melee and stood between the monk/paladin and the opposing fighter and cleric and fended them off until the rest of the party could get there.

Of course, the new hold spell will prevent that type of heroism because statistically, a held character will save before they can be taken down.

I play in an 18th level game, and the rest of us are just the chorus while the wizard sings the solos.

We must teleport, therefore we need the wizard. Plane hopping, scrying check +29, every divination spell under the sun... Incalcuable value.

And save or die spells are often Will saves. The wizard above has a save DC on his Dominate Monster of ~33. Go ahead fighter, roll your save. We have a fighter in our group (who does indeed dish out damage like there's no tomorrow) and we constantly fear his weak Will save. The bard picked up Break Enchantment for that very reason.

And I can't believe you've never had problems with Hold Person. It's easy to pump that save DC to 20 by 5th level. How many fighters routinely make that save? Precious few. Has your DM neglected this simple tactic?
1) Your fighter closes and attacks.
2) My fighter delays until my wizard's turn.
3) My wizard casts Hold Person.
4) My fighter CDG.

PS

 

[Tom Cashel]

We have a fighter in our group (who does indeed dish out damage like there's no tomorrow) and we constantly fear his weak Will save. The bard picked up Break Enchantment for that very reason.

It's a game designed to be played by groups of four characters. No class can be considered except in relation to all the other classes. No class should be great at everything. If the bard picks up Break Enchantment to help out the fighter, bully for you--you're doing it right. If the bard refuses to do this, stop whining about the fighter's shortcomings...you're doing it wrong. [EDIT: Not directed at you, Stormy--you're doing it right.]

The main problem with WotC's stated goal of "changing the game to correspond with the way it is played" is that most people have faulty notions of what constitutes "balance"...which is why the concept of "game balance" is considered overused and stale.

D&D 3.5 = Neverwinter Nights version 1.29 = breaks more than it fixes

 

[Belen]

I still disagree and I would love to know how to get a HOLD DC that high by 5th level. The only way I can imagine it is if the mage specifically burned a feat that allowed her to get a plus to that school of magic. Wizards do not get that many feats and they have metamagic, item creation, and normal feats to deal with. Most wizards never come close to getting all that they want.

I have to wonder what your group is doing wrong if the wizard is stealing the show at those levels. If you taken into account SR, and immunities to elemental spells, then that mage should find plenty to hamper her style.

Also, a GM who knows a mage is in a party can purposely place obstacles against magic. Everyone routinely places obstacles against melee characters, ie other melee types, but I have noticed that many GMs never create balanced opposition. ie. A GM does not want to mess with a caster throwing spells against the party, so just throws one or two types of classes against a group. There is a reason that mages can dispel oter spells! I say use it rather than water down the game.

There is no reason to have melee characters become more powerful than casters. They already get full mult-classing benefits, while mages suffer if they wish to multiclass.....

<sigh>

 

[Storminator]

That wizard is a specialist Enchanter, so damn right he "burned" the feat. Uses it constantly. DC on Sleep? 18. He's got an 18 INT, and Tattoo Focus (from FRCS) so he can become a Red Wizard. So 10 + 3 (spell level) + 4 (INT) + 2 (Spell Focus) + 1 (Tattoo Focus) = 20 DC. Sure he's devoted to this type of play, but he shuts folks down.

In the other game you better believe my DM comes hard for the wizard. But we need him anyway. How else can you teleport 3, 4, 5 times a day? We had one scene where the BBEG came teleporting for us, and we burned 4 teleports in 7 rounds to get away (let me tell you those were 7 hairy rounds! We teleport away! You're being scried...). Where else are you going to get that kind of spell power, but a wizard?

Now when the fights happen the rest of us more than hold our own. But that's the chorus part. Figuring out what we need to do, how we're going to do it, making the magic items we need, and getting in and out, that's all the little guy with the staff.

But to tack back to the rules changes, every member of our party can Haste themselves, and both the wizard and the cleric have Mass Haste. Surely if the party has 8 forms of Hasting, it's too good.

PS

 

[Endur]

Spellcasters are more powerful than melee types

Spellcasters are far more powerful than melee types.

They can fly, turn invisible, move through dimensions and time, etc, etc.

The lowly melee type can swing a sword. Yes, he can swing a sword better than the wizard or the cleric can. But if the wizard or clerics casts a bunch of buff spells, they might even be able to catch up to or surpass the melee character in a sword fight.

If all you care about is doing damage to monsters, play a fighter.

If you care about being the central character in the group, play a spell caster.

 

[takyris]

I believe that WotC did a good job of making the wizard more powerful at lower levels and less powerful at higher levels, relative to the old 1E and 2E traditions. They were still afraid to change some of the sacred cows, though, and some things that were meant to be balancing factors have turned out not to really be so balancing. I'm glad that they're making more changes in order to put the combat and skill-based classes on even footing with the wizards.

-Tacky

 

[Belen]

Please do not define more powerful as more versatile. Yes, the wizard can do a lot of stuff, but I am mostly concerned with the changes to combat power. And even with the buffs, a wizards will NEVER have the sword fighting power of a fighter. Tenser's transformation may give bab and attackes, but nothing simulates the feats and a wizard cannot cast spells in that mode!

I will be the first to say that a wizard is versatile; however, any of the other PCs could find a way to do the same. Want to teleport? Finance a ring etc. Just because a wizard can do more with spells, does not make them more powerful and any GM worth their salt can nullify their abilities during combat.

Just remember that a dragon with a breath weapon can ruin a fighter's day, yet that say dragon would one round a wizard. I have seen it happen.

Finally, ROLE-playing has nothing to do with abilities! I still see a movement to nerf casters, while powering up the melee types.

<aside: I don't allow teleport in my game. I have a ninth level point to point Gate equivalent, but nothing lower. Half the fun is getting there!>

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

Re: Spellcasters are more powerful than melee types

The lowly melee type can swing a sword. Yes, he can swing a sword better than the wizard or the cleric can. But if the wizard or clerics casts a bunch of buff spells, they might even be able to catch up to or surpass the melee character in a sword fight.

If all you care about is doing damage to monsters, play a fighter.

If you care about being the central character in the group, play a spell caster.

This is absolutely true... if you're playing 1E. How's that "Elf" of yours doing?

No, in 3E, which is what we're talking about, there are things called "magic items" which let fighters do more than swing swords. There's also other classes like "Paladins," "Rangers," and "Rogues" who have other special abilities that no Wizard/Sorcerer have.

 

[Storminator]

Please do not define more powerful as more versatile. Yes, the wizard can do a lot of stuff, but I am mostly concerned with the changes to combat power. And even with the buffs, a wizards will NEVER have the sword fighting power of a fighter. Tenser's transformation may give bab and attackes, but nothing simulates the feats and a wizard cannot cast spells in that mode!
<SNIP>

Ya ever seen somebody get Flensed? 1d6 Con and 1d6 Cha damage every round... and when the Cha hits 0, the Cha damage rolls over onto Con (tho that's a house rule). Devastating.

Chain Lightning? Mows 'em down. 18d6 +18*9d6. That's a lot hurt, even if folks are making saves. Sure it won't kill the tough creatures you fight at 18th level, but it'll bring 'em down to half, and it nails a lot of 'em.

Horrid Wilting anyone? Tears rogues to pieces.

Down at the lower end, Phantasmal Killer.

There's a lot casters can do. Sure foes can have SR, but that's usually less than 50% successful. No worse than a melee foe with a 42 AC. Our wizard breaks thru SR most of the time.

PS