Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 8546825" data-attributes="member: 53980">IMO, it's the degree of disparity between a high level fighter and a high level wizard.At level 1, the wizard is still arguably a little better than the fighter outside of combat, but it isn't dramatic. Casting Alarm around the campsite is quite handy, but the fighter could certainly keep watch and at least have a chance of spotting an intruder.At level 20, the disparity is tremendous. The fighter has improved marginally in their out of combat capacities. Maybe they have Remarkable Athlete and can jump a few feet farther. The wizard, on the other hand, can literally do just about anything with the right spells.No, that is not an argument for the quantum caster. The wizard will never have all spells prepared, I fully acknowledge that. But even a decent subset of "Do Anything" is vastly greater than "marginally better than level 1".In many high level campaigns, this difference is not so apparent due to various factors, ranging from DM management of spotlight time to magic items that can significantly broaden the fighter's capabilities to "vastly better than level 1".However, those are contingent on the DM, not the class. I'll reverse the issue to illustrate. Let's say the the fighter remained as is. But the wizard's spells no longer have any mechanics associated with them, just a bit of description regarding what the spells were supposed to do. What they do, how much impact they can have on the campaign, and whether they effectively do anything at all, would be entirely reliant upon the DM. Of course, you would still have skills from your background et al to fall back on if you have a strict DM.Does that sound like a game that is working fine-as-is, and that your average D&D player would want to play a wizard in?Edit: the example wizard is supposed to have mechanically functional cantrips. Just realized I omitted that detail.</blockquote>

Verification