sometimes you need to stab a bitch, and sometimes you need to blow his ass up from a great distance.  Often the solutions are in two different boxes.  This was never a problem before.

Quote from: LordVreeg;393269DEDU's OP seems to indicate early games, and so I won't derail into what I did with my systems, except to say that I made Buff spells a lot more enticing, so that the fighter/mage mix-collaboration is more enticing.  And I have a lot of types of magic.

But back in the day, first off, as Peregrin mentions, it was about the lifespan of the character.  And for the early levels, the Fighter was often the more active in the combat world, especially if the campaign used a lot of puzzles  and historical notes.  My MUs had to have 'comp lang' and 'detect magic' hanging at al times, or risk a major slowdown.  (this is because I believe the early game was foccused/balanced on exploring as much as fighting...perosnal opinion)
This continues later on, so the MU was not just artillery as a swiss army knife for the asventuring group.

Add this to the rules for spell casting times and components, and the balance issue never seemed to come up in our 0/AD&D games.

I would go a step further.

If you use spell acquisition RAW then there is no guarentee tha the MU gets fireball or lightning bolt at 5th and there is a reasonable chance that if they do find a copy of it somewhere they will fail their % chance to learn listed spell.
On the basis that D&D is lethal and PCs die, getting to 5th is an achievement. A 5th level Wizard with on average 13 hp AC 7 or 8 with no artilary spell gets owned by a fighter with a bow, AC2, 30hp and a +2 sword every time.

I actually think that wizards are weaker in versions 2e and down until about 10th level unless you let them choose whatever spells they want and not check for % to learn each spell (or allow them to fudge their stats).

I even have a great example. We had a party 8th and 9th. The MU had acquired a portable hole and a Sphere of anhililation, a lethal combo. We were walking down a tunnel, were suprised by a bunch of drow their first attack hit the wizard with a Flame strike. He had shit HP, low 20s, Dead... all done. Personally I would say a DM fuck up but it exposed a huge hole for the MU he had bugger all protection from any sort of firey blast.
Now in our D&D no magic shops, no selecting your own magic items from a horde (you know the way most people played it) the MU as a class has one huge disadvantage even at 8th or 9th level. They only have 8 or 9 d4 hps so they die really easily.

Quote from: jibbajibba;393282I would go a step further.

If you use spell acquisition RAW then there is no guarentee tha the MU gets fireball or lightning bolt at 5th and there is a reasonable chance that if they do find a copy of it somewhere they will fail their % chance to learn listed spell.
On the basis that D&D is lethal and PCs die, getting to 5th is an achievement. A 5th level Wizard with on average 13 hp AC 7 or 8 with no artilary spell gets owned by a fighter with a bow, AC2, 30hp and a +2 sword every time.

I actually think that wizards are weaker in versions 2e and down until about 10th level unless you let them choose whatever spells they want and not check for % to learn each spell (or allow them to fudge their stats).

I don't always agree with you, but here, I am in complete solidarity.  Many of the 'fiddly bits' that GMs ignored were actually great for balancing the game.  

Not that it always needs balancing.  A good GM can make up for anything.  But a lot of people who design games have a good head on their shoulders.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;393270I think there is one legitimate problem you are ignoring: With the right combination of spells, the 3E Wizard can do any other classes' job - At least as well and sometimes better - And generally for long enough.

...

And that - Is broken.

Well mainly the 3e wizard gets to write basically free scrolls, so suddenly there's no tradeoff to be made between "do I want to pop a lock" and "do I want to web my enemies" – and in 1e/2e, by the time the magic-user does have enough spell slots floating around to be pretty flexible, everybody's got a few utility-type magic items (which they keep, b/c selling them doesn't get them an extra plus on their sword) so everyone can do a few magical things.

Quote from: LordVreeg;393271This was never a problem for us, though it IS a good point.  
KNock, for example, was more for doors that the theif failed picking (or when the rogue did).  As I said, the wizard was the swiss army knife...but had daily limits on availability.

But as for 3e...you may be more right.

It's true. Sometimes I forget how heavily I nerfed wizards in my Pathfinder and 3e games. I don't allow scroll writing or magic item creation without questing for special components.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;393270I think there is one legitimate problem you are ignoring: With the right combination of spells, the 3E Wizard can do any other classes' job - At least as well and sometimes better - And generally for long enough.

Knock, for example. Whoops - Guess the Rogue didn't need those lockpicks after all.

And yeah, that's a player thing as well. A Wizard who gets Knock in a party with a Rogue is generally being a jerk, even if unintentional.

But! And I think this is one place legitimate complaints come from - The rules allow it. The spell lists encourage it.

And that - Is broken.

And what is that 'right combination of spells'?  Do you know players that would load up half their daily allotment of spells with knock just to make the Rogue redundant?  Knock exists more or less specifically as a backup to the Thief for when the roll is missed, and the noise of the Fighter kicking the door in can't be risked.

I know there is a potential spell selection where many of the functions of other classes can be mostly duplicated, but does anyone have that list available?

Quote from: StormBringer;393300And what is that 'right combination of spells'?  Do you know players that would load up half their daily allotment of spells with knock just to make the Rogue redundant?  Knock exists more or less specifically as a backup to the Thief for when the roll is missed, and the noise of the Fighter kicking the door in can't be risked.

I know there is a potential spell selection where many of the functions of other classes can be mostly duplicated, but does anyone have that list available?

There was a section of one of the books (One of the complete books, I think), devoted to exactly that - Replicating other classes' capabilities using a Wizard.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;393313There was a section of one of the books (One of the complete books, I think), devoted to exactly that - Replicating other classes' capabilities using a Wizard.

For the entire day?  I mean, I already said I know there is a potential selection of spells that can replicate certain class features, but all of them, every day, all day?

I have heard the argument that a Magic-User/Mage/Wizard (depending on version) can obviate the other classes, but can it be done consistently to where no other class is actually needed?  That is what I am asking.  Can any one spell caster completely obviate the need for other party members?  Or any two or three?  A Fighter can do their swording all day, a Thief can do their roguing all day, and so on.

Quote from: StormBringer;393316I have heard the argument that a Magic-User/Mage/Wizard (depending on version) can obviate the other classes, but can it be done consistently to where no other class is actually needed?  That is what I am asking.  Can any one spell caster completely obviate the need for other party members?  Or any two or three?  A Fighter can do their swording all day, a Thief can do their roguing all day, and so on.

Sure if a crappy pansy ass GM lets them.

Yeah, I can't say I've ever witnessed that in any earlier iteration of the game. Might work for a few obstacles, but the only way they actually replace another class is the 15 minute adventuring day, which is a problem unto itself.

EDIT: To be clear, the 15 minute day is a GM problem, not a system problem.

QuoteI've never had a problem with magic-users making everyone else usually in OD&D, AD&D 1e, AD&D 2e (core books), B/X or BECMI/RC D&D.

Even from just reading the games, I don't see any problems.

I think the reason the disparity became such of a problem is the change in assumptions about how the GM runs the campaign.  In O/AD&D, you're expected to go on and eventually get a stronghold, become a ruler, etc., so it makes sense that a wizard would be super powerful if he manages to reach high levels because he has nothing else going for him.  But for some reason the modern D&D party, comprised of forever wandering vagabonds who never settle down to rule, it does become more of an issue because the game now assumes you're going to be playing the same way straight through level 20.

So I don't think the way wizards and fighters are balanced in older editions is broken, but I think that the system becomes strained when you try to shoehorn that balance around new game-play assumptions.

Quote from: Peregrin;393328Even from just reading the games, I don't see any problems.

I think the reason the disparity became such of a problem is the change in assumptions about how the GM runs the campaign.  In O/AD&D, you're expected to go on and eventually get a stronghold, become a ruler, etc., so it makes sense that a wizard would be super powerful if he manages to reach high levels because he has nothing else going for him.  But for some reason the modern D&D party, comprised of forever wandering vagabonds who never settle down to rule, it does become more of an issue because the game now assumes you're going to be playing the same way straight through level 20.

So I don't think the way wizards and fighters are balanced in older editions is broken, but I think that the system becomes strained when you try to shoehorn that balance around new game-play assumptions.

This is very interesting.  I will need to think for a bit.

Quote from: StormBringer;393316For the entire day?  I mean, I already said I know there is a potential selection of spells that can replicate certain class features, but all of them, every day, all day?

I have heard the argument that a Magic-User/Mage/Wizard (depending on version) can obviate the other classes, but can it be done consistently to where no other class is actually needed?  That is what I am asking.  Can any one spell caster completely obviate the need for other party members?  Or any two or three?  A Fighter can do their swording all day, a Thief can do their roguing all day, and so on.

No, but most of the time, they don't need to.

Also, take a look at what you wrote. Why should the Wizard need to be able to, say, *totally* remove the need for any other class, for it to be broken? Significantly is enough - And the Wizard is at that point with the PHB.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;393349No, but most of the time, they don't need to.

Also, take a look at what you wrote. Why should the Wizard need to be able to, say, *totally* remove the need for any other class, for it to be broken? Significantly is enough - And the Wizard is at that point with the PHB.

Ok, then what is this spell list?  I don't deny you can set up a Nova Wizard that can blast all manner of destructive magic in successive rounds, or one that might be able to sub for one, two, or all other members of the party occasionally.  If the Magic User is absolutely forbidden from ever doing anything that duplicates another class in even the most abstract way, you are then playing a sage.  Most invocation spells do more damage over the short term than a Fighter.  Certain utility spells can duplicate Thief abilities.  Where is the healing, though?  Can't really replace that aspect of the Cleric, so there is one class feature that isn't in their repertoire.  What happens after the fireballs run out?  No significant weapon skills to fall back on.  Silence, 15' radius is a nice alternative to Move Silently, until the guards notice they just went deaf momentarily (any DM that doesn't enforce that is just a bad DM) and figure something is up.

No, in fact, the mere existance of knock does not forever render the Thief illegitimate, nor make the Magic User all powerful.  It is only in the context of repeated and frequent overshadowing that this could be considered 'broken'.  Simply pointing out the existence of certain magical means to accomplish something along the lines of another class' niche abilities is not enough to declare a problem.  The problem would be in the continual use of such spells precisely to thwart other players from contributing.

So, one last time, does anyone have a spell list that would make the other classes in a party redundant?  A list that can do such a thing even once a day is a good start.  A list that will replicate Thief abilities, Fighter combat abilities, and Clerical spell casting and combat abilities.

Quote from: Peregrin;393328Even from just reading the games, I don't see any problems.

I think the reason the disparity became such of a problem is the change in assumptions about how the GM runs the campaign.  In O/AD&D, you're expected to go on and eventually get a stronghold, become a ruler, etc., so it makes sense that a wizard would be super powerful if he manages to reach high levels because he has nothing else going for him.  But for some reason the modern D&D party, comprised of forever wandering vagabonds who never settle down to rule, it does become more of an issue because the game now assumes you're going to be playing the same way straight through level 20.

So I don't think the way wizards and fighters are balanced in older editions is broken, but I think that the system becomes strained when you try to shoehorn that balance around new game-play assumptions.

Yup, I noticed this since 3e came out. HP scaling above 10th+ levels for monsters didn't do justice for the fighter as well since his damage doesn't scale but the wizard's does.