D&D General Why the resistance to D&D being a game?

[Oofta]

And yet if you understood the story at all, you'd know he wasn't a "wizard" in the D&D sense in the slightest! He's an angel in the D&D sense. This isn't up for debate. Claiming otherwise isn't a "valid opinion". It's just not understanding really clear stuff in LotR and Tolkien's writings.

If you think D&D wizards should be an angels and the servants of gods, well, fine, but say that.

You also suggested "magic is supreme" is a theme of LotR, when the EXACT OPPOSITE is the theme of LotR. This suggests a profound lack of comprehension of LotR. A book you yourself have pointed out is foundational to modern fantasy. It is. And theme is PRECISELY OPPOSITE to what you think it is. Again, this isn't up for debate - this is a basic issue - this is like you thinking that Romeo and Juliet is about how gang violence is AWESOME AND COOL, or how The Tempest is about BADASS WIZARDS and casting awesome spells!!! or something. God or Frankenstein is about how we should be doing the wildest and most insane experiments possible and nothing will go wrong!

Tolkien's universe is actually quite low and/or subtle magic compared to D&D. The theme of The Hobbit and LotR is that the (literal) little guys are the true heroes of the stories. Tolkien considered Sam the true hero of LotR.

 

[ECMO3]

Depends on builds and priorities. If casters happen to have the right spell prepared and if they have the spell slot available and if the NPCs don't notice and take exception to the PC casting spells and if the DM doesn't enforce the rules like Charm Person only makes the NPC a friendly ally that knows they were charmed ... well given a lot of "ifs" a caster can surpass the fighter.

Not really for a few reasons.

Limiting spells and downtime helps a lot with Wizards, but not as much with others. Rituals and scrolls (which can be made) cover the prepared spells shortfalls.

Even when you look at the non-magic, Fighters get 2 skill proficiencies, the same as Wizards, Clerics and Druids. So intrinsically they would be similar at non-combat pillars except that the primary abilities of casters support those pillars better than dexterity and a lot better than strength. Then you add in spells like Friends or Charm Person which have undoubted negatives but offer options just not available to non-casters.

For example a fighter or a wizard may be similar at trying to persuade someone, because they are both relying on an off stat. However the Wizard has an option to use those spells to give him advantage. Maybe it is not advisable based on the sitation, but at worst they are equal.

 

[mamba]

However, 40+ years of D&D history proves that you can have a very successful game with wide power disparities between PCs

I don't think anyone was arguing this point...

 

[mamba]

He is a Wizard. Tolkein calls him a Wizard. He has many of the tropes of a Wizard. Claiming he is not a Wizard is just false.

he is not, and reiterating something that is very obviously wrong if you looked into it, does not make it any less so

Saying Gandalf was an Angel is not an argument for weakening D&D Wizards.

it actually is, and you can check that by comparing the D&D casters to the ones in the LotR TTRPGs...

 

[mamba]

Then it is not really about buffing meleers and has little or nothing to do with story or thematics. It is about giving non-casters a boost for no reason.

the reason is to make them equal in power.... that you do not agree wit the reason is not the same as there not being one

If we make a sword do more damage when we swing it, then logically everyone swinging it should do that extra damage. There is no logical reason that should be non-caster specific.

then maybe, just maybe, this is not the right solution to the problem

 

[Cadence]

If only LotR had appendices that gave more details on things...

 

[Oofta]

Not really for a few reasons.

Limiting spells and downtime helps a lot with Wizards, but not as much with others. Rituals and scrolls (which can be made) cover the prepared spells shortfalls.

Even when you look at the non-magic, Fighters get 2 skill proficiencies, the same as Wizards, Clerics and Druids. So intrinsically they would be similar at non-combat pillars except that the primary abilities of casters support those pillars better than dexterity and a lot better than strength. Then you add in spells like Friends or Charm Person which have undoubted negatives but offer options just not available to non-casters.

For example a fighter or a wizard may be similar at trying to persuade someone, because they are both relying on an off stat. However the Wizard has an option to use those spells to give him advantage. Maybe it is not advisable based on the sitation, but at worst they are equal.

There aren't that many rituals in 5E, they hardly make up for shortfalls. There are, what 20 wizard rituals? About the only one that I see used is Tiny Hut and Comprehend Languages. If you give wizards unlimited money to buy scrolls, that's just another version of the 5 minute work day. If a wizard charms a person, that person knows they were charmed. If the DM never has repercussions from that, it's on the DM.

In any case if you want to be exceptional at things outside of combat, play a rogue. A fighter can be decent at out of combat stuff if the player prioritizes it I know my fighter/rogue certainly was. But by default that's not the fighter schtick. Doesn't make them any less able to contribute to the group overall.

In any case .. now you're just ignoring what I've stated and repeating the same old "but wizards are inherently better" mantra. Unless there's something new we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Oofta]

the reason is to make them equal in power.... that you do not agree wit the reason is not the same as there not being one


then maybe, just maybe, this is not the right solution to the problem

In my campaign the fighter does indeed have a cool magic weapon. The wizard also has a wand of lightning bolts and a staff of power. I don't see how giving a fighter some magic makes them somehow less worthy, especially when @ECMO3 seems to be assuming that wizards have as many scrolls as they want.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

He is a Wizard. Tolkein calls him a Wizard. He has many of the tropes of a Wizard. Claiming he is not a Wizard is just false.

I agree he is not a D&D Wizard because if D&D patterned itself after a LOTR Wizard it would be more powerful, not less.

Saying Gandalf was an Angel is not an argument for weakening D&D Wizards.



Not through powers. The characters in LOTR persevere even though they lack the blatant power of the foes they face.

Frodo did not beat Sauron by swinging a sword hard enough to chop off his eye. We did not have to buff Frodo to where he could do as much damage as Sauron with Sting. He had to overcome the blatant disadvantage in observable power.

You really profoundly don't understand the media you're discussing, and you're putting your own ignorance and blatantly false projections, which are obviously refuted by both the works and the authorial discussion of them, out there as "the truth", and it's just deeply sad to see.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

In my campaign the fighter does indeed have a cool magic weapon. The wizard also has a wand of lightning bolts and a staff of power. I don't see how giving a fighter some magic makes them somehow less worthy, especially when @ECMO3 seems to be assuming that wizards have as many scrolls as they want.

I don't think having magic items is at all a problem.

I do think that having a situation where, one class basically hard-requires magic items to perform (which is not 100% true of Fighters etc. in 5E, but is at least 50% true, y'know?), and another doesn't, and this isn't at all accounted for in any other way (like, say a harder XP table for the one that doesn't, like Wizards had in 1E/2E), is a problem.

And I don't think it's one anyone meant to happen in some "MWHAHAHAHA" way.

I think it's been a creeping issue since 3E. In 1E/2E, casters had an uphill struggle XP-wise, were hideously vulnerable without magic items or powerful magic to protect them, and could easily be stopped from casting spells - and many of their spells took a while to cast and/or cost the earth (in a situation where money mattered more).

And slowly, slowly we've seen literally every factor which restricts and limits caster stripped away, and their baseline power actually significantly increased with stuff like cantrips, and whilst 5E limits the high-end power slightly, it's still playing too hard into a double-standard which doesn't really help anyone or make the game cooler or anything (and the huge baseline power increase from scaling cantrips sort of obviates the lower number of higher-level spells in a weird way, at least in the higher-level play I've run). It's just a sort of sad accident of design. The one thing we did get to somewhat limit stuff is Concentration, but in practice it's just worked around - it's relatively easy to figure out which spell should be your one concentration spell in any given situation.