Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7622068" data-attributes="member: 996">Yep, martial exploits and arcane spells were quite different, and the wiz retained the edge in versatility, while the fighter kept his in durability&nbsp; - reflections of both source and role that give the lie to all the &quot;fighters cast spells&quot; and &quot;samey&quot; talking points.&nbsp;Not nearly the main culprit, no.&nbsp; LFQW&nbsp; is a matter of hard numbers.&nbsp; A 1st level fighter in the classic game could hit a little better than the next guy, and at 14th he could hit significantly better.&nbsp; The 1st level wizard could cast 1 spell, the 3rd, 3, the 5th 6 and so on.&nbsp; One thing steadily getting better, vs the number of things you can do growing, and getting steadily better, and being able to do them more often.That wasn't happening to a much greater degree from one class to another in 4e, the wiz and fighter got comparable numbers of abilities, chosen from similarly expansive (really, not expansive at all compared to other eds - a class might get 3-6 choices at a given level,&nbsp; PH 1e MU chose from 30 spells at 1st level) lists.It's absolutely true though that the fighter was out in the cold out of combat: a better list than other eds but no bonus skills, utilities more focused on combat utility.&nbsp; The gulf between fighter &amp; caster in D&amp;D has generally been vast - in 4e, it was a relatively narrow gap, still undeniable - but it didn't balloon in outright power with level as it does in all other eds.Better balance, even profoundly better, does not have to mean perfect balance.Rituals price-scaled like items, so same-level were always expensive to learn and significant to cast, while much lower became cheap. The wizard heavily invested in rituals simply had less going on in the magic item department. Ritual caster was a feat the wiz got at 1st level as a bonus. One feat, in a game that gave you 15 more over 30 levels.&nbsp; The wizard wasn't /badly/ nerfed, at all, it just didn't rapidly become wildly overpowered with level.&nbsp; Really, a 4e wiz was probably better off than a wiz of any prior ed, at first level. By 3rd, not so much.So, yeah, AEDU, by the numbers, was resource parity. It killed LFQW, outright, like so many sacred cows.&nbsp; But, the classes weren't &quot;samey&quot; and some of the differences were in powers vs features.&nbsp; The wizard, in particular, had virtually all it's role support baked into it's powers, it's features were kinda cute, but not all that.&nbsp; The fighters features were potent and combat-oriented with strong role support - it's powers could be pretty cool, but were mostly vehicles for that role support.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7622068, member: 996"] Yep, martial exploits and arcane spells were quite different, and the wiz retained the edge in versatility, while the fighter kept his in durability - reflections of both source and role that give the lie to all the "fighters cast spells" and "samey" talking points. Not nearly the main culprit, no. LFQW is a matter of hard numbers. A 1st level fighter in the classic game could hit a little better than the next guy, and at 14th he could hit significantly better. The 1st level wizard could cast 1 spell, the 3rd, 3, the 5th 6 and so on. One thing steadily getting better, vs the number of things you can do growing, and getting steadily better, and being able to do them more often. That wasn't happening to a much greater degree from one class to another in 4e, the wiz and fighter got comparable numbers of abilities, chosen from similarly expansive (really, not expansive at all compared to other eds - a class might get 3-6 choices at a given level, PH 1e MU chose from 30 spells at 1st level) lists. It's absolutely true though that the fighter was out in the cold out of combat: a better list than other eds but no bonus skills, utilities more focused on combat utility. The gulf between fighter & caster in D&D has generally been vast - in 4e, it was a relatively narrow gap, still undeniable - but it didn't balloon in outright power with level as it does in all other eds. Better balance, even profoundly better, does not have to mean perfect balance. Rituals price-scaled like items, so same-level were always expensive to learn and significant to cast, while much lower became cheap. The wizard heavily invested in rituals simply had less going on in the magic item department. Ritual caster was a feat the wiz got at 1st level as a bonus. One feat, in a game that gave you 15 more over 30 levels. The wizard wasn't /badly/ nerfed, at all, it just didn't rapidly become wildly overpowered with level. Really, a 4e wiz was probably better off than a wiz of any prior ed, at first level. By 3rd, not so much. So, yeah, AEDU, by the numbers, was resource parity. It killed LFQW, outright, like so many sacred cows. But, the classes weren't "samey" and some of the differences were in powers vs features. The wizard, in particular, had virtually all it's role support baked into it's powers, it's features were kinda cute, but not all that. The fighters features were potent and combat-oriented with strong role support - it's powers could be pretty cool, but were mostly vehicles for that role support. [/QUOTE]

Verification