Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9479966" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Also, OP states we are comparing it to all time. Is 2024 worse than 3E's CoDzilla (or hulking hurlers or initiates of the 7 veils or Pun-Pun or...)? Worse than in 2E's putting a Player Options or Fighters and Priests of the Realms character alongside a base 1989 PHB character? Worse than 1E UA cavalier? Worse than some of the OP combos we argued about with 1e or BX or oD&amp;D (off the top of my head-- no save captures using transmute rock to mud and transmute mud to rock in short succession)? Or heck, just that the game has had overturn-the-whole-apple-cart material like artifacts and wish spells in there since sometime '74-'76. To say nothing of non-D&amp;D TTRPGs with equal or greater optimization gradients. I mean, if the premise were 'I'm annoyed at how many gimmicky power combos I'm finding in PHB2024, I didn't think they were going to do that,' I think it's 100% valid. But hilariously broken and most OP of all time? No, honestly it is par for the course.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 9479966, member: 6799660"] Also, OP states we are comparing it to all time. Is 2024 worse than 3E's CoDzilla (or hulking hurlers or initiates of the 7 veils or Pun-Pun or...)? Worse than in 2E's putting a [I]Player Options[/I] or [I]Fighters and Priests of the Realms[/I] character alongside a base 1989 PHB character? Worse than 1E UA cavalier? Worse than some of the OP combos we argued about with 1e or BX or oD&D (off the top of my head-- no save captures using [I]transmute rock to mud[/I] and [I]transmute mud to rock[/I] in short succession)? Or heck, just that the game has had overturn-the-whole-apple-cart material like artifacts and [I]wish [/I]spells in there since sometime '74-'76. To say nothing of non-D&D TTRPGs with equal or greater optimization gradients. I mean, if the premise were 'I'm annoyed at how many gimmicky power combos I'm finding in PHB2024, I didn't think they were going to do that,' I think it's 100% valid. But hilariously broken and most OP of all time? No, honestly it is par for the course. [/QUOTE]

Verification