Is it really necessary to destroy the magic in this way? I've never had problems with the magic, or I have felt necessary to nerf the spells. Casters have a limited number of spells per day (which means they can not be a nova, and in many rounds even they must refrain from using their magic) Sometimes they do awesome things, sometimes fail to do anything. Well, it is magic. It must seem magical. ST, SR, ER ensure that their spells are far of to success always. I do not see that high level casters are the invincible people who I have readed in these messageboards. Of course we do not play a “number-playing” game instead of a role-playing game.
Indeed, sometimes it is throwing the blame to the magic of those problems is not guilty. The feats have been poorly designed from the beginning in 3.0 (and incidentally are the cause of the Fighter’s malfunction to high levels ... but not as bad as the number-playing gamers say) The way in which the system sets DC spells is also wrong, though not a big problem. Even so, the only thing we get is an unnecessary nerf of magic.
Many of those who say that the magic is too powerful seem to assume that spells are always successful. This isn’t what I have seen, however. They seem to assume that all castes have always prepared all spells they need, and in the number that they need. They seem to believe they can repeat each of these spells thousands of times. Even when they compare the wizard with the fighter, I've never seen comparing the wizard after a few encounters (when the wizard had less spells… or don’t have spells). they do not see that the mechanics for both is different? Where the fighter has the same power to end the day at the beginning, the wizard does not. And who says the wizard says the cleric, or other casters.
Why compare class vs class when classes are not designed for such comparisons? D&D has always been a game in which a party solves challenges. A PARTY. What a single character or a single class can not do, a group can do it.
Before the magic was powerful, but a limited number of spells per day make the caster had to think long when to intervene. We can see that Jason goes contrary. Class more similar, eliminating the real magic. It's the way it is developed PFRPG, one step closer to the fourth edition without changing the whole system. The spirit of the game changes, of course. Abysmally.
I want a cooperative game, a game in which each class to make different things, a game in which the group is more than the sum of its parts. I don’t need that all the characters can do more or less the same, and that is not D&D. I feel that what many people want is fourth edition, but without having to learn the rules of the fourth edition. But I think that many people don’t want this either.
But... Sleep: casting 1 round. What? It is necessary? Why? Darknees useless? Glitterdust almost useless? And more and more. Everything I read is: Nerf, Nerf, Nerf. It sucks. At this rate, who will want to play a caster? Jason, the game need good feats (all classes but especially the Fighter need them), but let the magic calm.
Not everything needs to be simple (which problems gives 3.5 Dispel magic? The problems come when people see the magic as a means to get thousands of buffs). Is it a problem the a spell to make to run away enemies, because theren’t are squares on the battle grid? That sounds so ridiculous. And not everything needs to be simple. Believe me not.
In summary... the problem lies in the magic ... or in the style of play? In the spells... or in poorly designed feats that resulting in a bad class trait for the Fighter?
Sorry for my poor English. But I'm so tired of reading the same thing that I had to write this. I hope you understand me.
Note that Sleep has always been a 1 round casting time in 3.5.
Personally, I'd like to see all 2nd level spells being (more or less) equally popular. If that means nerfing Glitterdust and Web and strengthening Flaming Sphere, that's fine with me.
I agree that the new version of Darkness is useless, but Jason has indicated (in another thread) that he's going to change it.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Note that Sleep has always been a 1 round casting time in 3.5.
Personally, I'd like to see all 2nd level spells being (more or less) equally popular. If that means nerfing Glitterdust and Web and strengthening Flaming Sphere, that's fine with me.
I agree that the new version of Darkness is useless, but Jason has indicated (in another thread) that he's going to change it.
And not all spells have been nerfed. As an example, Flaming Sphere was buffed, going from 2d6 to 3d6 damage.
The Spanish player's handbook says that Sleep has "una acción estandar" (1 standard action) Might be a traduction mistake, although it seems unnecessary, I think.
PF Web sucks...
I do not want the pathfinder magic becomes “only-damage” like in the fourth edition... Many people try to get away from the fourth edition. Make viable evocation not must guide to convert in useless the other spells.
Agreed 100 % with the OP. The more I see the evolution of Pathfinder, the more I think I will continue with normal 3.5, which is too bad because I really like it in the beginning.
There are a LOT of spells that need to be re-balanced in Pathfinder. Some of them need to be improved (I'm looking at you, Summon Monster/Nature's Ally Spells), but most of them need to be downgraded in power, need to have their save mechanics changed, or need to have vague wording in the spell description clarified to prevent arguments from breaking out at the gaming table.
There are a LOT of spells that need to be re-balanced in Pathfinder. Some of them need to be improved (I'm looking at you, Summon Monster/Nature's Ally Spells), but most of them need to be downgraded in power, need to have their save mechanics changed, or need to have vague wording in the spell description clarified to prevent arguments from breaking out at the gaming table.
I have mastered D&D for almost ten years and rarely i had problems with the spells. What you say is only an opinion, not an universal truth. Anyway, each Dm is free to nerf the spells at his will...in his game, of course.
I have mastered D&D for almost ten years and rarely i had problems with the spells. What you say is only an opinion, not an universal truth. Anyway, each Dm is free to nerf the spells at his will...in his game, of course.
I've been playing D&D since the Red Box, and I respectfully disagree. A lot's changed inbetween 2nd Edition and 3rd Edition, and spells that were balanced back then aren't quite so balanced these days, thanks to the changes regarding Saving Throws and the introduction of Item Creation Rules.
But even if you don't agree with those ideas, how can you argue that spells like Gate, Glibness, Reincarnation, and Planar Binding aren't totally busted?