Scaling the Caster Classes Back

[ptolemy18]

A few thoughts on game balance....

I should note that in just about any other RPG besides D&D, there is no illusion that characters should be automatically made "balanced." If I am making a character in GURPS or Vampire or Shadowrun or Call of Cthulhu, I basically have the choice to spend all my points on social skills and intellectual skills and interesting stuff, or to spend it all on combat skills and so on. From the same base amount of skill points you can produce a cook-slash-scubadiver, a plumber with awesome social skills, a sensitive vampire with no combat abilities, and a cybernetic assassin with Wired Reflexes who can kill the other three characters before they get to take their first action for the round. :/

THIS is what I mean by saying that perfect game balance is impossible to achieve. The possibility of total "game balance" goes down directly proportional to the amount of choices given to the players in character creation. It is always gonna be possible for someone who just cares about making the strongest character to make the strongest character, and then they will have an advantage in combat over gamers who are more role-playing-oriented. D&D is fairly balanced because the character creation options are fairly limited compared to other games... if you strip them even further, the game will become even more balanced, but at the cost of options and fun.

 

[Merlion]

If you want to play a wizard but you don't want it to be so complicated, then you play a sorcerer. I always assumed that was the whole point of the sorcerer class (nice class, incidentally... got nothin' against them).

No. What I mean is apparently some people like the part about Wizards where they run out of things to do before everyone else, and where they have to be worried about every spell they cast for fear of running out etc etc.


The Sorcerer is only slightly less complicated than the Wizard...and you still have to know the spells. They are also less effective than a wizard. But they can be, as you say, a good choice for people who prefer a more focused role. Just pick all blasting spells and go.

However, Sorcerers will apparently be meaningfully differentiated from Wizards in 4e, not just wizards who are slightly less complicated and considerably less effective.

 

[Merlion]

A few thoughts on game balance....

I should note that in just about any other RPG besides D&D, there is no illusion that characters should be automatically made "balanced." If I am making a character in GURPS or Vampire or Shadowrun or Call of Cthulhu, I basically have the choice to spend all my points on social skills and intellectual skills and interesting stuff, or to spend it all on combat skills and so on. From the same base amount of skill points you can produce a cook-slash-scubadiver, a plumber with awesome social skills, a sensitive vampire with no combat abilities, and a cybernetic assassin with Wired Reflexes who can kill the other three characters before they get to take their first action for the round. :/

THIS is what I mean by saying that perfect game balance is impossible to achieve. The possibility of total "game balance" goes down directly proportional to the amount of choices given to the players in character creation. It is always gonna be possible for someone who just cares about making the strongest character to make the strongest character, and then they will have an advantage in combat over gamers who are more role-playing-oriented. D&D is fairly balanced because the character creation options are fairly limited compared to other games... if you strip them even further, the game will become even more balanced, but at the cost of options and fun.

The trouble starts when even in a typical group composed of people who have both an interest in roleplay/social and in their characters effectiveness in combat, and where everyones "min/maxing" skills are roughly equal, you still end up with some classes or other aspects being drastically more powerful.

The Cleric class is an example. Just its basic capabilites leave it with few to no weaknesses, unlike the other classes. So a Cleric built with even the slightest thought to mechanical effectiveness can outdo memebers of other classes quite easily, especially from level 7 onward.

 

[Brennin Magalus]

From the front page of enworld.org:

"There was also a comment about scaling the non-caster classes up, while scaling the caster classes (specifically the wizard) back."

I would like to see the wizard scaled out of existence so that the sorcerer can come into his own.

 

[William Ronald]

I would like to see the wizard scaled out of existence so that the sorcerer can come into his own.

There is as much of a fantasy basis for the spell caster with books, who studies as opposed to someone born with inherent power.

I suspect that we will see the sorcerer better defined, with perhaps a few things taken from the Warlock and perhaps some bloodlines from the Unearthed Arcana book as options for a character.

 

[Merlion]

There is as much of a fantasy basis for the spell caster with books, who studies as opposed to someone born with inherent power.
.

And there is even more basis for a spell caster who is both...born with a spark, refined through learning.

Thats why I dislike all the "origin" stuff in the class descreptions. Its also the only gripe I have with the Magister in Arcana Evolved...it fits what I want but still has the descreption and flavour as a "learned mage."

I think the player should decide the "origin" of his characters powers, without encumbrance.

 

[ptolemy18]

No. What I mean is apparently some people like the part about Wizards where they run out of things to do before everyone else, and where they have to be worried about every spell they cast for fear of running out etc etc.

Well, it's true, I do like that part...

 

[Stalker0]

In almost every high fantasy setting -- I'm sure people can think of a few that are different, but basically, in almost every setting -- powerful wizards are The Biggest Badasses Around.

That's because they are the highest level characters around. And that makes a lot of sense, who has a better life expectancy, the guy who summons monsters to kill for him and shoots fireballs from half a mile away, or the guy who runs screaming into the dragon's maw.

From my perspective, I have always felt that in combat, fighter types should be BETTER than wizards. Combat is all a fighter type does, but a wizard can alter the weather, control minds, divine the future, curse your kinsmen, summon an army to his beck and call, create a castle out of thin air, etc etc. Wizards get so many cool things they can do out of combat, why should they be equal to the fighter in combat, when combat is all the fighter does?

Think of Conan, he takes down wizards left and right. Wizards have the power to alter the world itself, but if one equal level fighter decides to pay them a visit, they should be sweating.

 

[Treebore]

Well, the good news is if all this is true I'll save a lot of money by not buying 4E.

When everyone is supposed to be equal to the guy who manipulates the forces of the universe, who commands other planar creatures, dominates minds, summons minions, travels the planes, and they themselves are not Wizards the game loses something.

Something core, something critical.

Plus it loses me as a fan.


I gotta quit reading all these threads, getting me way to depressed about the possibilities of 4E.

 

[hong]

Well, the good news is if all this is true I'll save a lot of money by not buying 4E.

When everyone is supposed to be equal to the guy who manipulates the forces of the universe, who commands other planar creatures, dominates minds, summons minions, travels the planes, and they themselves are not Wizards the game loses something.

Something core, something critical.

Yes. It loses the "it's not broken if the fighter can't do it" philosophy.

Whereas I am a fan of the "it's not broken so long as the fighter can do it" philosophy.