Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)

[cross ofth carpenter]

On Forums on 3.5, usually the topic of fighters and spellcasters (more narrowly wizards) with the most people saying that fighters are low tier
and don't do as well while magic-users dominate etc.

I think that is debatable and a good case could be made for fighters
and more narrowly against wizards but balancing the perceived power
some magic-users may have.

Now some aspects of this that are not considered are that
wizards in particular, perhaps due to their ego and power are
usually semi-antisocial and most likely to be feared and distrusted
by the community and society.

Whereas fighters, provided they have the same religion
as the community and are not a source of disorder are
likely to have the support and faith of the community
and society.

In addition wizards are physically not as strong,
which does have a major impact on survivability,
particularly in the levels to 10.

Another factor is the pyramid shaped scarcity of wizards by level.

The number of wizards of a given level is largely shaped like a
pyramid so that the higher the level, the less number of
wizards of that level exist so a 10th lvl wizard might exist
in a medium sized town but a 15th lvl wizard might only
exist in a much larger area and likely very few of them
would exist what to say of anything beyond that.

The scarcity of wizards is governed by another factor,
since the wizard is a knowledge based class and as
everyone knows in the D&D world of the middle ages
knowledge and learning were restricted to a few, the
wizard will most likely need an aristocratic background to
be able to acquire that knowledge and learning and
advance. Not something available to most people, but
only a select few individuals of aristocratic background.

Now different rule systems regard magic and spell casting
may exist, but it is not the case that a wizard is
able to use all of his spells at one, and the need
for scarce use of his prepared spells in a day
further limits his ability to be the dominant force
all the time or even most of the time.

That is why I think a good case can be made
for fighters and also the other non-magical
classes and against over-appraisal of
spell-casters which seems to be the case.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The survivability, rate of advancement, social consequences in the game world, and the actual mechanics of spellcasting are only some of the reasons that the nonmagical characters are perfectly fine, despite being undervalued by a small number of internet posters. Players keep playing all the classes, regardless.

 

[TwoSix]

Your argument in the opening post is primarily about world-building constraints. It's certainly easy to justify in the campaign world why wizards aren't the be-all and end-all class, because it's easy to tack on fictional constraints to NPC wizards.

In a 3.5 game where the players evaluate the rules with an eye towards effective tactics, and the social contract doesn't preclude acting in the most efficient manner to dispatch encounters, the spellcasters will dominate play from the mid-single digit levels onward.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

On Forums on 3.5, usually the topic of fighters and spellcasters (more narrowly wizards) with the most people saying that fighters are low tier
and don't do as well while magic-users dominate etc.

I think that is debatable and a good case could be made for fighters
and more narrowly against wizards but balancing the perceived power
some magic-users may have.

Now some aspects of this that are not considered are that
wizards in particular, perhaps due to their ego and power are
usually semi-antisocial and most likely to be feared and distrusted
by the community and society.

Usually fighter versus wizard debates involve either PCs (who can depend on each other) or NPCs versus PCs (in which case societal aspects fall away; evil wizards aren't likely to be tolerated in a good-hearted magocracy).

Whereas fighters, provided they have the same religion
as the community and are not a source of disorder are
likely to have the support and faith of the community
and society.

I picture wizards sort of like arrogant merchants. You might not like them, but they can withhold services that no one else can provide. Tick off the merchants and they can cut off everything from luxuries to food (depending on who their customers are). Tick off the wizards and they can cut off your services, and pretty soon the boycott organizers will be charmed and/or interrogated.

In addition wizards are physically not as strong,
which does have a major impact on survivability,
particularly in the levels to 10.

That's true. At 1st-level fighters are generally one of the strongest classes. After a point, though, even the wizard can survive being surprised, sometimes, whereas the fighter is less likely to survive it (due to being frozen by magic in round one). Very high-level wizards can use spells such as Contingency to make surviving being surprised more likely, an option the fighter doesn't have.

Another factor is the pyramid shaped scarcity of wizards by level.

The number of wizards of a given level is largely shaped like a
pyramid so that the higher the level, the less number of
wizards of that level exist so a 10th lvl wizard might exist
in a medium sized town but a 15th lvl wizard might only
exist in a much larger area and likely very few of them
would exist what to say of anything beyond that.

That pyramid isn't much different for fighters. The thing is, most "fighters" are in fact warriors. You can't tell if someone is a warrior or fighter just by looking. In a "warrior versus mage" conflict, there's a lot more warriors, but in a "fighter versus wizard" conflict, there could be the same number.

The scarcity of wizards is governed by another factor,
since the wizard is a knowledge based class and as
everyone knows in the D&D world of the middle ages
knowledge and learning were restricted to a few, the
wizard will most likely need an aristocratic background to
be able to acquire that knowledge and learning and
advance. Not something available to most people, but
only a select few individuals of aristocratic background.

On a battlefield, the common soldiers are mainly warriors, the aristocrats/knights are fighters. Knights trained from the age of seven with daggers, and to be a knight you needed a warhorse, armor, and at least one weapon. (Most knights had a lance, sword, and favored weapon that's better for going through armor, so an axe or hammer.) Very few commoners could afford that outlay, and in the Middle Ages you had to provide your own gear or pledge yourself to a lord, who could afford to lightly arm you. Compared to knights, most freemen warriors started as teenagers or young adults, and simply had less formal training.

So in short... training a fighter is expensive. Even 1st-level freeman adventurers can barely afford all their gear (and they start with a load of money, same as a wizard).

Now different rule systems regard magic and spell casting
may exist, but it is not the case that a wizard is
able to use all of his spells at one, and the need
for scarce use of his prepared spells in a day
further limits his ability to be the dominant force
all the time or even most of the time.

That's a pretty funny way of looking at it. The inability to use all of your spells at once is good for game balance, and it's not like fighters can put all their attacks in one day in one round. The lack of spell endurance is mitigated by the ability to create magic items (including magical traps that fighters can't deal with). A wizard participating in a battle should first Scry, then try long-term spells such as Planar Binding, saving attack spells for when opportunities emerge. (Don't Fireball the peasants, Fireball the command group!)

The best way to outsmart a cabal of wizards is to have a good Bluff score. The wizard probably won't be able to Scry your tactical meeting, but they can charm and interrogate anyone who knows what was said there, so hold a fake one and feed misinformation to the mages. (This means you need to Bluff your own guys.) Of course, there's a limit to just how much of that you can do. If you say you're using horses but are buying bridles for griffons, it's kind of obvious.

That is why I think a good case can be made
for fighters and also the other non-magical
classes and against over-appraisal of
spell-casters which seems to be the case.

As I mentioned earlier, most of the complaints about mage > fighter involve adventuring groups. Adventurers move outside society. Just like villains. The people in town X might not like wizards, but it's more important whether they like or dislike adventurers, and whether they like or dislike Baron Evil and his cabal of evil warriors and mages.

 

[cross ofth carpenter]

Well I still think that considering spellcasters
to completely dominate the game ignores
certain things. For example the way that the power of
classes is calculated is probably faulty in some ways.

A theoretical and hypotethical 18th lvl wizard or above
might be very powerful but the likelihood of one even
existing are pretty slim not to mention the tendency
of wizards towards isolation and becoming anti-social.

Most wizards who might exist if they are able and
above average are probably level 10. Certainly
not the dominating god that they are presumed to
be.

Another factor which in the psychology of wizards
is ignored is their tendency to go mad with delusions
of power and grandeur which is a very common trait
among them, particularly as it is reinforced by their
tendency towards isolation and becoming anti-social.

Their lack of contact with reality might lead them to
exaggerate their own powers.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not very comfortable with the argument that high-level wizards are balanced because high-level wizards don't actually exist.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Well I still think that considering spellcasters
to completely dominate the game ignores
certain things. For example the way that the power of
classes is calculated is probably faulty in some ways.

Obviously. The designers didn't playtest enough. Most complaints of mages > fighters come from actually playing.

A theoretical and hypotethical 18th lvl wizard or above
might be very powerful but the likelihood of one even
existing are pretty slim not to mention the tendency
of wizards towards isolation and becoming anti-social.

An 18th-level wizard would be as rare as an 18th-level fighter. A paragon fighter could take over the world by raising an army, and said characters do exist in many settings.

Most wizards who might exist if they are able and
above average are probably level 10. Certainly
not the dominating god that they are presumed to
be.

No, most wizards are level 1. As are most fighters. I don't get the point.

Another factor which in the psychology of wizards
is ignored is their tendency to go mad with delusions
of power and grandeur which is a very common trait
among them, particularly as it is reinforced by their
tendency towards isolation and becoming anti-social.

Their lack of contact with reality might lead them to
exaggerate their own powers.

No, I don't think that's right. We have no wizards in real life and have no idea what their psychology would be like. In addition, we can't even be sure that wizards would be loners (not that there's anything wrong with that). Wizards have good reasons to hang out together and share research, much like modern-day scientists. Wizards can also swap magic items.

 

[Dandu]

Another factor which in the psychology of wizards
is ignored is their tendency to go mad with delusions
of power and grandeur which is a very common trait
among them, particularly as it is reinforced by their
tendency towards isolation and becoming anti-social.

Their lack of contact with reality might lead them to
exaggerate their own powers.

Where in the Nine Hells are you getting this from? Not all wizards are Raistlin Majere, you know.

You might as well say that all high level fighters are ax crazy, mass murdering psychopaths who seek to conquer the world in a manner which would shame Genghis Khan and make Hitler weep. Or do you think it healthy to be a member of a profession that involves killing people for a living, and which requires you to kill a great deal of people to reach high levels?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

A friend of mine, talking about adventurers in general, said that PCs "believed that killing people gave them "magic points" that made them better at killing people", where "magic points" are XP, of course.

If that's how you gain level, all adventurers run the risk of going crazy.

 

[Dandu]

The argument that wizards are better than fighters is partially comparing apples to oranges. Wizards have a role that is distinct from the fighter's role. However, even though their roles are different, they are not equally powerful.

Consider: in every business, there is a janitor, and there is a CEO. Which one is more important? Obviously, the janitor; the CEO can take a month long vacation and no one will be adversely affected, but if the janitor leaves for even a day, work slows to a crawl.

A wizard's ability to impact the campaign setting is vastly superior to that of a fighter's. A fighter has two things he can do as a fighter: hit things or shoot things. Sure, he could try to raise an army, but that requires Charisma. He could try to lead an army, but that requires Int and Wis. As a fighter, your Strength, Dex, and Con scores are going to take priority over your mental stats - at least if you plan on fighting.

Conversely, a wizard is going to have good Int at the very least. They gain little from having Cha or Wis, as opposed to Dex and Con, but they're still better off than the fighter in the mental department. This enables them to better formulate plans and strategies, one of which will hopefully be to hire a bard as the spokesperson and a cleric as their advisor.

In terms of class abilities, the wizard's higher level spells allow him to affect the world and the campaign. Wall of Iron, for instance, generates a lot of GP worth of iron. Teleportation allows you to bypass mundane obstacles to travel. The Planar Binding line is risky, but can get you Imps for their Commune ability, which is a powerful divination, succubi for infiltration and seduction, and many other powerful outsiders. Contact Other Plane lets you play 20 questions with deities. Animate Dead gets you an indefatigable workforce at the very least. A Permanent Wall of Fire is a permanent source of energy.

And this is only using 4-6th level spells in Core.

Meanwhile, the fighter's class abilities enable him to hit things better.