Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 2235310" data-attributes="member: 151">Understood, and it's all good.&nbsp; However, here's a few ideas to consider:1) Games aren't solely balanced around combat, but combat is the easiest thing to balance around.&nbsp; That is to say, I can easily figure out how to make a spell that allows a wizard to have a chance of fighting a powerful melee creature, in the same way as I can create a feat for a warrior.&nbsp; These work out to base numerical equations.&nbsp; Balancing 'fact time' in role-playing mode is extremely difficult, from a rules standpoint.&nbsp; Characters in D&amp;D are not just based around combat effectiveness, but also around being in the spotlight.&nbsp; Magic Trap on a locked chest ahead?&nbsp; The rogue will get the spotlight (or the appropriately prepared wizard).&nbsp; Prismatic wall ahead?&nbsp; Better ask the spellcasters.&nbsp; Iron Golem attacking?&nbsp; Get out the weapons.2) Knowledge is power, and that applies to combat, as well.&nbsp; As anyone familiar with the classic 'scry and fry' technique could tell you, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.&nbsp; If spellcasters have lots of information, they become significantly &lt;i&gt;more&lt;/i&gt; powerful.3) Taking away a spellcaster's combat effectiveness has the potential to render large parts of the game as boring to them.&nbsp; Remember: D&amp;D was founded as a game about killing monsters and taking their stuff.&nbsp; Combat is the centerpiece of the game, by design.&nbsp; This doesn't mean that spellcasters can't have fun, but if you take away too many of their salient, real-time abilities, they swiftly become boring to play during combats.&nbsp; A lot of what you're suggesting sounds interesting, but I'd be very careful about polarizing their classes.&nbsp; If only the melee fighters have anything useful to contribute during combat, I hope there isn't too much of it, or you'll have some very bored spellcasters.&nbsp; By the same token, the melee characters will be bored stiff during the spellcaster diviniation sequeneces, again if you're not careful.It is certainly can be considered a legitimate complaint about D&amp;D that magic is expected and required at high levels for either side to compete in the core rules.&nbsp; It's also true that D&amp;D can be jerry-rigged to not require it be that way (see Grim Tales for an example).&nbsp; Ultimately, all that matters is what works out as fun for your group.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 2235310, member: 151"] Understood, and it's all good. However, here's a few ideas to consider: 1) Games aren't solely balanced around combat, but combat is the easiest thing to balance around. That is to say, I can easily figure out how to make a spell that allows a wizard to have a chance of fighting a powerful melee creature, in the same way as I can create a feat for a warrior. These work out to base numerical equations. Balancing 'fact time' in role-playing mode is extremely difficult, from a rules standpoint. Characters in D&D are not just based around combat effectiveness, but also around being in the spotlight. Magic Trap on a locked chest ahead? The rogue will get the spotlight (or the appropriately prepared wizard). Prismatic wall ahead? Better ask the spellcasters. Iron Golem attacking? Get out the weapons. 2) Knowledge is power, and that applies to combat, as well. As anyone familiar with the classic 'scry and fry' technique could tell you, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. If spellcasters have lots of information, they become significantly more powerful. 3) Taking away a spellcaster's combat effectiveness has the potential to render large parts of the game as boring to them. Remember: D&D was founded as a game about killing monsters and taking their stuff. Combat is the centerpiece of the game, by design. This doesn't mean that spellcasters can't have fun, but if you take away too many of their salient, real-time abilities, they swiftly become boring to play during combats. A lot of what you're suggesting sounds interesting, but I'd be very careful about polarizing their classes. If only the melee fighters have anything useful to contribute during combat, I hope there isn't too much of it, or you'll have some very bored spellcasters. By the same token, the melee characters will be bored stiff during the spellcaster diviniation sequeneces, again if you're not careful. It is certainly can be considered a legitimate complaint about D&D that magic is expected and required at high levels for either side to compete in the core rules. It's also true that D&D can be jerry-rigged to not require it be that way (see Grim Tales for an example). Ultimately, all that matters is what works out as fun for your group. [/QUOTE]

Verification