Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4932818" data-attributes="member: 2011">I disagree. A Fighter already gets a lot of weapon feats and armor feats and shield feats and better hit points for free, in addition to a +1 to hit and some multiple times per round class features.The Wizard, in return, gets some minor cantrips that are typically non-useful in combat, one Ritual feat also not typically usable in combat, the ability to add his Int mod to a cloth AC of 0 (i.e. the Fighter typically starts out 2 to 4 higher AC), and a single encounter class feature.From a combat perspective, the Wizard has fewer options and is squishier. In return, he gets to attack at range and occasionally attack 2 or more foes. The Fighter too gets to often attack 2 or more foes a round with Combat Superiority and Combat Challenge, and the Fighter's individual attacks do slightly more damage.Even the much touted Shield spell adds 4 to AC for 1 round+ whereas the Fighter has an AC advantage every single round.So what can the Wizard actually do in 4E combat that the Fighter cannot?Some slight ability to throw some conditions on foes, attacks at range, sometimes a slight edge in "to hit" since he can sometimes change which defense he attacks, but that is offset by the fact that he does less damage and the Fighter is also +1 to hit. And of course the broken Orb combos. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I personally think that the Fighter is a lot more effective in combat already.The Wizard can improve his AC via feats for in combat, but then again, the Fighter can gain the Ritual feat for out of combat.All in all, I do think that melee types are a lot more overall effective in combat with 4E than ranged spell casting types and having a way for spell casters to be more versatile at the cost of gold is not that unbalancing.This is not a bad idea.An increase in effectiveness offset by a decrease in frequency.But for me, that is only half of the issue. The other half is that there are so few options (i.e. the same At Wills, the same Encounters, the same Dailies) for most encounters that all PCs feel stifled. It's not just the Wizards.</blockquote>

Verification