Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="justanobody" data-source="post: 4506933" data-attributes="member: 70778">Well the game has always had magic, and the nature of magic in your game controls how much it affects your game. Most times magic can do anything. That is a part of the sword and sorcery fantasy genre. If people felt that magic was so overpowered, why did they play any class that didn't use magic except for item boosts?I know a player that loves to play a brute/barbarian/thug/whatever that is just a type of fighter to bash skulls in. As long as this player can bash skulls in during combat he doesn't care what the other players do. His character is always ready to charge in even knowing a lightning bolt could be right behind him to be the first to wreck havoc on the enemy.His reasoning was simple:Magic users are boring.They just sit around casting spells and not get their hands dirty.For him he had fun with what he had fun with. Never cared what others did so long as he could bash skulls. If a MU caused him to not get to bash skulls his character would likely turn to the MU as his next target. Loads of fun in the game with the tension between the two, and they both played it up for everyone.Magic can do almost anything, but it cannot think for the players. You sort of need to know what you are getting into before you play anything, and that is where the rules come into play less, and group dynamics come into play more. Including the DM, to know what each player expects from the game, and what limitations may be found on those expectations that must be met in the middle at times.If the group of players doesn't work together then many problems can occur, not the least of which is letting magic play too big a part.My wizards rarely did direct damage with spells, but used spells in ways the other players looked forward to. Maybe that is why we saw not these problems often, or we just didn't care. I would wonder if the wizard players were always optimizing spells for combat on purpose to beat the game could be the problem? I know a few that would only take damaging spells to learn or memorize. They were boring character even for them.So is it really those classes and how they changed that made the game more balance now over the old 1E way, or the expectations of things that some players see more closely in 4E so that it does not feel like what they had in 1E?You can get a lot of fast action in both systems, but do you expect the same out of 4E that you do when you play 1E?</blockquote>

Verification