Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7392925" data-attributes="member: 996">yeah, and George Burns smoked cigars and lived to be 100, but tobacco still causes cancer.&nbsp;3.5 was the high point of caster supremacy, yes.&nbsp; Classically, the magic-user, and generally, other casters, were balanced over a whole campaign, starting weaker than non-casters for a level or few, pulling equal through the 'sweet spot,' and dominating the later game (if the campaign ever got that far).&nbsp; To really experience balance, you'd have to play a caster not just in a full campaign, but casters in many campaigns, including some in which your magic-user died at low level, and some that never reached the high level pay-off, at all.&nbsp;I think either narrowing the focus/power of casters, or increasing the power/versatility of martial classes could help.&nbsp; It's not like it hasn't been done with some success in many other games and even one other edition of D&amp;D.&nbsp; It's just that the core branding of D&amp;D has become associated with the feel LFQW gives, so if it's addressed at all (rather than merely complained about on-line, which remains a popular pass-time we'd be loath to give up entirely), it has to be as a set of options.&nbsp;It's definitely not something small, it's on the same scale as wanting 3.5 levels of customization with feats &amp; MCing &amp; PRcs (which I also think is reasonable, BTW).&nbsp; And it wouldn't be a genre overhaul, so much as a genre reconciliation.&nbsp; Just put all classes in the same genre.&nbsp; Don't design non-casters as if they were in a gritty-realism low-fantasy genre and casters as if they were thinly-veiled supers with fantasy trappings ('high fantasy' doesn't even begin to cover it, LotR was high fantasy, and D&amp;D casters leave Gandalf &amp;co in the dust).&nbsp; &nbsp;There are two plausible resolutions:&nbsp; add options to bring the whole game up to the casters' 'supers' level, or to drag most of the classes down to the non-casters' 'gritty' level.&nbsp; Or, I suppose, aim for something closer to S&amp;S.&nbsp; You'd have to boost non-casters a bit and pull casters down some, but most of the 'balance' could come from making actually using spells extremely risky, not just inconvenient or applying lame RP restrictions or doing a few dice of damage when you flub a roll, but carry an inevitable risk of loss of the character (death or loss of control as it becomes a monster or insane and must be put down by other adventurers).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7392925, member: 996"] yeah, and George Burns smoked cigars and lived to be 100, but tobacco still causes cancer. 3.5 was the high point of caster supremacy, yes. Classically, the magic-user, and generally, other casters, were balanced over a whole campaign, starting weaker than non-casters for a level or few, pulling equal through the 'sweet spot,' and dominating the later game (if the campaign ever got that far). To really experience balance, you'd have to play a caster not just in a full campaign, but casters in many campaigns, including some in which your magic-user died at low level, and some that never reached the high level pay-off, at all. I think either narrowing the focus/power of casters, or increasing the power/versatility of martial classes could help. It's not like it hasn't been done with some success in many other games and even one other edition of D&D. It's just that the core branding of D&D has become associated with the feel LFQW gives, so if it's addressed at all (rather than merely complained about on-line, which remains a popular pass-time we'd be loath to give up entirely), it has to be as a set of options. It's definitely not something small, it's on the same scale as wanting 3.5 levels of customization with feats & MCing & PRcs (which I also think is reasonable, BTW). And it wouldn't be a genre overhaul, so much as a genre reconciliation. Just put all classes in the same genre. Don't design non-casters as if they were in a gritty-realism low-fantasy genre and casters as if they were thinly-veiled supers with fantasy trappings ('high fantasy' doesn't even begin to cover it, LotR was high fantasy, and D&D casters leave Gandalf &co in the dust). There are two plausible resolutions: add options to bring the whole game up to the casters' 'supers' level, or to drag most of the classes down to the non-casters' 'gritty' level. Or, I suppose, aim for something closer to S&S. You'd have to boost non-casters a bit and pull casters down some, but most of the 'balance' could come from making actually using spells extremely risky, not just inconvenient or applying lame RP restrictions or doing a few dice of damage when you flub a roll, but carry an inevitable risk of loss of the character (death or loss of control as it becomes a monster or insane and must be put down by other adventurers). [/QUOTE]

Verification