Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 5725810" data-attributes="member: 463"><p>There may have been a cultural shift, but I think it's mostly about game balance - 4e making wizards feel more like fighters, with plentiful attacks of limited power, is a lot easier to balance, and gets rid of the 3e &quot;I win&quot; effect where spellcasters rapidly dominated play after about level 4, and rarely ran out of spells - if they did run out the whole party would have to rest, because 3e 'balanced' encounters tended to assume &amp; require the casters.&nbsp; 3e had abandoned the 1e dynamic where most encounters could be handled by Fighters alone, and the M-Us could spend most of their time lurking in the back and throwing darts.&nbsp; 4e could have gone back to that 1e approach, instead it took a different tack.&nbsp; Fighter-ising wizards has many advantages in terms of flexibility - I can run a 10-encounter day or a 1 'spike' encounter day, and both work.&nbsp; That was not IMO the case in 3e.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="S'mon, post: 5725810, member: 463"] There may have been a cultural shift, but I think it's mostly about game balance - 4e making wizards feel more like fighters, with plentiful attacks of limited power, is a lot easier to balance, and gets rid of the 3e "I win" effect where spellcasters rapidly dominated play after about level 4, and rarely ran out of spells - if they did run out the whole party would have to rest, because 3e 'balanced' encounters tended to assume & require the casters. 3e had abandoned the 1e dynamic where most encounters could be handled by Fighters alone, and the M-Us could spend most of their time lurking in the back and throwing darts. 4e could have gone back to that 1e approach, instead it took a different tack. Fighter-ising wizards has many advantages in terms of flexibility - I can run a 10-encounter day or a 1 'spike' encounter day, and both work. That was not IMO the case in 3e. [/QUOTE]

Verification