Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 6136248" data-attributes="member: 23716">I don't think there is anywhere near such a consensus for D&amp;DN.&nbsp; It is true that many have complained about the Quadratic Wizard, Linear Fighter in past editions of D&amp;D, and many arguments (both on and off the internet) have ensued over the issue, but the designers of D&amp;DN have stated they are aware of the issue and are taking steps to mitigate it.&nbsp; I find it strange that you would propose your own solution to the problem without referencing these steps freely available in the latest play test packet.&nbsp; Namely:&nbsp; Wizards get fewer spell slots over all, and particularly higher level slots; spells no longer automatically scale as the level of the caster goes up, one has to use higher level slot to achieve a greater effect (this was a big part of the Quadratic Wizard); Many useful ongoing effect spells require concentration to maintain, thereby preventing the caster from layering on multiple spell effects to vastly alter an encounter; Save or Die (or, to be more inclusive: Save or Suck) spells have been subject to additional mitigating efforts such as Hit Point Thresholds (Easily the most controversial step taken, judging by reaction online); and swift action (or minor action) spells suffer the penalty of not allowing the caster to cast another spell or activate a magic item in the same round, thereby preventing a massive unloading of spell firepower in a round before opponents can act, though still possible through surprise.&nbsp; Not to mention the fact that Martial characters have auto-scaling damage now, which along with bounded accuracy, will help increase their potency into higher levels of play.&nbsp; I presume you are familiar with these issues but think they are insufficient? That may be true in the end, as this method is still highly dependant on restraint and discipline when designing new spells as D&amp;DN ages and new supplements are published.&nbsp; I still think these efforts, together with further tweaks and adjustments to individual spell power and levels, will yield the best results to mitigate spell caster power while still maintaining the traditional spell casting paradigm.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gadget, post: 6136248, member: 23716"] I don't think there is anywhere near such a consensus for D&DN. It is true that many have complained about the [I]Quadratic Wizard, Linear Fighter[/I] in past editions of D&D, and many arguments (both on and off the internet) have ensued over the issue, but the designers of D&DN have stated they are aware of the issue and are taking steps to mitigate it. I find it strange that you would propose your own solution to the problem without referencing these steps freely available in the latest play test packet. Namely: Wizards get fewer spell slots over all, and particularly higher level slots; spells no longer automatically scale as the level of the caster goes up, one has to use higher level slot to achieve a greater effect (this was a big part of the [I]Quadratic Wizard[/I]); Many useful ongoing effect spells require concentration to maintain, thereby preventing the caster from layering on multiple spell effects to vastly alter an encounter; [B]Save or Die[/B] (or, to be more inclusive: [B]Save or Suck[/B]) spells have been subject to additional mitigating efforts such as [B]Hit Point Thresholds [/B](Easily the most controversial step taken, judging by reaction online); and swift action (or minor action) spells suffer the penalty of not allowing the caster to cast another spell or activate a magic item in the same round, thereby preventing a massive unloading of spell firepower in a round before opponents can act, though still possible through surprise. Not to mention the fact that Martial characters have auto-scaling damage now, which along with bounded accuracy, will help increase their potency into higher levels of play. I presume you are familiar with these issues but think they are insufficient? That may be true in the end, as this method is still highly dependant on restraint and discipline when designing new spells as D&DN ages and new supplements are published. I still think these efforts, together with further tweaks and adjustments to individual spell power and levels, will yield the best results to mitigate spell caster power while still maintaining the traditional spell casting paradigm. [/QUOTE]

Verification