Does Dark Sun work with the character balance? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Does Dark Sun work with the character balance?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
migo
Sep 03, 2010 12:56:56 Some of the changes from 2e DS I'm reading about are making me a bit concerned. In 2e, wizards were seriously nerfed, they had a harder time casting spells, were actively persecuted, and that was on top of them being weak to start with compared to other classes without those extra restrictions. If you played a wizard it was a serious choice to explore that concept. I'm reading that now apparently preserving magic isn't a whole lot different from defiling, it's not more challenging to use, defiling magic just gives you an extra boost and an option to drain some life - there's a clear idea as to why defiling is stronger, but it seems like a conceptual sacrifice was made to maintain game balance (which is crucial for 4e and completely unimportant in 2e), and in 2e the fix was to play a psionicist instead.

So how is it working out? Is game balance compromising the feel of the setting or does it work out nicely after all?
#2
ian.thomson
Sep 03, 2010 14:10:34 4e wizards are still actively persecuted on Athas. That hasn't been removed.

2e wizards, beyond the lower levels, got to be really powerful. High level 2e wizards were way more capable of twinky, munchkiny crap than 4e (just the other day, a friend of mine was reminiscing about his wizard that did buckets of dice to multiple targets with his magic missle).

In the game story, defiling is supposed to be about power. If the defiler is basically doing the standard crap with just less experiance required, and the default wizard is penalized, it's not so much about power as not getting screwed.

The fluff always basically said preserving and defiling were the same magic, preserving was just done carefully.

It's easier to add in a bonus than a penalty.

With defiling being an option on top of arcane magic, rather than preserving being a gimped form of regular arcane magic, defilers are more clearly represented as more powerful and the temptation to defile is now open to any arcane caster.
#3
Wolf505
Sep 03, 2010 14:28:30 Defiling was always just the quick and easy path. Mechanically the two were no different in 2nd ed except that you left defiled terrain behind when you defiled, but defilers levelled faster then preservers. Since all classes level the same in 4th ed, it only makes sense that defiling have some kind of bonus to make it tempting, hence the way they did it. Playing an arcane caster is still going to be challenging in 4th edition Dark Sun because most people are still going to try and kill you if they find out what you are, especially if you're a defiler.

As for 2nd edition wizards... yeah, at low level they were weak compared to fighters say, but at higher levels they were ridiculously overpowered. A high level wizard in 2nd or 3rd edition could easily take out a whole army. In 2nd ed a fighter at level one attacks by swinging his sword and at level twenty attacks by swinging his sword, just more often. While a wizard gains exponentially greater power as they level. On a power scale of one to ten, a first level wizard was a one, while a first level fighter was like a three or four. At level 20 a fighter was still only like a five or six while a wizard was easily a 10 or higher. That's one of the things I love so much about 4th edition. The classes are all pretty much balanced at all levels, and as a fighter you have more to do then just swing your sword, then swing it more and more times as you level up.
#4
awaken_D_M_golem
Sep 03, 2010 14:54:28 2e and 4e are very different games.
It's got the same name on the masthead ... and that's about it.

4e might be considered balanced to the point of fetishness.
This is not a problem, if you really don't care one way or the other.
Weak classes aren't.
Strong classes aren't.
Options that do good stuff X, get penalty Y - but sometimes in a very roundabout way.

3e terms, some of 4e can be though of as 2nd level to 6th level.
2e terms ... heh ... you could Polymorph at 1st level, if you so choose.
You can't polymorph in 4e, the way 1e 2e and 3e did Polymorph.

But it is fun.
It is playable.
If your DM wants to make you die, he can.
If your DM wants to make you a Sorc-King, he can.
You get to fight either way.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 migo Sep 03, 2010 12:56:56	Some of the changes from 2e DS I'm reading about are making me a bit concerned. In 2e, wizards were seriously nerfed, they had a harder time casting spells, were actively persecuted, and that was on top of them being weak to start with compared to other classes without those extra restrictions. If you played a wizard it was a serious choice to explore that concept. I'm reading that now apparently preserving magic isn't a whole lot different from defiling, it's not more challenging to use, defiling magic just gives you an extra boost and an option to drain some life - there's a clear idea as to why defiling is stronger, but it seems like a conceptual sacrifice was made to maintain game balance (which is crucial for 4e and completely unimportant in 2e), and in 2e the fix was to play a psionicist instead. So how is it working out? Is game balance compromising the feel of the setting or does it work out nicely after all?
#2 ian.thomson Sep 03, 2010 14:10:34	4e wizards are still actively persecuted on Athas. That hasn't been removed. 2e wizards, beyond the lower levels, got to be really powerful. High level 2e wizards were way more capable of twinky, munchkiny crap than 4e (just the other day, a friend of mine was reminiscing about his wizard that did buckets of dice to multiple targets with his magic missle). In the game story, defiling is supposed to be about power. If the defiler is basically doing the standard crap with just less experiance required, and the default wizard is penalized, it's not so much about power as not getting screwed. The fluff always basically said preserving and defiling were the same magic, preserving was just done carefully. It's easier to add in a bonus than a penalty. With defiling being an option on top of arcane magic, rather than preserving being a gimped form of regular arcane magic, defilers are more clearly represented as more powerful and the temptation to defile is now open to any arcane caster.
#3 Wolf505 Sep 03, 2010 14:28:30	Defiling was always just the quick and easy path. Mechanically the two were no different in 2nd ed except that you left defiled terrain behind when you defiled, but defilers levelled faster then preservers. Since all classes level the same in 4th ed, it only makes sense that defiling have some kind of bonus to make it tempting, hence the way they did it. Playing an arcane caster is still going to be challenging in 4th edition Dark Sun because most people are still going to try and kill you if they find out what you are, especially if you're a defiler. As for 2nd edition wizards... yeah, at low level they were weak compared to fighters say, but at higher levels they were ridiculously overpowered. A high level wizard in 2nd or 3rd edition could easily take out a whole army. In 2nd ed a fighter at level one attacks by swinging his sword and at level twenty attacks by swinging his sword, just more often. While a wizard gains exponentially greater power as they level. On a power scale of one to ten, a first level wizard was a one, while a first level fighter was like a three or four. At level 20 a fighter was still only like a five or six while a wizard was easily a 10 or higher. That's one of the things I love so much about 4th edition. The classes are all pretty much balanced at all levels, and as a fighter you have more to do then just swing your sword, then swing it more and more times as you level up.
#4 awaken_D_M_golem Sep 03, 2010 14:54:28	2e and 4e are very different games. It's got the same name on the masthead ... and that's about it. 4e might be considered balanced to the point of fetishness. This is not a problem, if you really don't care one way or the other. Weak classes aren't. Strong classes aren't. Options that do good stuff X, get penalty Y - but sometimes in a very roundabout way. 3e terms, some of 4e can be though of as 2nd level to 6th level. 2e terms ... heh ... you could Polymorph at 1st level, if you so choose. You can't polymorph in 4e, the way 1e 2e and 3e did Polymorph. But it is fun. It is playable. If your DM wants to make you die, he can. If your DM wants to make you a Sorc-King, he can. You get to fight either way.