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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4976449" data-attributes="member: 22779">Eeeehh.  You're chance of learning a spell was pretty good by and large.  Assuming an 16+ Int (and that's not a tough assumption IME) you had about a what, 60, 70% chance of learning a spell.  If you ever hit 19 Int, that issue when away.Now, the max spells per level could certainly be an issue though.  You couldn't just keep adding spells to your spellbook forever.  There was an upper limit.  It was a pretty high upper limit, but, upper limit there was.As far as goes, well, again, sure, there are some players like this.  I don't deny that.  But, again, I don't think this should be the default.  I think it should be the player's choice.  If I as the player, choose to do that, it's because I want to, not because I have so few spells per day that I'm pretty much forced to by circumstance.Again, there's no reason you can't play like that in 3e or 4e either.  But, something to be really aware of in all of this was the assumption of party size.  It was perfectly okay for the wizard to sit back and watch in 1e and 2e because the party was assumed to be 6-8 rather than 4.  Those extra 2-4 PC's make an ENORMOUS difference.In 1e, you were assumed to have 3 frontline fighter types.  Plus the cleric and you have 4 PC's that can form a nice wall for the wizard to hide behind.  Because the monsters were quite a bit smaller hit point wise and damage potential wise, the three fighter types could put a serious pounding on pretty much any threat.The wizard was just icing on the cake.In 3e, the assumption is that there is no icing, there is only cake.  The wizard HAS to pull his weight every round or the party is going to start losing PC's.  The monsters are not only considerably tougher, but their damage potential is significantly higher.  Sometimes to the tune of doubling their 1e damage.  1st to 10th level PC's aren't all that different in any system 1e-3e as far as hit points go.  Suddenly, you had only 1 fighter type in the front instead of 3 spreading out the damage and the monsters were doing possibly twice as much damage per round.It's not an option for the wizard to not do damage.  If the wizard is just watching the fight, the fighter is seriously going to get pummeled.I think that's a point that gets lost in a lot of these comparisons.  The biggest shift between pre-3e and 3ed is the assumed size of the party and the huge increase in monster hit points and damage output.</blockquote>

Verification