Are Wizards OP or just Realistic?

[CyberThread]

In a fantasy setting about bending time and blowing up entire armies, are wizards truly op ( and melee is just underpowered), or is it just fantasy that wizards are top dog because of what they do.

[NotAnAardvark]

In the fluff regarding the primary settings low level mages are borderline useless (unless a main character) and high level mages can be beaten by mundane with guile, planning and sheer force of will.

In the actual game none of that is true anymore. So yeah, they're broken.

[Drachasor]

Who said D&D was about bending time and blowing up armies?

I thought it was about exploring dungeons and fighting dragons.

People can use magic to bend time and blow up armies because the magic allows that, but that doesn't mean that's what the game is about.

D&D casters are actually ridiculously powerful compared to almost all other fantasy casters. So we can't really say this is about the fantasy genre.

[malonkey1]

In a fantasy setting about bending time and blowing up entire armies, are wizards truly op ( and melee is just underpowered), or is it just fantasy that wizards are top dog because of what they do.

I think it really depends on the setting. And it can be both (real life examples of overpowered things include the nuclear bomb, or opposable thumbs). And one man's OP could be another man's sub-optimal. It all really depends on context. Is a high-level Wizard like the one presented in D&D unrealistic for, say, Conan? Probably. Is it unrealistic for the Tippyverse? Hah, good one.

[Rebel7284]

Both?

They are certainly OP (although Druids are more impressive for the first third of the game) but part of the reason they were designed this way is because of the high fantasy wizard flavor.

[ThePhantom]

Technicality, its a number of spells that are broken and not the class itself. Also, its common for the limiting factors of wizards to be ignored, most people don't keep track of spell components or the whole process of how putting spells into a spellbook work.

[Morbis Meh]

Wow, it's Wizard Wednesday already, you people love sticking to the schedule :smallbiggrin: Wizards in 3.5 are indeed the most variable of all the classes; you can be the most powerful being in the cosmos or a complete and utter schmuck depending on spell selection and mechanic no how. As far as Fantasy Settings go, yes they are top dogs, dealing with the deadliest of all beings while the fighters and other beings play lesser but usually important roles in their own right. It's hard to deny someone who has the power to warp reality to their will...

[Story]

Technicality, its a number of spells that are broken and not the class itself. Also, its common for the limiting factors of wizards to be ignored, most people don't keep track of spell components or the whole process of how putting spells into a spellbook work.

That's because in practice they aren't limiting factors.

And people routinely ignore tedious paperwork that doesn't impact the game. I bet you don't keep track of how much water or rations or how many mundane arrows you have either.


Anyway, it's interesting how casters are so much more powerful in D&D than other fantasy games. I remember a lengthy discussion where someone was trying to prove that Conan d20 Wizards were better. After pages of discussion, the consensus is that he wouldn't stand a chance against an ordinary level 20 Wizard despite getting help from the actual gods of the setting as well as arbitrary amounts of prep time.

[CyberThread]

monk monday
Tuesday Tippy
Wizard Wensday
Thrusday Turdsay
Freya Friday
Stat saturday
sunday sun....

[Talvereaux]

There is no 'realistic' wizard because magic isn't real, and there are no concrete rules to what it should or shouldn't be able to do. In some settings they are just a dork in a snuggy that can shoot fire and lightning, which is good in its own right but not inherently better than just killing someone with a sword.

It's up to the setting and rules to decide how good magic should be. If that involves making it incredibly overpowered... that's totally up to the writers, but it's still a balance issue from a playing perspective.

[Urpriest]

There are plenty of settings where mundanes can be just as terrifying as mages, so it really depends on what you're trying to model.

Think of Fullmetal Alchemist. The character of Fuhrer Bradley basically only uses mundane means, and yet he's able to defeat the setting's (quite powerful) mages on a regular basis, usually through superhuman feats of martial prowess. That's the sort of thing a "balanced" D&D Fighter could be doing.

[Elderand]

There are plenty of settings where mundanes can be just as terrifying as mages, so it really depends on what you're trying to model.

Think of Fullmetal Alchemist. The character of Fuhrer Bradley basically only uses mundane means, and yet he's able to defeat the setting's (quite powerful) mages on a regular basis, usually through superhuman feats of martial prowess. That's the sort of thing a "balanced" D&D Fighter could be doing.

Except bradley isn't mundane.

Better exemple would be Izumi's husband or the two ninjas from xing.

[sleepyphoenixx]

There's certainly a few fantasy rpgs with spellcasters who are as powerful as D&D wizards (or even more). They're in the minority though.
That said, the versatility and power of D&D spellcasting is one of the things that appeal to a lot of people, compared to systems where a mage is little more than an archer who happens to shoot lightning/fire/dark energy.
The problem i see is a mixing of high fantasy magic (very strong spellcasters) with low fantasy mundanes ("realistic" swordsmen).
Depending on perspective that either makes casters too strong or mundanes to weak.

Attempts to correct that imbalance either try to adjust casters downward (which is, imo, the wrong approach since the power and versatility of casters is great fun) or, if they try buffing mundanes, are being dismissed as being "too anime", "too wuxia" or something along those lines. If mundanes had more of a "greek heroes" powerlevel instead of being "medieval stormtrooper" there would be much less imbalance.

[Waker]

In the majority of fantasy settings in various forms of fiction, whether talking about books, movies or whatever, mages tend to be rather strong but have severe limitations when compared to D&D. The can pull off some impressive stuff, but they don't have nearly the breadth of spells available nor the ability to fling them off one after another. Spellcasting outside of D&D is usually slow, is extremely tiring or has some other limiting factor that just isn't present in the game.

[Urpriest]

Except bradley isn't mundane.

Better exemple would be Izumi's husband or the two ninjas from xing.

Yes, but everything he does is mundane. He's highly enhanced, but the enhancements (at least in Brotherhood) don't actually give him qualitatively magical abilities, they just improve his quantitative performance.

I agree that Lan Fan and Fu (and pretty much every ninja in media where they're presented as nonmagical) are also good examples, if lower-power.

[BlackDragonKing]

The problem I have with this is twofold.

1. Magic isn't real. Dragons, Giants, and 90% of the monster manual are complete slaps in the face to realism, physics, and what have you. D&D and Pathfinder are BY THEIR VERY NATURE exorbitantly unrealistic games, and I find it puzzling they don't just run with that being built-in. :smallconfused:

As it is, there are cases like Pathfinder where attempting to adhere to "realism" in places ends up creating a double-standard; actions like reloading a crossbow/gun or using weapon chords are things the designers tweak regularly, apparently to try and keep some basis in reality, which also effects some of the progression of Ex abilities. The PROBLEM with this is that refusing to say "no, nothing in this game is realistic and it's a waste of time to make anything in it conform to real life" creates a massive double-standard, since there are entire classes in D&D and Pathfinder whose abilities are entirely divorced from reality. Really, if you're going to restrict how much you can reload a pistol in six seconds in the name of realism but have giant spiders that cannot physically support their own weight be a common enemy for low-level adventurers or the wizard creating fireballs from nothing but the force of some magic words he memorized and then forgot once he used them, it's going to look very inconsistent. Because it IS inconsistent, and ends up creating the notion that "mundane" actions, such as Ex abilities and melee-related stuff, have rules for how unrealistic they can get before the designers cut them off, while magic gets a free ride to do whatever the hell it wants because you can't explain magic.

2. My bigger concern is that the power disparity being "realistic" is not OK in a game that has a leveling system. Classes have a certain level of inherent power, yes. Fine. Your CLASS LEVELS, however, should be an indicator of how much of a threat you are. A level 20 character should be an enormous threat to all but the most epic of opponents no matter what its class is, but a level 20 rogue is going to get his butt kicked against a powerful Lich while a level 20 wizard or cleric played with even a modicum of competence is going to knock it into next week without much difficulty.

If a level 20 fighter represents someone from the real world who is really, really good with a sword, then a level 20 wizard should represent someone who's about worked out a foolproof way to dance around a fire for three days and nights to make someone fall down the stairs and die. If a level 20 wizard can remake reality by snapping his fingers, a Rogue of the same level should be so skilled he can do the impossible because he's so good at being a Rogue physics and reason packed their bags long ago.

[Elderand]

Yes, but everything he does is mundane. He's highly enhanced, but the enhancements (at least in Brotherhood) don't actually give him qualitatively magical abilities, they just improve his quantitative performance.

I agree that Lan Fan and Fu (and pretty much every ninja in media where they're presented as nonmagical) are also good examples, if lower-power.

When it reaches the point of what bradley does and how he gets to do it, it can't be considered mundane anymore.

Just because it's not flashy doesn't mean it's not supernatural.

[LibraryOgre]

Technicality, its a number of spells that are broken and not the class itself. Also, its common for the limiting factors of wizards to be ignored, most people don't keep track of spell components or the whole process of how putting spells into a spellbook work.

3.x also removed a lot of the earlier edition restrictions on casters, while keeping a lot of the fluff that was somewhat justified by those restrictions.

[sleepyphoenixx]

When it reaches the point of what bradley does and how he gets to do it, it can't be considered mundane anymore.

Just because it's not flashy doesn't mean it's not supernatural.

Real life standards of what is mundane do not belong in high fantasy. If you want to play a fighter like that look for a low fantasy setting where magic is scaled to match that level of power.
The standards for high level mundanes in a high fantasy setting like standard D&D are more along the likes of mythical heroes that sunder castle walls merely by the air pressure of their strikes, decimate entire companies of soldiers with a single blow or perform similar feats of legend.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

In western culture, the strongest warriors are portrayed as armored knights. In western history, that armor was made obsolete by firearms. Sufficiently advanced technology is indiscernible from magic, and I'm sure that most uneducated people believed early firearms to be exactly that. Traditionally, western warriors have been defeated by magic, specifically magic wielded by non-warriors, so that's what western fantasy portrays.

In eastern culture, there have been many different varieties of warriors, and each has commanded a certain level of respect and mystery. Martial artists have performed feats of strength, agility, and skill that those witnessing would have otherwise believed to be impossible. The warriors were viewed as mystical, and so eastern fantasy portrays the warriors as those accomplishing wondrous things.

It's only been in the last generation of gamers that anime/manga and eastern fantasy has been widespread and common knowledge. D&D is still designed to portray western fantasy, in which non-warriors wield magic to defeat even the strongest warriors with minimal effort. I'm not really a fan of any anime/manga or anything that portrays the warrior-dominant eastern fantasy, so I find no problem with this at all.

[Dusk Eclipse]

When it reaches the point of what bradley does and how he gets to do it, it can't be considered mundane anymore.

Just because it's not flashy doesn't mean it's not supernatural.

By D&D definitions I'd wager most of his abilities would actually be EXtraordinary, I can't recall if the Ultimate Eye was from Brotherhood or the original anime, but I think that is the most supernatural stuff he had access to (well apart from the Homunculus "natural" resilience)

[NotAnAardvark]

Except that's not consistent with western fantasy at all.

The mighty warrior overcoming the witch or magical beast (Odysseus, St. George, Arthur, Conan, Beowulf, etc) is a very common fantasical element in western literature.

Can you name which stories you're referring to when you say mighty warriors being trivially defeated by random people with magic is a standard convention? I can't think of more than a couple off the top of my head.

It's fine if you like a game where wizards are god but you don't need to make things up to support your position. Just say "I like fighters being terrible, suck it" or whatever

[Psyren]

In the fluff regarding the primary settings low level mages are borderline useless (unless a main character) and high level mages can be beaten by mundane with guile, planning and sheer force of will.

A big fat No to all of this. Without magic on the mundanes' team they don't stand a chance both in-game and out. All the guile in the world wouldn't mean jack for the Harpers or any other organizations without magic items, spellcasters and friendly churches.

[Gettles]

By D&D definitions I'd wager most of his abilities would actually be EXtraordinary, I can't recall if the Ultimate Eye was from Brotherhood or the original anime, but I think that is the most supernatural stuff he had access to (well apart from the Homunculus "natural" resilience)

He didn't have any resistance beyond his eye (which worked similar to a "spidy sense" iirc) beyond that he was a normal, albeit extraordinarily skilled human which is why he didn't regenerate and physically aged.

[Phelix-Mu]

While "realistic" wizards from lore a usually pretty kickass, it's usually by narrative fiat rather than some overwhelming mechanic (there are, as you might expect, numerous exceptions).

The funny thing about D&D wizards is that, while they are (and by some measure have usually been so in past editions) very powerful, I'm not clear that the intent was to make them as powerful as has since been discovered on forums.

A few things to keep in mind.

1.) Grandfathering: Stuff from previous editions was kept in for no good reason. 2e magic had some stuff that was often casually abused, and little thought seems to have gone on regarding what was good and what was bad and what to bother keeping (ironguard got reprinted...great, virtual immunity to mundane weapons for wizards...was a dumb spell then, doubly dumb now).

2.) Ditching balancing factors to streamline stuff: System shock rolls, painful item creation, and aggressive, practically irreversible Constitution loss used to be things in magic. But they made people not even use entire portions of the magic system (and seek exploits elsewhere). Toning down was obviously called for, but instead, much of that was just chucked and replaced by lenient, low-cost spells that had few balancing factors, and a rather functional, by comparison, (but easily exploited) crafting system.

3.) Large, unorganized development of magic as 3e progressed: Magic got cancer somewhere in the first few years of 3.5 (someone clearly cast necrotic cyst on it). As each splat came out, more and more stuff added to the already impressive list of borked spells from core, and the cancer grew. More spells, more variables, more unforeseen interactions. By the end of the run, it is TO possible to achieve literally any effect desired with enough spell optimization, often at staggeringly low cost and without even touching Epic Spellcasting. Pretty sure that was never the intent of wizards, or magic generally. Want laser-eyed cyborg tyrannosaurs by the dozen? Yeah, we can do that.

4.) Nonexistent Errata: Many other games occasionally go back and fix that which was obviously broken. With a few notable exceptions (polymorph retconning and...I'm sure there is something else), this was hardly ever done in 3e. As an editor and stickler for internal consistencies and stable sense of tone and power in a game, this bothers me. If they don't see the value in raising flags above the biohazard spells and advising DMs to "handle with caution or use this new version," then they have flunked their customer relations evaluation.

I like giving my players new toys and rewarding their efforts with awesome, but some of the toys that come in the D&D cereal box are secretly made from dioxin and the ground-up bones of DMs past. This is uncool.

So, in summary, I don't think that it is wizards so much that are OP, but that wizards are the best playground for spell optimization (due to a few key spells and their spell acquisition mechanic...reliant on the equally borked WBL mechanic...borked because of magic *sensing a migraine*). Spell optimization significantly overshoots any genre-appropriate powerful coolness and launches casters into the metagame, where we now wonder why threats exist at all with the superweapons of the PHB Spells chapter around (answer: DM fiat/game conceit). Toss an optimized wizard at any challenge the game reasonably anticipated, and that challenge is no more (in fact, it may never have existed at all...thanks, teleport through time).

Disclaimer: I actually love D&D much, much more than I should, warts and all.:smallwink:

[Dusk Eclipse]

A big fat No to all of this. Without magic on the mundanes' team they don't stand a chance both in-game and out. All the guile in the world wouldn't mean jack for the Harpers or any other organizations without magic items, spellcasters and friendly churches.

But that applies from fiction specifically set in D&D, true in the forgotten realms Wizards are scarily powerful, though they do loose some of their mystique since there are so many of them. But in other type of fiction guile and guts defeat wizards 9 out 10 times; for example in the Disney Alladin movie, he defeats Jafar by tricking him.


He didn't have any resistance beyond his eye (which worked similar to a "spidy sense" iirc) beyond that he was a normal, albeit extraordinarily skilled human which is why he didn't regenerate and physically aged.

:smallredface: I forgot about that, well then it just show that it is possible to have an Extraordinary character without magic in an universe with functional high magic.

[fishyfishyfishy]

In western culture, the strongest warriors are portrayed as armored knights. In western history, that armor was made obsolete by firearms. Sufficiently advanced technology is indiscernible from magic, and I'm sure that most uneducated people believed early firearms to be exactly that. Traditionally, western warriors have been defeated by magic, specifically magic wielded by non-warriors, so that's what western fantasy portrays.

In eastern culture, there have been many different varieties of warriors, and each has commanded a certain level of respect and mystery. Martial artists have performed feats of strength, agility, and skill that those witnessing would have otherwise believed to be impossible. The warriors were viewed as mystical, and so eastern fantasy portrays the warriors as those accomplishing wondrous things.

It's only been in the last generation of gamers that anime/manga and eastern fantasy has been widespread and common knowledge. D&D is still designed to portray western fantasy, in which non-warriors wield magic to defeat even the strongest warriors with minimal effort. I'm not really a fan of any anime/manga or anything that portrays the warrior-dominant eastern fantasy, so I find no problem with this at all.

The problem with this line of thinking is that there are western fictional heroes who accomplished great deeds without magic. Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill come to mind.

[Psyren]

But that applies from fiction specifically set in D&D, true in the forgotten realms Wizards are scarily powerful, though they do loose some of their mystique since there are so many of them. But in other type of fiction guile and guts defeat wizards 9 out 10 times; for example in the Disney Alladin movie, he defeats Jafar by tricking him.

1) The person I quoted specifically mentioned D&D settings.

2) Even using your example, Aladdin's life was saved - multiple times - by an intelligent wondrous item. With just his wits/guile, he would be dead, dead, dead.

[Haldir]

In western culture, the strongest warriors are portrayed as armored knights. In western history, that armor was made obsolete by firearms. Sufficiently advanced technology is indiscernible from magic, and I'm sure that most uneducated people believed early firearms to be exactly that. Traditionally, western warriors have been defeated by magic, specifically magic wielded by non-warriors, so that's what western fantasy portrays.

In eastern culture, there have been many different varieties of warriors, and each has commanded a certain level of respect and mystery. Martial artists have performed feats of strength, agility, and skill that those witnessing would have otherwise believed to be impossible. The warriors were viewed as mystical, and so eastern fantasy portrays the warriors as those accomplishing wondrous things.

It's only been in the last generation of gamers that anime/manga and eastern fantasy has been widespread and common knowledge. D&D is still designed to portray western fantasy, in which non-warriors wield magic to defeat even the strongest warriors with minimal effort. I'm not really a fan of any anime/manga or anything that portrays the warrior-dominant eastern fantasy, so I find no problem with this at all.

There are some legitimate points in this, but I would instead say that science rather than magic is the real motivator of this trend you've identified in western lit. All societies have thousands of years of history with the "alchemical" (mixing certain things to produce various imagined effects), but Europeans are the ones who really took the whole science thing and ran with it. Particularly metallurgy, food production, navies, medicine, and a unifying religious order were all factors that essentially made Western culture the most powerful culture in the world.

Instead of saying that Western culture does not venerate a fantastical sense of the warrior (it does, as other posters have mentioned), say that western culture especially venerates the scholar, because it has seen greater benefits of having scholars than any other culture on the planet.

Technical Expertise - Wizard.
Religious Unification and Medicine- Cleric
Food production- Druid.

Yup, that hits all the main offenders.

[Dusk Eclipse]

1) The person I quoted specifically mentioned D&D settings.

2) Even using your example, Aladdin's life was saved - multiple times - by an intelligent wondrous item. With just his wits/guile, he would be dead, dead, dead.

1) I don't see how he specifically mentioned D&D settings

2) Point taken.

[NotAnAardvark]

1) The person I quoted specifically mentioned D&D settings.

Well even in forgotten realms there's stories of particularly effective mundanes beating wizards and Archmagi. Usually with trickery but occasionally through sheer force of will. If we went by game rules that would simply never happen. Ever.

[Keneth]

Everyone has their place. Except monks, no one cares about monks.

[Phelix-Mu]

There are some legitimate points in this, but I would instead say that science rather than magic is the real motivator of this trend you've identified in western lit. All societies have thousands of years of history with the "alchemical" (mixing certain things to produce various imagined effects), but Europeans are the ones who really took the whole science thing and ran with it. Particularly metallurgy, food production, navies, medicine, and a unifying religious order were all factors that essentially made Western culture the most powerful culture in the world.

Instead of saying that Western culture does not venerate a fantastical sense of the warrior (it does, as other posters have mentioned), say that western culture especially venerates the scholar, because it has seen greater benefits of having scholars than any other culture on the planet.

Technical Expertise - Wizard.
Religious Unification and Medicine- Cleric
Food production- Druid.

Yup, that hits all the main offenders.

This is actually a very interesting point. Almost worthy of its own thread (but which I am too lazy to start atm)....:smallsmile:

[Urpriest]

When it reaches the point of what bradley does and how he gets to do it, it can't be considered mundane anymore.

Just because it's not flashy doesn't mean it's not supernatural.

In that case, sure. All I'm arguing is that a 20th level Fighter accomplishing what bradley does with pure martial skill would be by no means out of place.


By D&D definitions I'd wager most of his abilities would actually be EXtraordinary, I can't recall if the was from Brotherhood or the original anime, but I think that is the most supernatural stuff he had access to (well apart from the Homunculus "natural" resilience)

The spoiler you whitetexted was in both, but only in the original anime did it function in an explicitly supernatural way (specifically, like a Time Stop). In Brotherhood, it's very much a martial thing.

[Psyren]

1) I don't see how he specifically mentioned D&D settings.

He said:


In the fluff regarding the primary settings low level mages are borderline useless (unless a main character) and high level mages can be beaten by mundane with guile, planning and sheer force of will.

The references to both "primary settings" and "level" logically connote D&D. If he was talking about novels or other works then neither of those terms would fit.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Fair enough I guess.

[Vogonjeltz]

monk monday
Tuesday Tippy
Wizard Wensday
Thrusday Turdsay
Freya Friday
Stat saturday
sunday sun....

Ahem, it is Taco Tuesday

*i don't get the joke. What is a takos?

[malonkey1]

Ahem, it is Taco Tuesday.

Ahem, it's TAKOS Tuesday. The "S" is silent.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Actually I thin it is THAC0 Tuesday.... or perhaps that is in the "older edition" subfourm?

[CyberThread]

http://i.imgur.com/kKbbgZa.jpg

[Story]

*i don't get the joke. What is a takos?

It's a reference to The Lego Movie. Which you should see if you haven't already.

[Haldir]

This is actually a very interesting point. Almost worthy of its own thread (but which I am too lazy to start atm)....:smallsmile:

Well, to be it's own thread it would have to be qualified. Especial veneration of the scholar has always existed in all societies in some form, and all the major societies now venerate technology/science equally, which means they, all of them, venerate (emulate) western society in some manner.

It is also difficult to draw legitimate parallels between real history and D&D history. Without the Gods to keep a balance, whichever group stumbles onto divinations and teleports first is going to dominate everything, potentially being able to cripple any other groups ability to achieve divinations and teleports. Realistically, I don't believe any D&D society would advanced past level 8 or so, when Clerics get the ability to be everywhere and kidnap every child that could potentially be useful to them. Imagine rows of clerics, casting divinations and looking at name lists "Will Billy Bob develop awesome magical powers?" "Yes." Send in the goons.

Hell, the spell Mount alone could reshape the entire course of a conflict, other honorable mentions in the 1st Level Ability to Dominate the World- invisibility, Silent Image, Web, Fog Cloud.... Wild Empathy. Basically any army with magic is going to trounce any army without it, handily. They're not going to march out with wizards standing behind fighters, they're going to build use-activated traps of these things and carry them out the field. Crank lever = Kill enemy, and you're basically Napoleon.

[Phelix-Mu]

Indeed. The major aspect in which the setting is unrealistic without some force (the DM, the gods, an Overgod, Cthulu) artificially enforcing the default faux-medieval construct-society is definitely the way in which magic in the setting doesn't seem to reflect magic in the rules. Even if a very, very small fraction of the population has access to it, it is a daily, renewable resource with almost unlimited potential (limits conceivable at low levels, increasingly not so as the level of the caster increases). Combine with the levels of item crafting now available even at low level, and much of the faux-medieval thing just seems very weird.

[Psyren]

In-universe, wizards still have superlative potential, but you have to remember also that the books/novels/etc. model things that the games simply ignore. Things like the toll that spellcasting can take on the body, or negative consequences of erroneous verbal or somatic components, or research gone awry, or even what levels mean and how to get them.

As a result, realizing that potential is much, much rarer in a story sense than it is in-game.

[Phelix-Mu]

In-universe, wizards still have superlative potential, but you have to remember also that the books/novels/etc. model things that the games simply ignore. Things like the toll that spellcasting can take on the body, or negative consequences of erroneous verbal or somatic components, or research gone awry, or even what levels mean and how to get them.

As a result, realizing that potential is much, much rarer in a story sense than it is in-game.

Which seems silly, cause the point of the game is to tell a story. Moreover, a lot of the things you state as the game simply ignoring are more accurately things that 3e ignores. From my recollection of 2e, all of that stuff could happen. Magic is comparatively safer than it was before.

While magic is generally founded on secret power that bends/breaks the normal rules of reality, I think the spellcasting mechanic in 3e (daily renewable resource that scales in power level from impressive to trans-narrative) overshoots the mark a bit with what it potentially offers. At lower levels of optimization, players may not play with all of their chips, or a higher-op person may hold back intentionally, but that isn't the same thing as a balanced mechanic (not saying magic=mundane, but there has to be some ratio there that is at least measurable...right know it's a meta-level yawning abyss).

[Psyren]

2e had some consequences but it wasn't really all that much less safe. There was no real chance of bungling a verbal component and calling Cthulhu or something there either. Some spells had unintended consequences as/after they resolved, but rarely while being cast.

As for the gap - well, whether it's too far apart is really up to the group itself. Pegging it to one playstyle could easily break it for another after all. I can see the sense in making the default game straightforward for mass appeal, and then leaving it up to GMs/tables who want to make things less predictable to add in things like spellcraft checks and spellblights.

[veti]

I can't believe someone asked the question "are wizards realistic?" Because no.


The funny thing about D&D wizards is that, while they are (and by some measure have usually been so in past editions) very powerful, I'm not clear that the intent was to make them as powerful as has since been discovered on forums.

This, definitely. While D&D (3.x in particular) wizards (and clerics, for that matter) need to be sharply clipped to keep them from breaking just about any game, I'm pretty sure this was never the designers' intention. I think it comes from two major sources:

One, carelessness and, let's be honest, cheapness on the part of the designers.

Two, the proliferation of sources and splatbooks, and not nearly enough health warnings on their use. There are way too many spells and monsters just in the core books - add in a few splatbooks, and it's just silly. A DM needs to be extremely selective in what they allow, otherwise the possible interactions between things rapidly become unmanageable.

[Haldir]

Indeed. The major aspect in which the setting is unrealistic without some force (the DM, the gods, an Overgod, Cthulu) artificially enforcing the default faux-medieval construct-society is definitely the way in which magic in the setting doesn't seem to reflect magic in the rules. Even if a very, very small fraction of the population has access to it, it is a daily, renewable resource with almost unlimited potential (limits conceivable at low levels, increasingly not so as the level of the caster increases). Combine with the levels of item crafting now available even at low level, and much of the faux-medieval thing just seems very weird.

Definitely.

There is, however, a converse to this. Some societies prove reluctant to adopt new technologies unless they are absolutely forced too. If first level spells are enough to rule the world, there might not ever be incentive to develop second level spells, effectively keeping the world in a unified but low-magic state.

The really stellar example here is gunpowder. Hundreds of years of use as a weapon, but only a handful of those are what we would consider a gun. The primitive version of the substance was so effective that there was no need to improve it for a good long while because it was effective as they understood it.

[CyberThread]

Definitely.

There is, however, a converse to this. Somenot societies prove reluctant to adopt new technologies unless they are absolutely forced too. If first level spells are enough to rule the world, there might not ever be incentive to develop second level spells, effectively keeping the world in a unified but low-magic state.

The really stellar example here is gunpowder. Hundreds of years of use as a weapon, but only a handful of those are what we would consider a gun. The primitive version of the substance was so effective that there was no need to improve it for a good long while because it was effective as they understood it.


Not to counter to hard but I disagree. Gunpowder was inexact as recepies were not freely shard. Therefore tinkering and experimintation happened. As were the devices used for the going boom.

[OldTrees1]

In a fantasy setting about bending time and blowing up entire armies, are wizards truly op ( and melee is just underpowered), or is it just fantasy that wizards are top dog because of what they do.

This description of a Wizard is fine for high mid to high level. Melee is underpowered. However the optimization ceiling of Wizard is so much higher than this description that you can't see it from here.

However it is good to note that often fantasy stories have fewer but high level wizards and more but lower level warriors.