Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 5386631" data-attributes="member: 15538">Although the fighter, as I have noted, is somewhat underbuilt, I think it gets picked on. Is a paladin so much more self-sufficient?Furthermore, every class has its weaknesses. Wizards have to expend significant spell resources to deal with grapples; sorcerers must expend significant spell knowledge. Clerics are potentially quite powerful, but can be slow starters if they get debuffed and are feat-starved. Rogues have problems with amorphous opponents and heavy-hitters; against a dragon, a rogue is effective, but very, very &quot;dependent&quot; on other PCs for defense.Simply raising each of those a spell level is probably a decent adjustment. Glitterdust is extremely useful, but at rounds/level, is just under what I would call broken. I largely agree with the rest of your list.This should probably be rounds/level, with the minutes/level version possibly being an alternate casting of freedom.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pawsplay, post: 5386631, member: 15538"] Although the fighter, as I have noted, is somewhat underbuilt, I think it gets picked on. Is a paladin so much more self-sufficient? Furthermore, every class has its weaknesses. Wizards have to expend significant spell resources to deal with grapples; sorcerers must expend significant spell knowledge. Clerics are potentially quite powerful, but can be slow starters if they get debuffed and are feat-starved. Rogues have problems with amorphous opponents and heavy-hitters; against a dragon, a rogue is effective, but very, very "dependent" on other PCs for defense. Simply raising each of those a spell level is probably a decent adjustment. Glitterdust is extremely useful, but at rounds/level, is just under what I would call broken. I largely agree with the rest of your list. This should probably be rounds/level, with the minutes/level version possibly being an alternate casting of [i]freedom[/i]. [/QUOTE]

Verification