Quote from: Kyle Aaron on April 03, 2024, 07:00:21 AM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on April 03, 2024, 12:21:36 AM
The game should have verisimilitude.

That's the pretentious prick's way of saying, "I want to argue for realism when it suits me, and discard realism when it suits me." Same as the nonsense about female characters not being as strong as male.

It's a long word for dodging the point. Don't be a pretentious prick, and do contend with the actual arguments presented.

I am saying the mechanics imply the exact "thing" a mage is supposed to represent. And this changes edition by edition. Everyone is going to have their flavor of what they want in their game. But we're talking the difference between what that flavor is and how its mechanically represented and what those mechanics mean. But you know this, K-money!

If people want Mages to have Fighter HD - knock yourselves out. Just make sure your setting represents that.

Quote from: zagreus on April 03, 2024, 09:28:27 AM
So... I don't get some of this, honestly.  Playing AD&D you can make a very survivable 1st level wizard. 

Let's do some in vivo, character generation, using AD&D 2nd edition.

The way I generate characters is 4d6, drop the lowest, re-roll ones, place the scores where I want.  For this post I generated some rolls with the intent to make a hypothetical wizard.  I got 16, 12, 10, 12, 9, 17.  Very decent.  Int is 17.  Con is 16.  Who cares about the other scores, they're mostly irrelevant.   

If I'm playing a single classed Wizard, I'm playing a specialist.    Therefore, I get two (not one) spells per day.  One from my specialty school, and Sleep.  With a 16 con, he can be an Invoker or Conjurer.  I want Sleep, but I hate losing Magic Missile, so I'll just go with color spray instead, I'll make him an Invoker.   

Most house rules, in any game I've ever played say max hp at 1st level, so he has 6 hit points.  Decent.  And he'll have weapon proficiency Darts.  3 ranged attacks per round.  He can fight from range as well as just about anyone at first level.

Spells at first level:  Let's say Read Magic, Cantrip, plus 4 others.  I'll go with Magic Missile, Color Spray, Detect Magic, and Identify.   Usually, will be memorizing Magic Missile and Color Spray. 

I've also got 10! slots for non-weapon proficiencies.  This will be in the Greyhawk campaign.  We'll put these to: Read/Write Common.  Speaks Elven.  Read/Write Elven.  Speak Orc.  Speak Dwarf.  Read/Write Dwarven.  Ancient History (Ancient Magical Ruins of Local Area).   Ancient Language (Old Oeridian), Spellcraft, Riding (Land-based)

All of a sudden this dude seems decently playable.  Not bad for a 1st level AD&D wizard, eh?

Greetings!

Good work, Zagreus! That Wizard won't be pathetically helpless and weak with everything. I like it very much!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 03, 2024, 09:55:49 AM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on April 03, 2024, 07:00:21 AM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on April 03, 2024, 12:21:36 AM
The game should have verisimilitude.

That's the pretentious prick's way of saying, "I want to argue for realism when it suits me, and discard realism when it suits me." Same as the nonsense about female characters not being as strong as male.

It's a long word for dodging the point. Don't be a pretentious prick, and do contend with the actual arguments presented.

Actually, stating that realism is not a concern in games with fantasy elements is the ultimate dodge.  OK, if we can have dragons and not break the tone, why can't we have a Corvette ZR1?  It's fantasy, right?

You know this; you're just being a pretentious prick about it.  Certain elements fit the setting and tone of the game world.  Some don't.  It is dependent on the tone developed by the players and DM.  Some groups would think adding a Corvette to the game is the coolest thing ever.  For some, it would be a game-destroying decision.  So, why don't you stop dodging the point and explain why the martial abilities of a magic user don't matter in fantasy RPGs.  At least then you'd be contending with the actual arguments presented...

Greetings!

*BOOM* Absolutely right, my friend!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on April 03, 2024, 07:00:21 AM

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on April 03, 2024, 12:21:36 AM
The game should have verisimilitude.

That's the pretentious prick's way of saying, "I want to argue for realism when it suits me, and discard realism when it suits me." Same as the nonsense about female characters not being as strong as male.

It's a long word for dodging the point. Don't be a pretentious prick, and do contend with the actual arguments presented.

Should the game have no rules then?  Should the characters have no boundaries?
Should Wizard get the same hit dice as fighters, AND be able to wear any armor they wand AND be able to use any weapon? Why not give them theif abilities too? Heck they are smart, they learn the skills.

If that's your jam, go ahead and run that game.  It will probably suck though because the players will probably play your Omni-wizard and forgo anything else.  Let them all fly, and turn invisible at will. Most players will jump at the chance to get those abilities.  Why should they have to earn those abilities as spells?  Why the limits? 

Verisimilitude is a sliding scale.  I want the players to have enough "seeming of reality" to get immersed in the game and enjoy the act of overcoming challenges.  They can role play their characters as though they were real people because the world, though fantastical, is real enough to them.

Sometimes you can go to far with the realism.  It's up to you to decide where to draw the line.  And if you draw that line too far to one side or the other, your game will suck.

Have fun.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 03, 2024, 09:55:49 AM
Actually, stating that realism is not a concern in games with fantasy elements is the ultimate dodge.  OK, if we can have dragons and not break the tone, why can't we have a Corvette ZR1?  It's fantasy, right?

It's medieval fantasy, not Middle-Aged Fat Bastard Fantasy.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on April 03, 2024, 11:34:47 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on April 03, 2024, 09:55:49 AM
Actually, stating that realism is not a concern in games with fantasy elements is the ultimate dodge.  OK, if we can have dragons and not break the tone, why can't we have a Corvette ZR1?  It's fantasy, right?

It's medieval fantasy, not Middle-Aged Fat Bastard Fantasy.

So what?  Are you suggesting that the medieval setting imposes some requirement to limit the fantasy to what might seem realistic in that setting?  Are you actually arguing for realism when it suits you, but not when it doesn't?

Quote from: SHARK on April 03, 2024, 02:00:34 PM

Quote from: zagreus on April 03, 2024, 09:28:27 AM
So... I don't get some of this, honestly.  Playing AD&D you can make a very survivable 1st level wizard. 

Let's do some in vivo, character generation, using AD&D 2nd edition.

The way I generate characters is 4d6, drop the lowest, re-roll ones, place the scores where I want.  For this post I generated some rolls with the intent to make a hypothetical wizard.  I got 16, 12, 10, 12, 9, 17.  Very decent.  Int is 17.  Con is 16.  Who cares about the other scores, they're mostly irrelevant.   

If I'm playing a single classed Wizard, I'm playing a specialist.    Therefore, I get two (not one) spells per day.  One from my specialty school, and Sleep.  With a 16 con, he can be an Invoker or Conjurer.  I want Sleep, but I hate losing Magic Missile, so I'll just go with color spray instead, I'll make him an Invoker.   

Most house rules, in any game I've ever played say max hp at 1st level, so he has 6 hit points.  Decent.  And he'll have weapon proficiency Darts.  3 ranged attacks per round.  He can fight from range as well as just about anyone at first level.

Spells at first level:  Let's say Read Magic, Cantrip, plus 4 others.  I'll go with Magic Missile, Color Spray, Detect Magic, and Identify.   Usually, will be memorizing Magic Missile and Color Spray. 

I've also got 10! slots for non-weapon proficiencies.  This will be in the Greyhawk campaign.  We'll put these to: Read/Write Common.  Speaks Elven.  Read/Write Elven.  Speak Orc.  Speak Dwarf.  Read/Write Dwarven.  Ancient History (Ancient Magical Ruins of Local Area).   Ancient Language (Old Oeridian), Spellcraft, Riding (Land-based)

All of a sudden this dude seems decently playable.  Not bad for a 1st level AD&D wizard, eh?

Greetings!

Good work, Zagreus! That Wizard won't be pathetically helpless and weak with everything. I like it very much!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Want me to make a 3d6 straight down the line Wizard, Shark?  I'll make it extra special!  Promise!

In OD&D, you can't cast in armor. Thus, you can always wear armor before and after you cast your holy hand grenade for the day.

As others have mentioned, unless your mage's CHA is crap, that gold you don't need to spend on armor and weapons means you can spend it on HD 0 meat shields!

BTW, one common houserule back in the day was to begin everybody at 3rd level. That shut up most of the complainers. In fact, it became the default rule for Dark Sun too.

Quote from: Theory of Games on April 02, 2024, 08:57:35 PM
I know something's wrong with me head but --- are you guys arguing that a game with elves and dragons and magic should be more realistic?

Every day in this hobby since 1974!

We could put this the other way around - compared to folkloric tales and Swords and Sorcery literature, AD&D magic users become implausibly strong.

Early medieval Northern European magic tends not to involve magic users who can shoot balls of fire, rather they have the power of foresight, or charm (such as the Norse vǫlva in the saga of Erik the Red) and can make talismans of protective magic. Even the late medieval and renaissance magicians of the Faustus/grimoire tradition made amulets that conferred some specified power (such as luck or protection from disease) or obtain the favor of a summoned demon aristocrats to indirectly obtain goals like treasure finding or special knowledge (locate object  or legend lore) - but such magic is not really fitted to going into a dungeon and fighting orcs.

Sword and Sorcery literature preceding D&D also does not generally describe wizards with vast magic powers compared to AD&D wizards - as was explain in an early Dragon article Gandalf's spells can all be cast by a 5th level AD&D magic user (oh yeah, he has a magic bastard sword - but who is to say his rather crappy use of Glamdring was not due to the balancing of its +5 bonus with the magic users' -5 penalty for using it). In Vance's The Dying Earth, the nearest to Gygax's system, the trick to killing Mazirian the Magician was to make him use up all his spells, which he did very quickly and then died very quickly.  Most of the 'magic users' in Howard's Conan are clerics of Mitra, but the actual sorcerers tend to be old and frail no where near as powerful in a dungeon as, say, Ernie Gygax's Tenser.  In Fritz Leiber's stories, the Gray Mouser's master Glavas Rho is easily defeated by soldiers and Ningauble and Sheelba are not adventuring magicians. Even a post D&D author like Susanna Clarke in Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell makes magic users quite limited in their powers. If anyone is to blame for magic user power creep, it is Joanne Rowling and her kiddies shouting Wingardium Leviosa every five seconds. AD&D magic users by 6th level wipe the floor with the powers of most folkloric or fictional magic users.

In the 80s I heard all the complaints about Gandalf and swords and the 1st level/1 spell thing. Personally, I like the speed and simplicity of Gygax's Vancian system, but if players moaned, I let them start at 3rd level and use a short sword (after all, it is 1D6 like a staff - as I didn't play Weapon v Armor so it didn't matter). That tended to end the complaints - as did the players  returning to AD&D after playing 2nd edition Chivalry and Sorcery (especially its rule that players could not look up the magic system in the book while playing).
   

Quote from: Opaopajr on April 04, 2024, 01:47:11 AM

Quote from: SHARK on April 03, 2024, 02:00:34 PM

Quote from: zagreus on April 03, 2024, 09:28:27 AM
So... I don't get some of this, honestly.  Playing AD&D you can make a very survivable 1st level wizard. 

Let's do some in vivo, character generation, using AD&D 2nd edition.

The way I generate characters is 4d6, drop the lowest, re-roll ones, place the scores where I want.  For this post I generated some rolls with the intent to make a hypothetical wizard.  I got 16, 12, 10, 12, 9, 17.  Very decent.  Int is 17.  Con is 16.  Who cares about the other scores, they're mostly irrelevant.   

If I'm playing a single classed Wizard, I'm playing a specialist.    Therefore, I get two (not one) spells per day.  One from my specialty school, and Sleep.  With a 16 con, he can be an Invoker or Conjurer.  I want Sleep, but I hate losing Magic Missile, so I'll just go with color spray instead, I'll make him an Invoker.   

Most house rules, in any game I've ever played say max hp at 1st level, so he has 6 hit points.  Decent.  And he'll have weapon proficiency Darts.  3 ranged attacks per round.  He can fight from range as well as just about anyone at first level.

Spells at first level:  Let's say Read Magic, Cantrip, plus 4 others.  I'll go with Magic Missile, Color Spray, Detect Magic, and Identify.   Usually, will be memorizing Magic Missile and Color Spray. 

I've also got 10! slots for non-weapon proficiencies.  This will be in the Greyhawk campaign.  We'll put these to: Read/Write Common.  Speaks Elven.  Read/Write Elven.  Speak Orc.  Speak Dwarf.  Read/Write Dwarven.  Ancient History (Ancient Magical Ruins of Local Area).   Ancient Language (Old Oeridian), Spellcraft, Riding (Land-based)

All of a sudden this dude seems decently playable.  Not bad for a 1st level AD&D wizard, eh?

Greetings!

Good work, Zagreus! That Wizard won't be pathetically helpless and weak with everything. I like it very much!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Want me to make a 3d6 straight down the line Wizard, Shark?  I'll make it extra special!  Promise!

Greetings!

Yeah, Opa! Sounds good!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Spinachcat on April 04, 2024, 04:03:05 AM
In OD&D, you can't cast in armor. Thus, you can always wear armor before and after you cast your holy hand grenade for the day.

As others have mentioned, unless your mage's CHA is crap, that gold you don't need to spend on armor and weapons means you can spend it on HD 0 meat shields!

BTW, one common houserule back in the day was to begin everybody at 3rd level. That shut up most of the complainers. In fact, it became the default rule for Dark Sun too.

Quote from: Theory of Games on April 02, 2024, 08:57:35 PM
I know something's wrong with me head but --- are you guys arguing that a game with elves and dragons and magic should be more realistic?

Every day in this hobby since 1974!

Greetings!

Yeah, my friend! I think that low-level parties being sure to always be on the lookout for hiring a half dozen or more spearmen or swordsmen, your basic, low-level Men-at-Arms, not necessarily to be wasted as so-called "cannon fodder"--but to form a defensive cordon around weaker characters like the wizard, and to form a backstop to protect other missile-firing and ranged members of the party, is always a smart move. I think that strong policy has somehow been forgotten and left by the wayside through the years for some reason.

Such mercenary troops do not need to be uber-spectacular--just sturdy enough to hopefully stay alive, and keep the monsters from eating the wizard and ranged characters. Every round that the ranged characters can fire un-inhibited, serves to act as a decisive force-multiplier, and actually contributed to providing the party with a strong advantage, and tends to progressively end fights quickly in the party's favour.

As the party advances a level or two, gains a bit more gold, the smart move is to supplement those half dozen or so swordsmen hirelings with an additional 6 or so hireling archers. They have instructions to focus fire, taking out enemy spell-casters and missile troops as first priorities; before focusing fire on stronger line troops. Thus, the group's firepower is further maximized and sharpened into an ever-lethal killing machine.

Somewhere around the party reaching level 4 or 5, they should augment their retainer troops even more, with their own dedicated armourer, a pair of medics/herbalists, and a healing-specialized Cleric.

Following these principles, the Wizard is seldom in any real danger. Through this process as well as insuring that the Wizard is cleaning up with collecting potions, scrolls, wands, and ointments and all manner of other weird, specialized magic items, the Wizard shouldn't need to dream of reaching high-level before they can shine. If they can manage to survive through levels 4, 5, and especially 6, the party Wizard should really be coming into their own of being an increasingly prominent and dangerous character.

I have not really had a problem with Wizard's early limited magical powers. The sticking point it often seems is their absolute physical weakness, and or lack of basic survival skills. Being able to climb, swim, run and jump and all that. That is where I think later editions made some improvements. Nonetheless, having a decent Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution score, even for a Wizard, is very helpful. I would argue also leaning into being "generalists" as so much of the adventuring life is physically demanding on every member of the team, and having such minimum requirements and standards should be expected and encouraged. That is *not* to argue that Wizards need to have Fighter Hit Dice, or uber-physical combat abilities. Wizard's shouldn't have such, and arguably don't even need them. But having sufficient physical and survival skills to keep up with other members of the party seems reasonable to me.

I think Old School Wizards are mostly fine. The adventuring party needs to function as a team, and always be creative, tenacious, and resourceful. As noted previously, the whole party needs to invest in hiring Expert Hirelings, to provide the cushion and resilience that the party needs, and especially to defend the weaker members of the party. I know modern groups do not tend to do this very often, which leads to them getting overwhelmed and jacked hard. That harsh reality then leads them to make all kinds of flawed assessments and assumptions about the various Classes. Much of their suffering and experienced problems actually is a reflection of their own lack of creativity, resilience, and resourcefulness.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: El-V on April 04, 2024, 09:58:40 AM
We could put this the other way around - compared to folkloric tales and Swords and Sorcery literature, AD&D magic users become implausibly strong.

Early medieval Northern European magic tends not to involve magic users who can shoot balls of fire, rather they have the power of foresight, or charm (such as the Norse vǫlva in the saga of Erik the Red) and can make talismans of protective magic. Even the late medieval and renaissance magicians of the Faustus/grimoire tradition made amulets that conferred some specified power (such as luck or protection from disease) or obtain the favor of a summoned demon aristocrats to indirectly obtain goals like treasure finding or special knowledge (locate object  or legend lore) - but such magic is not really fitted to going into a dungeon and fighting orcs.

Sword and Sorcery literature preceding D&D also does not generally describe wizards with vast magic powers compared to AD&D wizards - as was explain in an early Dragon article Gandalf's spells can all be cast by a 5th level AD&D magic user (oh yeah, he has a magic bastard sword - but who is to say his rather crappy use of Glamdring was not due to the balancing of its +5 bonus with the magic users' -5 penalty for using it). In Vance's The Dying Earth, the nearest to Gygax's system, the trick to killing Mazirian the Magician was to make him use up all his spells, which he did very quickly and then died very quickly.  Most of the 'magic users' in Howard's Conan are clerics of Mitra, but the actual sorcerers tend to be old and frail no where near as powerful in a dungeon as, say, Ernie Gygax's Tenser.  In Fritz Leiber's stories, the Gray Mouser's master Glavas Rho is easily defeated by soldiers and Ningauble and Sheelba are not adventuring magicians. Even a post D&D author like Susanna Clarke in Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell makes magic users quite limited in their powers. If anyone is to blame for magic user power creep, it is Joanne Rowling and her kiddies shouting Wingardium Leviosa every five seconds. AD&D magic users by 6th level wipe the floor with the powers of most folkloric or fictional magic users.

In the 80s I heard all the complaints about Gandalf and swords and the 1st level/1 spell thing. Personally, I like the speed and simplicity of Gygax's Vancian system, but if players moaned, I let them start at 3rd level and use a short sword (after all, it is 1D6 like a staff - as I didn't play Weapon v Armor so it didn't matter). That tended to end the complaints - as did the players  returning to AD&D after playing 2nd edition Chivalry and Sorcery (especially its rule that players could not look up the magic system in the book while playing).

Quote from: El-V on April 04, 2024, 09:58:40 AM
We could put this the other way around - compared to folkloric tales and Swords and Sorcery literature, AD&D magic users become implausibly strong.

Early medieval Northern European magic tends not to involve magic users who can shoot balls of fire, rather they have the power of foresight, or charm (such as the Norse vǫlva in the saga of Erik the Red) and can make talismans of protective magic. Even the late medieval and renaissance magicians of the Faustus/grimoire tradition made amulets that conferred some specified power (such as luck or protection from disease) or obtain the favor of a summoned demon aristocrats to indirectly obtain goals like treasure finding or special knowledge (locate object  or legend lore) - but such magic is not really fitted to going into a dungeon and fighting orcs.

Sword and Sorcery literature preceding D&D also does not generally describe wizards with vast magic powers compared to AD&D wizards - as was explain in an early Dragon article Gandalf's spells can all be cast by a 5th level AD&D magic user (oh yeah, he has a magic bastard sword - but who is to say his rather crappy use of Glamdring was not due to the balancing of its +5 bonus with the magic users' -5 penalty for using it). In Vance's The Dying Earth, the nearest to Gygax's system, the trick to killing Mazirian the Magician was to make him use up all his spells, which he did very quickly and then died very quickly.  Most of the 'magic users' in Howard's Conan are clerics of Mitra, but the actual sorcerers tend to be old and frail no where near as powerful in a dungeon as, say, Ernie Gygax's Tenser.  In Fritz Leiber's stories, the Gray Mouser's master Glavas Rho is easily defeated by soldiers and Ningauble and Sheelba are not adventuring magicians. Even a post D&D author like Susanna Clarke in Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell makes magic users quite limited in their powers. If anyone is to blame for magic user power creep, it is Joanne Rowling and her kiddies shouting Wingardium Leviosa every five seconds. AD&D magic users by 6th level wipe the floor with the powers of most folkloric or fictional magic users.

In the 80s I heard all the complaints about Gandalf and swords and the 1st level/1 spell thing. Personally, I like the speed and simplicity of Gygax's Vancian system, but if players moaned, I let them start at 3rd level and use a short sword (after all, it is 1D6 like a staff - as I didn't play Weapon v Armor so it didn't matter). That tended to end the complaints - as did the players  returning to AD&D after playing 2nd edition Chivalry and Sorcery (especially its rule that players could not look up the magic system in the book while playing).

This is why the martial-caster balance is so bad. DND martials wouldn't survive the Trojan War, let alone the Kurukshetra War. DND casters could not only survive, but thrive. If casters get to be stronger than any mythological wizard, then DND martials need to be stronger than Arthur or Achilles or Herakles.

Quote from: El-V on April 04, 2024, 09:58:40 AM
We could put this the other way around - compared to folkloric tales and Swords and Sorcery literature, AD&D magic users become implausibly strong.

Early medieval Northern European magic tends not to involve magic users who can shoot balls of fire, rather they have the power of foresight, or charm (such as the Norse vǫlva in the saga of Erik the Red) and can make talismans of protective magic. Even the late medieval and renaissance magicians of the Faustus/grimoire tradition made amulets that conferred some specified power (such as luck or protection from disease) or obtain the favor of a summoned demon aristocrats to indirectly obtain goals like treasure finding or special knowledge (locate object  or legend lore) - but such magic is not really fitted to going into a dungeon and fighting orcs.

Sword and Sorcery literature preceding D&D also does not generally describe wizards with vast magic powers compared to AD&D wizards - as was explain in an early Dragon article Gandalf's spells can all be cast by a 5th level AD&D magic user (oh yeah, he has a magic bastard sword - but who is to say his rather crappy use of Glamdring was not due to the balancing of its +5 bonus with the magic users' -5 penalty for using it). In Vance's The Dying Earth, the nearest to Gygax's system, the trick to killing Mazirian the Magician was to make him use up all his spells, which he did very quickly and then died very quickly.  Most of the 'magic users' in Howard's Conan are clerics of Mitra, but the actual sorcerers tend to be old and frail no where near as powerful in a dungeon as, say, Ernie Gygax's Tenser.  In Fritz Leiber's stories, the Gray Mouser's master Glavas Rho is easily defeated by soldiers and Ningauble and Sheelba are not adventuring magicians. Even a post D&D author like Susanna Clarke in Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell makes magic users quite limited in their powers. If anyone is to blame for magic user power creep, it is Joanne Rowling and her kiddies shouting Wingardium Leviosa every five seconds. AD&D magic users by 6th level wipe the floor with the powers of most folkloric or fictional magic users.

In the 80s I heard all the complaints about Gandalf and swords and the 1st level/1 spell thing. Personally, I like the speed and simplicity of Gygax's Vancian system, but if players moaned, I let them start at 3rd level and use a short sword (after all, it is 1D6 like a staff - as I didn't play Weapon v Armor so it didn't matter). That tended to end the complaints - as did the players  returning to AD&D after playing 2nd edition Chivalry and Sorcery (especially its rule that players could not look up the magic system in the book while playing).

I agree with almost all of this. One of the things that boggles my mind is that so many people insist that old-school D&D is a Sword & Sorcery game. Sword & Sorcery fiction is clearly among the inspirations, but the end product looks nothing like it. D&D is a lot like Star Wars, in that it's a massive genre mashup that ends up producing something wholly unique. You can put a genre-label on it, like people do with "space opera" for Star Wars, but it still essentially stands alone.

Gygax and company probably deserve more credit than they get for developing an entirely new subgenre of fantasy. Despite not having a label like "space opera" coined for it (that I'm aware of), D&D has more things in it's same genre than Star Wars does, only because it has so many more imitators. The fact that a lot of people refer to it as "standard fantasy" is just a testament to the level of influence it has.

You mentioned in there that J.K. Rowling might be to blame for people thinking wizards should be able to constantly throw around flashy magic. I've heard that the magic in Harry Potter is heavily inspired from the magic in Tales of Earthsea, but since I haven't read the latter, I can't confirm or deny. The steady power creep of magicians in popular fiction is probably owed to a lot of things. If I had to guess, I'd probably assume videogames are the most major factor, but if you dig deep enough, I wouldn't be surprised if you found that the real culprit was D&D itself.

For my own tastes, I'd prefer a game that represents wizardry more as it exists in those old S&S novels, but that would require essentially getting rid of the magic-user as a player class. I think you'd have to either make magic something which is only used by NPCs, or a kind of bonus skill system, not very applicable in combat, which players can learn on top of being a warrior or thief or whatever. But at that point, we're talking about a hypothetical game which isn't D&D.

Quote from: SHARK on April 04, 2024, 10:04:58 AM
Greetings!

Yeah, Opa! Sounds good!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Va-va-va-voom!

Guinevere, the Recently Released Page of the Enchantress
Human Female Wizard

STR 08, WgtAlw 35, MxPrs 90, OpDrs 5, BB/LG 1%
DEX 07,
CON 07, SysShk 55%, Rez 60%
INT 13, #Lng 3, Splv 6th, Lrn% 55%, (Mx# SpLv 9)
WIS 08,
CHA 15, MaxHnc 7, LoyBas +3, RctAdj +3

HP: 1d4 (I rolled a 2)
AC: 10.
Lang: Bilingual with room for one more language. e.g. English, French

Wiz: * No Armor.
* Wpns (dagger, knife, dart, sling, staff).
* Magic allowed wpns, potions, rings, wands, rods, scrolls, & misc. (still no armor).
* Create Magic Items start 9th potions & scrolls
* 1d4 HD 1st-10th lvs
Mage: * Any Magic School.

Wizard Spells
Spell Book Title -- "Madam Kitty's Hostess Primer" (there's a spell or 3 still unlearned inside)
1st Lvl: Cantrip, Detect Magic, Friends, Mending, Message, Read Magic, Unseen Servant.

Optional Skills
Secondary Skills: Page to an Enchantress, Courtly Education (etiquette, heraldry, religion, read/write, etc.)
NWP, Class 4: Etiquette, Heraldry, Read/Write, Read/Write. NWP, Int 3: Dancing, Religion, Singing

GP: 1d4x10 (I rolled a 3, so 30gp)
Weapons: knives x2 (1gp), darts 6 (3gp), sling & bullets x10 (0.6gp), quarterstaff (-)
Rest of 25.4gp spent on comforts, fashions, and toiletries to look attractive, then a men-at-arms just in case.

Bio: Was a page of an enchantress, an observer and courier to exciting high society life. Guinevere was
raised to extend her patroness' reach as another young enchantress, but once grown she was not beautiful
enough (only CHA 15). Sadly released, yet with good references and vague protege social protection. Guinevere
plies her services to adventurers in hopes to make her patroness proud one day. Their fortune seeking world is
surprisingly coarse, but intriguing... 

Not gonna lie, I wanna play her already!