Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GM Dave" data-source="post: 5863176" data-attributes="member: 6687992">I think the answer to their problem of Fighter / Wizard combos is staring them in the face and they don't realize it.Logic Train here;Q&nbsp; Why did they give fighter's multiple attacks per round?A&nbsp; A Wizard using one action to cast a fireball that did 10d6 of damage was not comparable to a fighter swinging a 2H sword once.Q&nbsp; Why does multiclassing have problems between say a fighter and a wizard?A&nbsp; You are left with choosing between less swings of a sword or a weakened spell.&nbsp; You can not properly combine the two on the same round.Q&nbsp; How do you combine the equivalent of swings of a sword with casting of a spell?A&nbsp; You need to decide how many swings of a sword is equivalent to a level of spell.More specifically, you need to say that the casting of a level 1 or 2 spell is equivalent to one swing of a sword but the casting of a level 6 or 7 spell is equivalent to four swings of a sword.Now a player can choose on their round to cast several small spells, several swings of a sword, one big spell, or any combination and be in the same action economy as all the others.If you are a healer than you can do several small heals possibly helping out several people a little bit or go for a bigger heal on one or two people.You can even apply an 'all out' strategy with melee allowing a person like a 'rogue' to combine all their smaller attacks into one big, all or nothing attack, when things are most favourable.Everyone's damage and action economy is kept relatively comparable as a result and it makes sense that casting a level 8 spell is going to take more time then a level 1 spell which means that a good wizard should be able to choose between casting several weaker spells or one bigger spell in the same period of time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GM Dave, post: 5863176, member: 6687992"] I think the answer to their problem of Fighter / Wizard combos is staring them in the face and they don't realize it. Logic Train here; Q Why did they give fighter's multiple attacks per round? A A Wizard using one action to cast a fireball that did 10d6 of damage was not comparable to a fighter swinging a 2H sword once. Q Why does multiclassing have problems between say a fighter and a wizard? A You are left with choosing between less swings of a sword or a weakened spell. You can not properly combine the two on the same round. Q How do you combine the equivalent of swings of a sword with casting of a spell? A You need to decide how many swings of a sword is equivalent to a level of spell. More specifically, you need to say that the casting of a level 1 or 2 spell is equivalent to one swing of a sword but the casting of a level 6 or 7 spell is equivalent to four swings of a sword. Now a player can choose on their round to cast several small spells, several swings of a sword, one big spell, or any combination and be in the same action economy as all the others. If you are a healer than you can do several small heals possibly helping out several people a little bit or go for a bigger heal on one or two people. You can even apply an 'all out' strategy with melee allowing a person like a 'rogue' to combine all their smaller attacks into one big, all or nothing attack, when things are most favourable. Everyone's damage and action economy is kept relatively comparable as a result and it makes sense that casting a level 8 spell is going to take more time then a level 1 spell which means that a good wizard should be able to choose between casting several weaker spells or one bigger spell in the same period of time. [/QUOTE]

Verification