How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?

[TwoSix]

Apparently not one you'd get, no.

I'm really trying, but I'm also not seeing the point.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Did you have a point to make?

The point is you people are just making up problems that aren't even there in order to favor the fighter.

But you know what? There is a real simple solution to your so-called dilemma.

In d20 it's really easy to multiclass, and you can multiclass fighter with wizard and you can do everything you want. You can have a character that has all of those nifty little effects you lament that should belong to the fighter.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I'm really trying, but I'm also not seeing the point.

Yeah. I really have no idea what point he's trying to make with that question.

The Knock spell is a 2nd-level Wiz/Sorc spell that acts as a combination perfect Open Locks roll and a perfect Strength check (up to two applications of either or both per casting).

What else am I supposed to see there? What point is he demonstrating?

Instead, he's just gonna huff and puff, etc.

The point is you people are just making up problems that aren't even there in order to favor the fighter.

But you know what? There is a real simple solution to your so-called dilemma.

In d20 it's really easy to multiclass, and you can multiclass fighter with wizard and you can do everything you want. You can have a character that has all of those nifty little effects you lament that should belong to the fighter.

Actually, the real solution is that I just don't play my Wizard characters to the full extent of their abilities, like I posted earlier.

I'm not sure what you mean by "favor the fighter."

 

[Umbran]

... I'm willing to bet you I can design a completely reasonable door that a 1st-level rogue can open that a wizard with a knock spell cannot.

Have any of you people bitching about knock even read the damn spell?

First off, Jeff, please, could you tone it down a notch? Letting annoyance show probably doesn't help anyone see your point. Nor does being cryptic.

In 3.x, Knock is a 2nd level sorcerer or wizard spell. So, the Wizard doesn't get access to it until 3rd level, for one thing - your first level rogue will run circles around the 1st level wizard. And note that wizards don't automatically get every spell - he's got to spend one of his precious new spell level slots, or find and pay for it. Then, the wizard has to prepare it, or spend XP and time making scrolls... you get the idea.

Next, Knock only handles, at most, 2 impediments. Put in a third, and the knock spell doesn't open the door. You ever see one of those NYC apartment doors with a bazillion locks on them?

Reading strictly - just tie the darned door shut, as Knock affects chains, but not ropes. A pair of cleats and a stout string will defeat Knock, but not stop a rogue with that really slim knife in his toolkit...

 

[Diamond Cross]

And the thing about knock is this:

What if you're in a party that doesn't have a Rogue in it and you come across that chest that has that +5 Holy Avenger Vorpal Sword of Vampiric Regneration in it your fighter's been wanting for 22 years? Knock is the only solution to that dilemma. And knock doesn't even undo traps. Heck, it doesn't even open doors either.

The only other option is to bash the chest open. And that has certain dangers and risks.

As far as Jeff goes, he is correct. This fighter vs wizards hate fest is just complaining that one class gets abilities that other classes don't. And is absolutely no different than the classic complaining of why fighters get that 18/66 STR while other classes don't get exceptional strength. People do get frustrated with people complaining a lot. Especially under certain circumstances when the complaining is not warranted and people are making problems up that don't even really exist. it's been going on for far too long and needs to stop. There is nothing wrong with the classes.

Some people just want their favorite class to do everything and for their favorite class to be the star of the show. That's not what D&D was made for.

But what D&D was made for was team work, to be part of a team, not for solo play.

There are many things Wizards can do that fighters can't. So what?

I'd really love to see this thread end, especially since it has gone off topic for far too long. It was meant to address literature, not game mechanics.

 

[TwoSix]

The amount of assumption of intent in this post is quite high.

Especially under certain circumstances when the complaining is not warranted and people are making problems up that don't even really exist. it's been going on for far too long and needs to stop. There is nothing wrong with the classes.

Except that, you know, there is. Not all of them. Bard? No. Fighter? A little. Wizard? Yes. Cleric? Heck yes.

Some people just want their favorite class to do everything and for their favorite class to be the star of the show. That's not what D&D was made for.

But what D&D was made for was team work, to be part of a team, not for solo play.

Thank you for arguing our point!

Past mid levels, spellcasters (at least ones played proactively) can solo the game. Fighters can't.

There are many things Wizards can do that fighters can't. So what?

Because the reverse isn't true?

I'd really love to see this thread end, especially since it has gone off topic for far too long. It was meant to address literature, not game mechanics.

We just talked about Gandalf as a 3.5 bard 5 posts ago.

 

[Diamond Cross]

Thank you for arguing our point!

Past mid levels, spellcasters (at least ones played proactively) can solo the game. Fighters can't.

And that is just not true. Period.

Nor was I arguing your point. That is very dishonest of you to try to turn the argument like that. I was doing no such thing.

Nobody can solo the game. That is the truth. Any DM can pick any creature that a spellcaster can not overcome by themselves and will need a team to overcome it.

And I have been playing the game since the early 1980s. Long before I even knew of such things as computers or the internet existed.

Even in DDO, I still need people to help me with even some of the low level dungeons I've gone into, when I play alone. I always have a Cleric and my summoned monster because a Wizard has a lot of difficulties in close combat especially when the opponents swarm him. There are many dungeons I can not complete without those two helping me.

And some opponents have Spell Resistance and immunities to many different spells.

For example, what is a lone Wizard or Cleric going to do when he faces a party of five Drow of equal level?

Try soloing that and you'll see how far you get.

Drow have Spell resistance. And if they happen to have a another wizard, well there's spell countering.

So don't give me that stuff.

A wizard is a powerful force to reckon with, but some people have some really strong misconceptions that they just can't beat.

 

[Umbran]

Past mid levels, spellcasters (at least ones played proactively) can solo the game.

I don't know if that is true. As I raised in my note about Knock - the spellcasters have to have spells prepared. Having theoretical access to a spell, and having practical access in the middle of the dungeon is not the same thing, by a long shot.

Does your wizard know in the morning how many monsters of what type he'll fight, and now many walls he'll need to climb, and now many locks will need to be opened? What happens when the number of tasks he needs to perform exceeds the number of spells he gets per day?

 

[LostSoul]

I don't know if that is true. As I raised in my note about Knock - the spellcasters have to have spells prepared. Having theoretical access to a spell, and having practical access in the middle of the dungeon is not the same thing, by a long shot.

Does your wizard know in the morning how many monsters of what type he'll fight, and now many walls he'll need to climb, and now many locks will need to be opened? What happens when the number of tasks he needs to perform exceeds the number of spells he gets per day?

Scribe Scroll does help, though.

 

[Mort]

I don't know if that is true. As I raised in my note about Knock - the spellcasters have to have spells prepared. Having theoretical access to a spell, and having practical access in the middle of the dungeon is not the same thing, by a long shot.

Does your wizard know in the morning how many monsters of what type he'll fight, and now many walls he'll need to climb, and now many locks will need to be opened? What happens when the number of tasks he needs to perform exceeds the number of spells he gets per day?

3e/3.5 exacerbated this with extremely easy access to scrolls/wands (heck scribe scroll is free for the wizard). It's not an issue at lower levels but by mid+ (say past 10 or so) a wizard that has any downtime at all will be well prepared with knock, water breathing, tongues etc. (he doesn't need dozens of scrolls just several of the "you don't usually need it, but when you need it boy do you need it variety).

Also by mid-high levels - leaving spell slots open becomes a pretty good option, which really increases versatility (at the expense of time of course).

It's one reason I think spontaneous casters (sorcerers, beguilers etc.) are never brought up as a problem when these issues get trotted out.