I’d disagree. I’ve always played D&D as low-powered, low-magic since I was a kid. I’ve played that way for almost 40 years now. To me, that’s just D&D. High-powered, high-magic is fine. It’s just not D&D to me. Harry Potter is neat but it’s not D&D.
Harry Potter is a good example here in a few ways. Yes the magic is IMO mostly too fast-paced for D&D, but in the heat of combat they still have to aim their spells and can (and often do) miss; and D&D could do with a lot more of this. There also seems to be no real limit on how many spells a caster can do - or try - in a day, which while balanced when everyone works that way isn't at all balanced in a level-based system that's also trying to make and keep martials playable.But not Harry Potter. Love HP and I am finishing reading Prisoner of Azkaban (not my favorite one) for the 4th time (as I go through the series again). I have watched the movies even more.
The point of death being so much closer to breathing down the necks of PCs rather than being changed up in a locked cage in the back room of another locked building with a lock on the building isn't so much the actual PCs getting killed. I've had more 5e PCs fall to monsters than 2e/3.x/pf PCs but in almost every case the 5e PC was suicidally played or just straight up executed with the player shocked it was even on the table. In 2e/3.x/pf though the PCs knew that life was fragile & acted with a sense of self preservation.
I know a lot of people don't count them, but they still always had spellcasting which is why they've evolved into the half-casters we have now, they just slowly gained more spellpower, developing from their earlier incarnations.
See this is a pivotal issue for me.
Does there have to be a reason? Tastes change over time.
