Nope, I wanted them to be less "boring" to play (less "situational" ¿?), be more flexible, Because, as you said, in IE videogames you have a party, in tabletop you only have one. Wizards and clerics and druids are ok, why would I want to nerf them? o.O Just refine`em or give them more features.
Combat examples again... -facepalm- Combat is fun with all classes, every class has its strengths and weaknesses. ed: my issues are with the non-combat use of skills, or the lack of use for non-combat skills for non-casters, to be more precise. All you can do can be done (better) with a spell. I know my english is horrid, but I thought that I´ve made that abundantly clear
Back on track, the advantage/disadvantage and inspiration mechanics, central in 5e, are a game-changer. Also the Larian CEO stated that they will implement in some way in the game. Like in most games in late years, I suppose that BG3 will have an history/easy mode but I would appreciate a core rules mod ( not simply a hard mod same as easy but with enemies with more ac and hp).
It's our moment to shine. And we're gonna ace it So we made our checks and stuff and then all that happened was that we made it to the other side of the gorge and we found a water source. We were soaked and dirty and full of mosquitoes bites, but we´ve made it. Total 35 seconds of rp. Also I found some footprints, so We found earlier that some humanoids were in the defilade. Totally cool. So our druid did not have to spend one use of "create water" spell and his raven did not have to warn us (because that feathery show-off totally made his spot check) and all was solved with two dice rolls. The Druid also simply feather-step his way of out the swamp and burned the mosquitoes without a sweat. Even the raven gave us some pitiful stares "Maybe you should go sacred fist from here? (That I know because of they rp that, Senda and Worthington the third hate that smartass talking bird for a reason ). Our moment to shine... totally worth it (not).
(also just after that we mess it up big time with a double hide and spot check, but fortunately, the evasion of the monk kicked and the barbarian had like tons of hp so we survived. The duid took us out with a vine spell and healed us while his "flying bother" laughed at us)
I know it is just an example and probably I have a bias. Maybe it is because I do not have good experiences in our plays: the adventures or the gm does not allow the use of class features wisely. In theory there are lot of potential in most non-caster classes`utility skills, but in practice, we simply do not find much to do besides combat in our plays when we rp warrior classes. And I am not the only one who thinks that.
Yes, _Vic_, but no RPG game made melee interesting to me. Mainly when i an restricted to an weapon that was mostly used as backup weapon and was ineffective against armor or large creatures(swords), i loved Dragon's Dogma, as an Sorcerer, Magick Archer, Assassin and Ranger, but the "prologue" where you play as an warrior, is so boring for me that i downloaded an save to skip it on my second run.
Every time that an game tried to """balance""", resulted on the same boring experience for all classes.
But the problems that you presented can be solved on BG3 without changing an single rule. For eg, you could make certain spells scrolls like knock outlawed in BG city and only few members of thieves guild able to sell it to you for a big price, after an side quest, for eg. That way an "monkey rogue" would not be easily replaced by an wizard with his inventory fulfilled by knock scrolls. Considering that you need "mage licence" to cast spells on the city on BG2, this will not be against the rules. All other spells that can "replace" other classes can be given an similar treatment.
Ooook, now I see. If you are telling me that to make more interesting the warrior-type classes they have to make a mandatory "Dumb-down" or cripple alchemist, divine and arcane spellcasters, I agree it is a no-no. I hope they find another way.
In the "Arcanum" game already mentioned you do not have this problem. You also have the "knock" spell but cast it makes a lot of noise, so you cannot actually use it to unlock doors, safes or containers without the guards or the monsters next door coming to you. So you need some rogue skills to do that silently.(Also you have the tech vs arcane penalty)
About melee fighting, well the fighter types look ok in 5e. I do not played it but now fighters can have cool abilites to get more moves or give disadvantage to your opponents so maybe it is not a "point and hit, with pauses to gulp potions" thing. https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter
Man this discussion is hillarious. So without going into the individual points.
The argument presented against caster supremacy is: "I like it that way" Well i dont. I prefer martial characters because i dont like the Wizard archetype.
And yes, wizards should be """Crippled""" because No, one class should not do everything. And whenever someone brings this up, you just repeat "but muh spellslots", yes, muh spellslots, thats the problem. Beeing able to change your loadout on a long rest. Wizards shouldnt be less powerfull, they should have less utility, because right now they have ALL the utility.
And have you maybe considered, Victor, that no game made melee fun for you because you only play games that do melee badly? You keep saying you dont like 4E, but you didnt play 4E, because 4E made melee combat fun. And no it isnt "all the same", it just uses the same layout and thats why this lie gets parroted.
4E actually let melee characters do things without constantly houseruling. You could actually do things like goading people into attacking you, openng up opportunitites to let your allies attack, actually use your movement and footwork to your advantage, actually punish people for attacking the squisheis, beeing able to choose wether you hit hard or precise WITHOUT SPENDING TWO FEATS ON IT.
And as Vic said. Its about the non combat utility. Of which martial characters have none. And which especialy wizards have all. And come on, money cost, money cost is a joke in dnD. What else are you gonna spend money on anyway? To that ill add, again: It should not be the DMs job to balance the game, the developer should do that. The DM should set the boundries and direct the expirience, he should not have to Houserule and constantly micromanage everything to make the mess of a game the developes made playable.
As for Sorcerors and Favored soul, that sorta stuff: yeah well they suck dont they? In Tier lists they always come out way later than Wizard. but they still are much better than martials due to out of combat utility, even if its more limited.
Man this discussion is hillarious. So without going into the individual points.
The argument presented against caster supremacy is: "I like it that way" Well i dont. I prefer martial characters because i dont like the Wizard archetype.
And yes, wizards should be """Crippled""" because No, one class should not do everything. And whenever someone brings this up, you just repeat "but muh spellslots", yes, muh spellslots, thats the problem. Beeing able to change your loadout on a long rest. Wizards shouldnt be less powerfull, they should have less utility, because right now they have ALL the utility.
And have you maybe considered, Victor, that no game made melee fun for you because you only play games that do melee badly? You keep saying you dont like 4E, but you didnt play 4E, because 4E made melee combat fun. And no it isnt "all the same", it just uses the same layout and thats why this lie gets parroted.
4E actually let melee characters do things without constantly houseruling. You could actually do things like goading people into attacking you, openng up opportunitites to let your allies attack, actually use your movement and footwork to your advantage, actually punish people for attacking the squisheis, beeing able to choose wether you hit hard or precise WITHOUT SPENDING TWO FEATS ON IT.
And as Vic said. Its about the non combat utility. Of which martial characters have none. And which especialy wizards have all. And come on, money cost, money cost is a joke in dnD. What else are you gonna spend money on anyway? To that ill add, again: It should not be the DMs job to balance the game, the developer should do that. The DM should set the boundries and direct the expirience, he should not have to Houserule and constantly micromanage everything to make the mess of a game the developes made playable.
As for Sorcerors and Favored soul, that sorta stuff: yeah well they suck dont they? In Tier lists they always come out way later than Wizard. but they still are much better than martials due to out of combat utility, even if its more limited.
The fighter, especially the Battlemaster, has a lot of different things he can do in battle, combat manuvuers, grappling, multiattacks, second wind, help ally, healer kits, action surge, and so on. And the fighter has the most feats/ability boosts in the game, by design, it gives the fighter extra flexiblity.
Want to mix in none combat spells, take ritual caster, more more combat manuveurs, take the right feat, want to be able to shield bash, take the right feat, want to know more languages, take the right feat, ect...
And no the DIVINE Soul does not suck. Twinned Guidance, Extend Spell Conjure Celestials, twin or distance spell raise dead, twin guided bolt, Distance Contagion, at will flight, only the Life Cleric is a stronger healer, you can buff allies healing spells, once a day you can heal yourself for a ton if hit points, twin Sancuary, Extended Spirit Guardians, Subtle Spell Geas, and so much more.
And Shadow Sorcerer is so powerful she gives nightmare to Wizards. Unleash a Hound of Ill Omen on the Wizard and no matter the invisibility spell, it will find the Wizard and attack it, damage him, knock him down, and gives the Wizard disadvantage to spell saves against the Shadow Sorcerer spells, Shadow Form makes the Shadow Sorcerer hard to kill and allow him to move through people and things, the Shadow Sorcerer can teleport at will 120 feet in shadows and darkness. None of this counts as spells so the Shadow Sorcerer can cast spells too, including magical Darkness he can see through. A Shadow Sorcerer can kill almost any 5e Wizard of the same level.
Sordak, use magic, use necromancy, use alchemy, psionics, use steampunk technology, use frostpunk technology, use sci-fi technology, use real world technology(...) is far more interesting than swing an weapon. If you wanna know an game where i liked to play on melee, there are one. Vampire, the masquarede - bloodlines. Gangrel was an interesting clan, but even on VtMB, i rather play as Tremere or Lasombra(Antitribu mod), they unfortunately din't made thaumaturgy strong as on pnp, you can't use lure of flames or path of conjuration for eg. And before everything, i know that is almost impossible to implement 1% of things that you can do with path of conjuration on pnp into the game(maybe offer an list with items in the game and pause the game), but D&D was never meant to be an balanced game. Is a game about pretending that myths are real.
When you say that wizards needs to be crippled. Be real. What CRPG crippled an class and din't ruined the class? NWN2 warlocks are one example. Is borderline unplayable without an mod that fixes the class. The DC's are bugged, the SR checks bugged, i hated the class. But after this mod ( https://neverwintervault.org/project/nwn2/other/warlock-reworked-102g ) that fixes the class, loved the class.
Honestly, i rather Larian not implementing any caster class than implementing in a crippled way. And pathfinder that is ultra unbalanced for you, most classes are B or C tier on the tier lists ( at least here > https://www.gamersdecide.com/articles/pathfinder-best-class-pathfinder-class-tier-list ) and honestly, IMO Druid and Clerics are better than Wizards.
---------------------------
EDIT : See the Bear Totem Barbarian on 5e if you wanna an powerful melee class;
One: Omegaphallic: Battlemaster: you do realize that battlemaster is a shitter version of the 4E Warlord right? EVERY martial class in 4E, every.single.one. had not only as many combat options as the battlemaster, but MORE, usually on level 1. Seriously, Battlemaster is all thats left of 4E in 5E, and thats why its considered the most well designed fighter subclass.
And feats? oh i can spend FEATS to do things. Does the wizard need feats to do cool sutff? no? So why does the martial have to pay feat tax to gain utility? Why do only martials need to do that? Why dont wizards? Why dont cleircs?
Also: its not about PvP, its about overshadowing each other in a grouop. it doesnt matte whose dad can beat up whose dad, it matters who consistently overshadows everyone else.
Two: Victor NO, i do not want to play a WIzard. I do not want to play a WIzard by any other name. I prefer low magic characters. Your entire argument is "dont like caster imbalance? paly a caster". No. No just balance casters. 4E did it, GURPS did it, WHFPR did it, Shadowrun did it, The Dark Eye did it, Why cannot DnD fix its casters? this is a problem almost exclusive to DnD and Pathfinder, get rid of it already.
And no, bugs are not an argument. Its about a mechanical nerf, not about ruining it by riddling it with bugs. Wizards have too much utility and martials have too little. Cut Casters into more narrow classes with a narrower role, and boost the utility of Martials and give EVERY martial class maneuvers, not just one. thats literaly how easy it is to fix this, but the pearl clutching grognards working at WOTC and Paizo who somehow still want to metaphysically punsih the jocks that bullied them in school insist on this nonsense, and insist that its "fine" the way it is.
And on your tier list, you conveniently forget to mention that "B"- tier is the third category rather than the second. All of S tier is casters, all of it. Cleric is the only melee class, and its a melee caster. A tier is yet again all casters. B tier features one (1!!!) martial class: the unchained rogue, which is essentialy optional rules. No a bloodrager is not a martial class, a bloodrager is a melee sorcerer for all intents and purposes, his powers are magical. No a hunter is not a martial class, he casts druid spells.
C tier. Almost bottom of the barrel, you know what we have here? Fighter, barbarian AND rogue AND Paladin. So all the Classic DnD Martial classes are almost in the worst Category. and D category? There is only ONE caster in there. the Kineticist
Please tell me how this was supposed to be an argument AGAINST caster supremacy when it very obviously shows you that playing a martial is a joke option
Druids can do well on melee, mainly if they shapeshift.
If you prefer low magic chars, is your preference, but some people don't like melee because they have few things to do. Solution? IMO is to bring cool stuff to martial classes to do. But cripple casters will ruin the game... Instead of an boring experience for people who only like melee, we will have an boring experience for everyone. I can't find ways to make pure martial classes more strong without making then "supernatural"...
And ironic you mention other RPG's, because magic tends to be stronger on other games. Did you heard about mage the ascension? Mages in world of darkness can make even ancient vampires fear in despair. And an archmage can be an god in his own dimension. Tremere that are the closest clan to mages are feared and mistrusted due his blood sorcery that is an very limited version of hedge sorcery... And on warhammer, i never played, but looked into the wikipedia and an lv 1 spell can animate D6 skeletons ( https://wfrp1e.fandom.com/wiki/Summon_Skeletons ) and weapons like crossbows have an good range(if on yard > https://wfrp1e.fandom.com/wiki/Crossbow ), looks like the unique difference is that high level spells doesn't exist on warhammer.
And not all martial classes are bad. As you have said. Monks on 3e are not that bad. Bear Totem Barbarian is not bad. Paladins aren't bad.
If you cannot find ways to make martials stronger without making them "supernatural" maybe you have a problem with your setting. Note that DnD wizards easily outshine gandalf, on level 3. I dont even say casters should be nerfed, im saying they shouldnt be able to do EVERYTHING. Right now they do, this needs to go in order to nerf them. its something almost every DM does in one way or another.
Either by restricting spell components, by banning certain spells or by enforcing a houserule that you can only pick spells from certain spellschools. Why? because otherwise the entire Campaign becomes trivialized by the sheer ammount of utility a wizard has.
I can tell you how to make Martials better: Combine 4E style Maneuves and exploits and pre 3rd edition out of combat progression. Give Fighters a castle, by the rules. dont make it an optional thing "the party may gain .... " No, make a rule that on a certain level, the fame of a Fighter will cause one of the powers in the setting to recognize him and to bestow upon him knighthood. Give him political clout, give him soldiers he can bring with him, give the Barbarian his own horde like he used to have. Make him a leader of men. Right now hes none of that, right now the fighter is a guy who hits hard and the barbarian is a guy who hits hard but doesnt quite run as fast as usain bolt. Make martials push the boundries of Human physicque, the inspiraiton for Fighters should not be "a guy who lifts hard in the gym", the inspiration for the wizard are gandalf an merlin, so the inspiraiton for a fighter should be King Arthur and Beowulf.
And no its not "ironic" that i mention other RPGs. Magic is far weaker than DnD in almost any fantasy RPG. World of Darkness is not a high fantasy setting. Im talking about Warhamer FRPG, The Dark Eye, GURPS fantasy if you wanna go there, even older DnD editions.
And yes, they are all bad. They are bad because they can only solve a problem that is Combat or their very specific class niche, which is Intimidation for a barbarian, tracking for a ranger, opening locks for rogues or, well nothign realy for a fighter, Meanwhile wizards can solve any problem with a spell and without having to roll for it AND solve combat without even participating in it, and if they do, they are no weaker than anyone else.
More options to martial classes is OK IMO. Bring things that made monks good on 3.5e, bring 4e stuff that made fighters good, but don't cripple wizards.
Anyway, arcanists aren't based sole on Gandalf. They are based on myths and Odin is a might wizard and Galdalf is based on Odin, but compared to what Odin can do in Norse mythology, Galdalf is a weakling.
Quote
Odin is able to shapeshift just like Loki, and he can shapeshift into an animal or human anytime he wants. Odin mostly speaks in phrases and riddles, and Odin’s voice is so soft that all who hears him speak thinks all he says is true. Odin can also just say a single word and he will be blowing out the flames of a fire, or tone down waves of the sea. Odin is seldom active in a battle but when he is, he can make his enemies blind in combat, deaf or horror-struck, Odin can even make their weapons hit like sticks, or make his own men as strong as a bear and go berserk.
Odin can predict the fade of all humans, and see their past, he even knows that one day Ragnarok (Ragnarök) will start and there is nothing he can do to prevent it. Odin also has the ability to travel to remote lands, in his or in the memories of others. Odin can send people to their death or give them an illness. Some Vikings sacrificed to Odin, and gave him good promises, in the hopes to gain insight into whether they could win a battle or not.
This looks much more strong than even what Mistra can do on D&D. Mainly when you consider that he isn't limited by spell slots... More options to martial classes is OK IMO. Bring things that made monks good on 3.5e, bring 4e stuff that made fighters good, but don't cripple wizards. Conan is a low Magic Setting and wizards can be insane deadly. Thoth Amon
"Thoth-Amon is a powerful Stygian sorcerer. He has many spells and rituals at his disposal. He commands beasts, especially snakes, and many types of insects. He has the power to corrupt and infest those who he has infected with venom; before they die, horrible monsters are spawned from their bodies. Thoth-Amon can communicate with others over long distances by possessing swarms of insects(...) He is even capable of summoning bizarre and terrible creatures to do his will." https://villains.fandom.com/wiki/Thoth_Amon
But as i've said, there are tradeoffs
Complexity/Depth VS accessibility Open world VS Linearity Variety, Immersion and replay-ability VS Balance
BG2 has certain linear chapters and certain open chapters... But i don't think that balance is that important in SP games
For eg, an VtMB run as Nosferatu will be much harder than with an Tremere for eg, have seduction capped at zero and be monstrous looking in a game very focused on investigation, dialog and social life and being unable to be seen in the city without breaking the masquarede is an hard challenge. While other clans can walk into an club and with high seduction, get free blood dolls, an nosferatu needs to eat rats. While other clans can get discount from prostitutes, prostitutes refuses the nosferatu, run, screams on fear and breaks the masquarede. Even getting firearms and ammo become much harder. And the main appeal of a Nosferatu clan is exactly the idea of being forced to roleplay as an outcast.
Is unbalanced? Yes, but who cares? It increases the immersion, replayability, and variety on the game. Another example is Dark Souls. An Paladin(STR/FHT) would have an much easier time in the game than an swordsman that refuses to use armor. It makes sense in DkS world, it makes sense lore wise and it increases the replayability. Also, isn't broken on pvp. So, what is the problem? Other example? On Pokemon red, an CHILDREN's game. Those who start with Squirtle or Bulbasaur has an much easier time against the first and second gym leader. Is this a problem? Real life is not balanced. You can see how ranged weapons can be "op" on Battle of Agincourt. If fictional stuff exist, they will not be balanced too and as longs it makes sense in the fictional world, i an fine.
So fighters should be based on actual humans and wizards on literal gods? Do you not understand the funamental problem with this? And if so, Martials should be basedd off of Thor or Hercules. They should divide rivers willy nilly and split mountains with a hammer blow, now were talking.
And conan is a terrible argument, look at the abilities you list there, thats low level DnD shit. not to mention that Conan dabs on every single wizard he encounters.
and again, theres no depth to having all the options. theres no complexity, theres just a lack of balance. and thats your argument "its unbalanced but my favorite option is favored so lets keep it that way" well... no. No i just disagree with you.
I dont want it to be that way. And i dont care if its a single player game. Its gonna have MP just like Baldurs Gate 1 and 2 had. And im probably gonna play it that way. Even if it were single player only, then i dont want ONE character in my party to do everything.
Sordak, never said that casters should be godlike, i only mentioned Odin, as an example. Odin casually speaking is equal to the greatest spell that an mortal can cast(Wish) without casting time, xp cost and other things. And din't compared Odin to mortals, compared Odin to D&D deities. About Thor, Thor had some "spell like abilities", mainly with lightning element. I an not against trying to make martial classes more supernatural, making any fighter above lv 5 fells like a superhuman.
As for Conan, Conan is a low magic setting, of course an might sorcerer can't cast spell equivalent to tier 9. There are an adaptation to D&D to Conan's low magic setting and some OPTIONAL rules( https://hyboria.xoth.net/sorcery/low_magic_system.htm ) that tries to make magic more ritualistic and risk, to name an example rule "17. Learning a new spell from another caster or a spellbook requires 2 days of dedicated study per spell level and a Spellcraft check with a DC of 15 + 2 per spell level. Spellcraft checks will be modified by the quality and comprehensiveness of the caster’s notes and/or instruction. The DM will inform players of any modifiers prior to the character’s attempt to cast the spell."
And even with core rules >
Quote
Flashy spells of mass destruction: Removed fireball, delayed blast fireball, meteor swarm and the like, since it doesn't really fit the setting. Left magic missile and lightning bolt to retain some arcane firepower. Convenience spells: Removed create water, create food and water and some other convenience spells. Makes for a more interesting trek through a desert, for instance, when 1st-level characters can't simply conjure up water from thin air. Life-restoring magic: Removed raise dead and resurrection. Those who come back from the dead, come back as undead! Powerful low-level divinations: Removed detect magic and comprehend languages. A first-level spell that allows you to understand all written languages? Not in this campaign!
Thors "spell like ability" is him throwing a hammer. his hamme ris a magic item that does two things 1. return 2. change the lenght of its haft Thor is a martial, but a martial god.
Im not gonna let you redefine any example of a martial feat as "magic" so you have a case for saying Martials shouldnt be able to do it.
And yes, as said, Magic in Conan is just much weaker. a low level DnD wizard probably is gonna dab on Toth Amon, mostly because Conan wizards dont have a lot of direct magic as you pointed out yourself. I dont argue that all Settings should be Conan, im arguing that if your Wizards are almost godlike in power at high levels, so should everyone else. And everyone should have the same level of utility.
the problem with the Wizard utility is that it doesnt work in a team based game. Theres no point having a team when one character solves all problems. and DnD is that, a team game. A wizard like he is in 3.5 works much better in a game like Elderscrolls (even tho morrowind is the only TES game where casters get even remoteley simmilar options to DnD) where you play a single character.
As for magic on conan, direct damage magic is almost non existent, but an Wizard can raise an undead army for eg, can conjure demons, and shapeshift.
But yes, D&D 6e should bring more cool stuff to other classes fells superhuman at higher levels. For example, Rangers on Dragon's Dogma can do all type of cool stuff. Tenfold flurry, comet shot, crippling arrow, can use all types of arrows, blast arrow, poison arrow, even maker's finger. So IMO if the LV 20 sorc is stopping the time, the lv 20 Ranger should be with an massive bow trowing arrows at the size of Javelin that can punch walls, be poisoned, can be explosive and do all type of crazy stuff. Should be able to jump very high, and feels more like an demigod archer. Holy water arrows to use against undead sounds interesting too. Fighters, i honestly don't know how to make then powerful without making then "supernatural".
Dragons Dogma archery is fun, but i prefer the melee, dragons dogma generaly is very japanese and i like it for that, it takes no stupid "but its not realistic" nonsense arguments that bog down the combat and make non magickal characters boring. Its also the gold standard for Action RPGs as far as im concerned.
Anyway, i agree. Barbarians for eg, coud get an power of not only enter on range, but when reach high level, enter in a "berserk" state, gaining +8 STR, +6 DEx, +4 CON, DR 20/fire/cold/electricity, increased speed and regen. For social interations, an huge bonus to intimidate after lv 10 sounds interesting too. About Japanese things, i usually don't like much Japanese games. Dark Souls and Dragon's Dogma are the exception.
About monks,i read the 5e rules and yes. Monks got unnecessarily nerfed. Furry of blows, movement speeds, bare hands damage, everything got nerfed. Sadly, because monks was never OP.(unless multi classed on 3.5e, but an better solution was just to make monk feats unavailable for non humanoid creatures)
Look man you keep talking about stats, but this stuff only matters in combat and their ONE thing. Ok a Barbarian can intimidate someone and fight.
The issue is that thats the only two solutions for any given problem the Barbarian has. Which would be ok, if everyone int he party had only one role. But thats not the case.
Sordak, you to say that you was right. Even Paizo recognized that imbalance problem and made the 2e classes more balanced, in combat and outside of combat, since E2 din't released, i can't detail why. As for Vampire, the Masquarede, V5 changed a lot of things too. A lot of "blood sorcery" "powers" that could be used at will on V20, now require an ritual.
I still think that if you are adaptating an book into an movie, you need to be faithful. Same with manga, why Hellsing ultimate is more loved? Fullmetal alchemist brotherwood than normal fullmental? The best HP movies are exactly the last ones, more faithful to harry potter books. ToEE was very true to pnp rules and was amazing.
Well, i give you a flawed example here. game of thrones. Game of thrones is a flawed example because the series didnt turn out so well in the end.
But in the middle, the Series did one thing very well, it glanced over those parts of the books that made no sense. GRRM had, multiple times, wrote himself into a corner and had entire chapters wehre ntohing relevant was hapening (Lets look for Sansa in a place of the world wehre nothing plot relevant is going on and also where the reader knows Sansa isnt currently at).
The Series didnt do that, the series had many flaws, but ironing out the mistakes in the original is something that an adaptation can do. Furthermore, id like to point to Jodrowskis comment about adapting Dune, he said he was going to rape it. Rather strong words, but they ring true. An adaptation will always, per definition, clash with the original authors vision to some degree. ebcause if it were the original authors vision, you wouldnt need an adaptation to begin with.
The question is not wether or nto an adaptation should be different, the question is wether or not the change is good or bad, or which things are changed.
![[Linked Image]](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/villains/images/0/0d/Thoth-amon_352647-173421-.jpg)