Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 4366151" data-attributes="member: 5100">In 1e, the wizard was the "system mastery" character.  It's what you gave to the established players while the newbies played the fighter.  That's a gross oversimplification, but there is a certain amount of truth to it.  You had to think to survive the first 6-8 levels as a wizard.Also, despite the spell progression table running to something like level 36, I never saw a wizard start at 1st and make it to name level.  I've heard of them, but I haven't seen them.  Of course, I always assumed that name level was pretty much retirement age, anyway.  When the dwarf stopped advancing at 6th level, why bother?I can buy into this.  I liked 1e wizards because of the array of spells available.  There was no assumption of bull's strength on the party or any such crap.  You had a handful of spells and the rest of the party was still relatively strong without you, so you'd best manage your resources or plan to spend half the session knowing you're done.  That "relatively strong" is important, too.  You didn't throw the fireball in the first battle.  You waited until it was actually needed.In the old days, people would have been embarrassed at the thought of a five minute work day.  In the snow.  Uphill.  Both ways.That's a different conversation.  I think most people are fine with the cleric being toned down.  Some people have a real issue with the wizard not having the potential to do just about anything.</blockquote>

Verification