|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 5:31AM
#41
|
- Hero Artisan Gold Medalist
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2007
|
Chrisasmadi, as far as psionics goes, consider how much page space the fighter class got in the 3.5 PH. Now look at how much page space it got in the 4e PH. The new format limits them to 8 or so classes per book, which meant that some fan favorites like the barbarian, bard, druid, and sorceror didn't make it into the PH1. As there was more demand for those than for psionics, they came in PH2 and psionics is having to wait for PH3. You might ask, well then why are we having to wait so long for the PH3? Simple: WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now. That means new classes take more time to put out because they take longer to develop and longer to test.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 5:48AM
#42
|
|
|
You might ask, well then why are we having to wait so long for the PH3? Simple: WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now. That means new classes take more time to put out because they take longer to develop and longer to test.
Actually I found the Psion to be very well balanced in play.
I was a d8: Deep, Dark and Cynical... but apparently they changed the quiz... 
Member since April 2001
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 6:00AM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2009
|
You might ask, well then why are we having to wait so long for the PH3? Simple: WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now. That means new classes take more time to put out because they take longer to develop and longer to test.
Actually I found the Psion to be very well balanced in play.
I think that's his point. They waited to release it Psion instead of rushing out a Psionic's book, therefore we got a well balanced and original class. Instead of an overpowered mess of abilities and rules.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 6:00AM
#44
|
|
|
You might ask, well then why are we having to wait so long for the PH3? Simple: WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now. That means new classes take more time to put out because they take longer to develop and longer to test.
Actually I found the Psion to be very well balanced in play.
I think that is exactly what Tylara is saying, previously WOTC had a tendency to release things too quickly and their weren't very well balanced, with this edition they seem to care a lot more.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 6:14AM
#45
|
|
|
Yeah you're right... I misread the following sentence
WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now.
So, ignore my post 
I was a d8: Deep, Dark and Cynical... but apparently they changed the quiz...
Member since April 2001
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 8:22AM
#46
|
|
|
Going back to the original post for a second, I'd just like to add that I despise the D&D Wizard, of any edition, and feel that its influence has often hurt other works of fiction who imitated it. Why? Because of this silly notion that "Wizard = EVERY SINGLE SPELLCASTER TYPE YOU CAN IMAGINE". The only reason that the Wizard was originally like this was to save space. It was literally the only magic-user class (god, it was CALLED Magic-User!), so it had to be able to handle every magic-user archtype possible. One sacred cow later, and here we are with the Wizard being expected to do EVERYTHING you'd ever want magic to do. Why couldn't they have left out the do-all "Wizard" and instead made individual Necromancer, Illusionist, Blaster, Mindbending, Elementalist, and what have you, magic-users? Because die-hard fans who can't accept any change would riot. Maybe next edition.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 9:13AM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2009
|
Going back to the original post for a second, I'd just like to add that I despise the D&D Wizard, of any edition, and feel that its influence has often hurt other works of fiction who imitated it.
Why? Because of this silly notion that "Wizard = EVERY SINGLE SPELLCASTER TYPE YOU CAN IMAGINE". The only reason that the Wizard was originally like this was to save space. It was literally the only magic-user class (god, it was CALLED Magic-User!), so it had to be able to handle every magic-user archtype possible.
One sacred cow later, and here we are with the Wizard being expected to do EVERYTHING you'd ever want magic to do.
Why couldn't they have left out the do-all "Wizard" and instead made individual Necromancer, Illusionist, Blaster, Mindbending, Elementalist, and what have you, magic-users? Because die-hard fans who can't accept any change would riot.
Maybe next edition.
I don't disagree with you. I don't agree with you either.
My advice, put down the haterade and enjoy the game.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 10:36AM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2005
|
Going back to the original post for a second, I'd just like to add that I despise the D&D Wizard, of any edition, and feel that its influence has often hurt other works of fiction who imitated it.
Why? Because of this silly notion that "Wizard = EVERY SINGLE SPELLCASTER TYPE YOU CAN IMAGINE". The only reason that the Wizard was originally like this was to save space. It was literally the only magic-user class (god, it was CALLED Magic-User!), so it had to be able to handle every magic-user archtype possible.
One sacred cow later, and here we are with the Wizard being expected to do EVERYTHING you'd ever want magic to do.
Why couldn't they have left out the do-all "Wizard" and instead made individual Necromancer, Illusionist, Blaster, Mindbending, Elementalist, and what have you, magic-users? Because die-hard fans who can't accept any change would riot.
Maybe next edition.
they pretty much will do that. "wizard" in 4th is the old generalist wizard, a little bit of everything, but no real specialties. i vaguely remember hearing that the shadow power source will contain a necromancer
and the sorcerer is already the "blaster" type.
that is a problem with a class based game... which archetypes should a class embody? in 3rd and previous, the wizard was meant to be everything from Gandalf to Merlin, Elminister to Tim the Enchanter, the skeleton army necromancer from Diablo 2 to that creepy guy who builds the army of little magical walking soldiers. the monk in 3rd however, was made to be a very specific type of monk. so the million GP question is: should classes focus on a wide range of archetypes or not?
3rd ed SRD, character sheets, errata & free modules4th ed test drive - modules, starter rules, premade characters and character builder & character sheet, errata Free maps and portraits, dice, printable graph paper, campaign managing website, image manipulation program + token maker & zone markers"All right, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back. GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR **** LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! Make life RUE the day it thought it could give CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'm gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that's gonna BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!" -Cave Johnson, Portal 2
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 12:49PM
#49
|
|
|
I don't disagree with you. I don't agree with you either.
My advice, put down the haterade and enjoy the game.
"Haterade"? Not worth it to hate a game. I highly dislike this aspect of the game, but i wouldn't waste time "hateing" a game. I do enjoy the game. Otherwise I wouldn't be here. However, I feel that if I observe a flaw in the game, then I should be allowed to say it here. "Stop whineing, just ignore the problem" isn't really the best way to do it.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Aug 30, 2009 - 1:32PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Oct 15, 2005
|
should classes focus on a wide range of archetypes or not?
Yes. More options is always good, unless they are completely redundant (like that Healer class in 3.5e).
Chrisasmadi, as far as psionics goes, consider how much page space the fighter class got in the 3.5 PH. Now look at how much page space it got in the 4e PH. The new format limits them to 8 or so classes per book, which meant that some fan favorites like the barbarian, bard, druid, and sorceror didn't make it into the PH1. As there was more demand for those than for psionics, they came in PH2 and psionics is having to wait for PH3.
Yeah, but equally, they also reduced the space taken of some classes as well. 3.5e Wizard - About 80 pages, including all the spells they can use, though some of these are shared, of course (at an average of 5 spells/page)
4e Wizard - 16 Pages (including Paragon Paths)
You might ask, well then why are we having to wait so long for the PH3? Simple: WotC actually gives a -censored- about balance now. That means new classes take more time to put out because they take longer to develop and longer to test.
This is not always a good thing. I care far more about having more options to represent more types of characters than I do about every single tiny thing being balanced. This opinion will probably get me flamed, but whatever.
"Haterade"? Not worth it to hate a game. I highly dislike this aspect of the game, but i wouldn't waste time "hateing" a game. I do enjoy the game. Otherwise I wouldn't be here. However, I feel that if I observe a flaw in the game, then I should be allowed to say it here. "Stop whineing, just ignore the problem" isn't really the best way to do it.
Indeed.
|
|
|
