|
5 years ago ::
Apr 10, 2008 - 1:18AM
#221
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
I like the way Georgie said it:
"Fool me once…and, uh…you won't fool me again!"
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 10, 2008 - 1:26AM
#222
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
In 2E, the Fighter was better than 3.5 version arguablely, but he was not more powerful than the Wizard.
Definately not at same level; Fighters saving grace was he leveled faster than Wizard.
Were you using alot of houserules?
No he wasn't. His experience matches my own. The fighter in 1e and 2e was more powerful than the wizard for most of the levels that campaigns were actually played in (1-10). BTW, except for the lowest levels, the fighter did NOT level faster than the wizard. In fact the wizard had a slight edge IIRC from levels 4-9.
The big thing about the fighter was that the fighter had the best saving throw table hands down and all the magical gear a fighter was expected to wear (magical rings of protection, magical armor, shields etc) all decreased the fighter's saving throw numbers (already the lowest in the game after about level 4). [Remember low saving throw numbers in prior editions were good.]
Basically this meant the fighter didn't fail saves except on a '1' rendering most SoD type spells useless. SoD type spells were there to get rid of lower level threats, and weren't a serious threat to the fighter.
Wizard barely were upgraded: Concentration skill was it. I thought 2E spells were stronger (Haste was okay if you weren't human).
This is false as well. Wizards in 3E got to use constitution bonses for hit points above +2 which could drastically increase their hit points (and survivability). Wizards gained the ability to cast defensively. Morever a wizard no longer had to declare spellcasting prior to initiative rolling which meant it was nearly impossible to interrupt standard action spells (another new 3e concept).
Let's also add that in 3E Wizards got bonus spells (untrue in prior editions) and Intelligence for a wizard also made it harder to resist his spells (also untrue in prior editions). In addition to all that, the wizard while always lagging in the fighter in base attack bonus was no longer completely screwed in physical combat (at low levels the wizard has almost as good a 'to hit' as the 'fighter').
The big thing that put casters OTT (esp clerics but wizards too) was the fact that the new saving throw mechanic in 3E wasn't completely thought through when used in conjunction with the old 1e and 2e spells. Suddenly those SoD type spells that were meant to be minor monster killers or nuisance attacks suddenly became much more deadly.....
-Polaris
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 10, 2008 - 1:29AM
#223
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
I like the way Georgie said it:
"Fool me once…and, uh…you won't fool me again!"
The fact remains that Wotc and it's developers went to great lengths to assure people right after 3.5 (in 2004-6) that there was no 4E in the offing, and they lied through their pearly white teeth. [4e was in active developement almost from the time the ink on 3.5 was dry.]
Given that, give me one good reason to trust WOTC now when they say there are no plans for 4.5? Just one.
-Polaris
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 10, 2008 - 7:06AM
#224
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
No he wasn't. ... The big thing that put casters OTT (esp clerics but wizards too) was the fact that the new saving throw mechanic in 3E wasn't completely thought through when used in conjunction with the old 1e and 2e spells. Suddenly those SoD type spells that were meant to be minor monster killers or nuisance attacks suddenly became much more deadly.....
-Polaris
Well, there were lots of things with the conversion of 2e to 3e that showed the developers of 3e were not really 'tuned' into the underlying mechanics of 2e (and earlier editions).
3e was the first to produce a standard xp table for all the classes. Previously, balancing xp for a level verses the powers gained at a level was one of the biggest challenges of the game.
The equalizing of the xp tables has caused plenty of havoc as the powers gained at each level are not balanced.
It is also clear that not much playtesting got beyond the first few levels. This is a typical problem with MMOs and other testings of this type. No real playtest group that had taken things like Paladin, Ranger, and Sorcerer would have signed off on these classes if they had played them at higher levels.
The same goes for most of the feats. The advantage of Weapon Specialization and Weapon Focus is good in the first five levels but when compared against being at level 10 of 15 then they become pretty inconsequential.
The same goes for the variety of SoD mechanics. They were always a problem but the creatures with higher abilities (in 2e and earlier) often had reached a level that either they were getting 90% Magic Resistance (or higher) plus a Save that required them to roll a 1 or 2 to fail or the rules said that the spell was just not powerful enough to effect them.
Most mages did not waste time casting ten to twenty SoD spells in the hope of one spell getting through the double save barrier.
3e though allowed mages to heavily power up the DC which meant that something would get through or attack a type of save that a monster could not avoid (Dragons and such Collosal size creatures have lousy reflex saves).
In short, 3e removed the balancing mechanic of earlier editons (xp cost per level of abilities gained) and put in an 'open season' of any amount of abilities in a class or prestige class as a replacement.
Despite this, many people that I have known have had fun with the rules but I do look forward to seeing what 4e will bring.
|
|
|
