Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9606383" data-attributes="member: 7030563">The groups (plural) as well as every group I have played D&D with in the last 44 years.I agree and I acknowledged that in my post above when I said:  "I know it is a problem for people on this forum"For you and a few others, I agree there is some sort of problem.As I said above this is a problem for anyone that needs to to play the most powerful character at the table, but refuses to play the classes with mechanics which provide that.You are acting like I am saying this is not a problem for anyone and I am not saying that.  I just don't think it is a problem for most player.It is not just acceptance it is advocation.I am not saying it is ok that non-casters are weaker, I am saying the game is better because of this.No fully believe my attitude is consistent with the vast majority of players and it certainly is consistent with the people I game with.I think you are projecting your attitude on others.But every playuer CAN have phenominal godlike power if they want to.  You are making out like this is not somethiung the rules allow, but it clearly is allowed.You CAN play the most powerful class and have phenominal godlike powers.  Everyone at the table CAN do it.I respectfully disagree.  I don't think itis onerous at all, it is a core part of the game and one I think makes it better.I disagree on this too.  I think a very small minority don't accept this.  Mybe I am wrong, but I do not believe I am wrong and the fact the game historically has done better and been more popular when the disparity is at its widest.I don't need to prove what I believe.  That is what the word "believe" which you forgot to include in your bold is all about.But I have as much proof (i.e. none) as you do and more anecdotes to boot.It is not false.  I stated it is my belief.  In fact it would be false and be a lie if I said I didn't believe that.There can be no equals in a game which relies on radomization.  Two players with the exact same characters, abilities and who even take the exact same actions will still not be equals.You need to take dice completely out of the game to have any hope of having true equality.What you are referring to is not equality but bias.  You want it so that choices made do not mechanically bias the results.  I disagree with this position and feel that bias is a good thing.I think anything that degenerates others is not acceptable, but I believe the classes are designed to have roles and some of them are designed to be more powerful mechanically and I think that is a good thing.  I think the current version of the game is more fun, WAY more fin in fact, than previous versions that were more balanced.]Personally I don't understand the need to play a character who is just as powerful at every other character at the table.  I accept that the character I am playing will often be weaker than other PCs and sometimes I accept the fact that my PC will be more powerful than other PCs and I think that is a good thing.What I have trouble understanding is why others who understand the rules and mechanics find this to be a problemYou don't believe the rules allow some classes overshadow others?Is that what you are saying?  If so I think you are wrong.The designers have said this, but when they say this it is broad statements, not nuanced discussions as we are having on this board.  I don't know if those that say this are only a subset of designers, or if they are pandering, or if they only intend it to apply to specific levels/situations, or  specific part of the game, or if they don't understand the rules they wrote.What I do know is it is designers who put Simulacrum and Wish into the game and any caster with access to these two spells can far exceed the capability of a non-caster, to include being able to replicate virtually any of the class-specific abilities from other classes.</blockquote>

Verification