Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SteveC" data-source="post: 1793687" data-attributes="member: 9053">Yes, it certainly seems like that was the idea. The problem is that the wizard and the sorcerer can't do anything besides use those temporary magic spells. This isn't an issue at higher levels, when wizards have unmatched combat ability and flexibility. The problem comes at low levels, when 3.5 reduced what a wizard can do. I think the idea of getting more towards the idea of "wimp at low levels, king at high levels" is a bad thing. Even with that, I certainly don't think that my two example spells needed to be nerfed to make skill users more viable. A first level wizard with spider climb can cast one other first level spell the whole day, after all.  One of the things I really liked about 3E was that it gave you a number of different ways to get to the same result: it is about options. Now with all of us...err..."rules artists" we find that there are ways to be very effective in different things that an adventurer needs to do. What has bothered me about 3.5 is that some of these methods have been determined to be bad, while others have not. The result is fewer options to make an effective character, and more similarities. The other debate in this thread is a good example of this: in 3.0 we have keen and improved critical stacking, which is one way to do a lot of damage at high levels. There are other viable ways as well: power attack, two handed weapons, huge numbers of attacks and two-weapon fighting and so on. There is no definitive consensus (at least that I've seen) as to what method makes for the absolute best damage dealing character. As we see in this very thread, people have different ideas as to how this works, and it ultimately doesn't matter who's right: so long as each of the different options is viable in one way or another. In 3.0 games I saw rapiers, scimitars, falchions, and two handed swords all described as uber.  In 3.5 we've eliminated the stacking of keen and improved crit, which makes a character concept that was viable before no longer available. Keen and Improved critical combine for a lot of damage, but that's what they're supposed to do. High level fighters are supposed to deal out hella' damage! The question is: do they do disproportionately more damage than any other kind of fighting style/magic item combo? From my experience, no they don't: in a medium to high level game it's too easy to completely negate critical hits for this to be an uber strategy. Now of course that's just my opinion, but I'm going to raise this question again: what was going on with the stacking that made it better than any other combat style? Haven't we just replaced "keen + improved crit" with "power attack, two handed weapon" in the new edition? Is having one less way to do hella' damage better for the game? Let me now officially get off of my soapbox...</blockquote>

Verification