3e has specific stacking rules, a limited set of bonus types, and insanely fewer modifiers than 4e. I have played in a fight with opposing Cleric debuffs, strength draining spiders, and Buffs on our side.Piell wrote:Damn, not only do you not understand 4E, you don't understand 3.5. 3.5 was a ridiculous situation of stacking modifiers with random conditions and durations. Try fighting a bunch of spiders with strength draining spells and web abilities backed up a by a drow casting level drains and debuffs while your wizard hastes you and the cleric is counterbuffing. That's a nightmare of modifiers constantly changing.
And it was easy, because each effect has a discrete duration measured in rounds, all effects end at the end of rounds, most actions only cause you one modifier change, and most effects last a number of rounds that is "The combat' or "The combat plus a long time."
4e has effects that end after the action that spawns them, that end at the end of your turn, at the end of the round, at the end of the next round, at some point during your opponents turn, at the end of your opponents turn, or just whenever they make a save. And that's what your character alone can do, not going into how everyone else's character has the same set of possible durations, and the enemies could have even more screwed up stuff.
And since there aren't any good effects, like "Helpless" or "Paralyzed" or "Dazed (3e kind, since 4e is just 3e nauseate)" most effects end up adding stupid modifiers.
So? 3.5 is not a race to who can cast those spells first. A Glitterdusted Wizard that acts second can Glitterdust the opponents too. Immunities and bypasses are plentiful, and save or dies have this thing called a save which occurs before you lose any actions that you can pass.Piell wrote:Also 3.5 is full of spells that are commonly known as Save or Die, perhaps you have heard of them. Sleep and Glitterdust are basically instant wins at low level for example, or Dominate Person, Hold Monster, and Flesh to Stone at mid levels.
3.5 is a complex game of attempting to figure out the ideal effects to deliver, and balancing AoE vs single target effects, measured against action uses, like defensive or BC actions. I mean, sure it sucks if you are a Fighter, but just don't play a Fighter, just like you don't play a Warlock in 4e, the difference being that 3e is actually fun for everyone else, whereas 4e is still boring, even if you are a Wizard or a Ranger.
The statement had literally nothing to do with balance. It is about whether the game is a race to casting the insta win spells. Since it is not at any level, and is so most at level 1-4, and least at level 15-20, his point is that even when it is most like this flaw, that is only by virtue of the fact that everything ends very fast at that level.Darwinism wrote:So I'll just laugh at your first point. You're focusing on low-level combat, which is the only time a meatstick will be useful in 3.5E, because later on the Cleric will cast Divine Might and do just as well in melee while throwing around spells. And save-or-dies(or their best friend, save-or-lose) spells are a huge issue because of spells like Wail of the Banshee, Finger of Death, Polymorph, and Baleful Polymorph. Then let's get into spells that do stat damage. Like Ray of Stupidity, or PrCs like Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil.
So yeah at first level the Wizard needs to rely on his friends but rapidly outpaces them and eventually doesn't need them at all.
Balance at level 1-4 is not balance.
But thank you for proving yet again that you can't or won't read what other people are actually saying, because talking out your ass about Fighters sucking in 3e is your only defense against criticisms of 4e that have nothing to do with balance.