Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Underman" data-source="post: 5972988" data-attributes="member: 6696705">D&amp;D Next is going there anyway, like with balancing wizards vs fighters re: the 15 min adventuring day article. Also, I disagree it's enforcing anything on the DM in such black and white terms, or at least moreseo than what was &quot;enforced&quot; on DMs in past editions (wandering monsters and other paradigms).Doesn't make sense to me. A wizard will use a sword maybe once per encounter if at all. A warrior would use that sword at least every single round. The total damage dished out by a sword fighter will far exceed anything the wizard can do with it. So the net benefit to the party is to give the best sword to the fighter.That makes metagame as well as in-game sense -- in fact it makes more visceral sense in-game to the characters who are putting their lives on the line.Perhaps if one is immersed in characters who are reckless and silly and selfish and independent, then ya, they might not think of the party's net benefit (but even in that extreme case, the fighter can go up to the wizard and punch the crap out of the wizard and take his sword).IME, we play characters who function more as a SEAL team, and despite the odd squabbling, know it's better to give the best sword to the fighter. Always. Period.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Underman, post: 5972988, member: 6696705"] D&D Next is going there anyway, like with balancing wizards vs fighters re: the 15 min adventuring day article. Also, I disagree it's enforcing anything on the DM in such black and white terms, or at least moreseo than what was "enforced" on DMs in past editions (wandering monsters and other paradigms). Doesn't make sense to me. A wizard will use a sword maybe once per encounter if at all. A warrior would use that sword at least every single round. The total damage dished out by a sword fighter will far exceed anything the wizard can do with it. So the net benefit to the party is to give the best sword to the fighter. That makes metagame as well as in-game sense -- in fact it makes more visceral sense in-game to the characters who are putting their lives on the line. Perhaps if one is immersed in characters who are reckless and silly and selfish and independent, then ya, they might not think of the party's net benefit (but even in that extreme case, the fighter can go up to the wizard and punch the crap out of the wizard and take his sword). IME, we play characters who function more as a SEAL team, and despite the odd squabbling, know it's better to give the best sword to the fighter. Always. Period. [/QUOTE]

Verification