Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buugipopuu" data-source="post: 5859129" data-attributes="member: 41173">The system isn't built for PvP, and since you're talking about a problem with the system, you can't invent edge cases where it falls down.Since when was this about Wizards vs Fighters?&nbsp; Anyway, why play a Fighter when you can play a Warblade?That's not what &quot;exponential&quot; means.&nbsp; The effectiveness of most spells scales approximately linearly with spell level, not exponentially.&nbsp; Secondly, why is &quot;characters being able to do better things as they level up&quot; inherently unbalanced?&nbsp; The increased power of higher level spells is countered by the increased ability of higher level threats to deal with them.&nbsp; This is at least more interesting than a system where the only thing levelling up gives you is bigger numbers which are countered by the well-tuned bigger numbers of the monsters so every level feels exactly the same.<a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disintegrate.htm" target="_blank">Disintegrate certainly doesn't look like an instant-death spell.</a>&nbsp; It's a high damage spell that's limited by the fact that it needs both an attack roll and a fort save to go through.Dominate Person, as the spell is actually called, is overpowered for a 5th level spell, WotC put too much of a cost reduction on not being able to target non-humanoids.&nbsp; There's nothing in the system that says &quot;5th level spells must include the ability to make someone your slave for days with a single save.&quot;, or &quot;a spell can create an effect which can only be effectively countered by another spell&quot;.&nbsp; Jack Vance didn't decree &quot;And thus, 11th level Wizards must have the ability to slayeth their foes with but a single spell.&quot;.&nbsp; WotC were just dumb and underestimated the effectiveness of Save-or-Suck spells.Why is it a problem?&nbsp; If you make the difference between spells small enough, there's no reason any spells have to be a &quot;Win Button&quot;.If only the 3.5 system supported spells with expensive material components or effects which need specific actions to be completed to take effect.&nbsp; Oh, wait, it does.&nbsp; That has nothing to do with Vancian magic.&nbsp; Jack Vance also didn't decree &quot;And lo, no spell shalt ever costeth gold pieces to cast, and must always be completeth in a Standard Action with but a single save separating success and failure.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buugipopuu, post: 5859129, member: 41173"] The system isn't built for PvP, and since you're talking about a problem with the system, you can't invent edge cases where it falls down. Since when was this about Wizards vs Fighters? Anyway, why play a Fighter when you can play a Warblade? That's not what "exponential" means. The effectiveness of most spells scales approximately linearly with spell level, not exponentially. Secondly, why is "characters being able to do better things as they level up" inherently unbalanced? The increased power of higher level spells is countered by the increased ability of higher level threats to deal with them. This is at least more interesting than a system where the only thing levelling up gives you is bigger numbers which are countered by the well-tuned bigger numbers of the monsters so every level feels exactly the same. [URL=http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disintegrate.htm]Disintegrate certainly doesn't look like an instant-death spell.[/URL] It's a high damage spell that's limited by the fact that it needs both an attack roll and a fort save to go through. Dominate Person, as the spell is actually called, is overpowered for a 5th level spell, WotC put too much of a cost reduction on not being able to target non-humanoids. There's nothing in the system that says "5th level spells must include the ability to make someone your slave for days with a single save.", or "a spell can create an effect which can only be effectively countered by another spell". Jack Vance didn't decree "And thus, 11th level Wizards must have the ability to slayeth their foes with but a single spell.". WotC were just dumb and underestimated the effectiveness of Save-or-Suck spells. Why is it a problem? If you make the difference between spells small enough, there's no reason any spells have to be a "Win Button". If only the 3.5 system supported spells with expensive material components or effects which need specific actions to be completed to take effect. Oh, wait, it does. That has nothing to do with Vancian magic. Jack Vance also didn't decree "And lo, no spell shalt ever costeth gold pieces to cast, and must always be completeth in a Standard Action with but a single save separating success and failure." [/QUOTE]

Verification