Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 1286673" data-attributes="member: 537">Handy hint. A 20th level mage will indeed blow away a 20th level warrior who has nothing more than a piece of steel in hand. This is just as true of 3E as it has always been.Second handy hint. The 760,000 gp of magic bling that 20th level characters get is there for a reason. If you disagree with that reason, just remove the 760,000 gp of magic bling.Third handy hint. At 20th level, there is no reason to believe that the same tropes that sustain play at low levels still apply. The warrior with nothing but a mundane sword and sheer stubbornness is a low-level and low-power trope, and asking such a character to pull their weight at 20th level is ridiculous. 20th level play requires a readjustment of assumptions, to deal with how the new powers available change gameplay dramatically.Not that it's hard to find examples in fiction of supernaturally competent warriors. Hercules is the canonical example of the warrior who can do deeds even the gods find impressive. From Celtic mythology there's Cuchulain and lots of others; Slaine is a modern take on this tradition. In Chinese wuxia stories you have swordsmen who can fly and do all sorts of funky powers (the Jedi in Eps 1 and 2 are loosely based on this).Yes, Elmunchkin's paradise. Getting out of the shadow of Gygaxmania is the best thing that 3E ever did.You're the one who seems to think that other factors besides balance are more important to the game. Why don't you tell me? Surely if the relative parity of classes was truly unimportant to you, then you'd have plenty of reasons to play a mage, regardless of how well they do in a fight with others. Or by "balance is unimportant", do you really mean that IMbalance is important, ie you're pissed that your overpowered mage actually has some competition now?Have you played any 20th level 3E?Okay.</blockquote>

Verification