Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 5973242" data-attributes="member: 710">I still don't really believe that the "old" system was balanced, but I believe that the real balance problems occured at higher levels, which were never that common in D&D (that is true even for D&D 4, that make epic levels core!), and that 3.x did add a lot of stuff that benefited casters. Bonus spells, the way saving throws worked (pre 3E, saving throws may have seemed like an incoherent mess - but the Fighter was actually likely to save against many spells. Even with a good fortitude save, I have lost several Fighters in 3E to save or die effects that targeted fortitude). I believe spell acquisition rules also became a lot easier, and the problematic "game breaker" spells (Teleport, Scry and whatnot) were easier to attain. But we also have to realize that some old mechanics were also pretty unfun, even if they were technically balanced. Jack99 example of - take damage => lose spell. That may be balanced in that a Wizard cannot rely on his destructive magic to actually work - but it also means you take away one of the cool things the class can do. 3E instead made avoiding this too easy for it to be a genuine balancing mechanic. But, a fair compromise could have been - take damage, you must try again next round, instead of "take an action, lose your precious spell".I believe one thing 3E often did was trying to make things more "elegant" and computable - stuff like Good Save = 2 + 1/2 Level, BAB = +1/Level or 3/4 Level or 1/2 Level, but never really considered how these values would affect and change gameplay and balance.</blockquote>

Verification