Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 9126465" data-attributes="member: 996">[spoiler]TSR-era had more restrictions, and more hard/arbitrary restrictions, than WotC.  But, it was still very high-magic, and necessarily so.  There was really no way to get by without magical healing, for instance, and it's not like potions were for sale in quantity, either.  So you either had a Cleric (at least) in the party, and magic items were found in many treasure hoards so you got a +1 weapon or two before you encountered a monster that was utterly invulnerable "hit only by" non-magical ones (and not slower than the slowest party member), or your adventuring career would not be successful.The stated conceit back in the day was that the world was still much like medieval Europe, because casters were rare, and, in warfare "canceled eachother out."  I don't think it held together too well back then, either.  But, y'know, it was the 70s when 0D&D was out and the core three 1e D&D books being written, and the hobby was still very new.[/spoiler]Sorry, this is a 5e thread, and I was goin' on about the olden days.That's what the 5e PH comes right out and says about magic, early on.  It's unavoidable and indispensable. That's backed up by the fact that every class in the PH casts spells.  IIRC, that's 12 classes: 6 full casters, 2 half-casters and 4 sometime-casters with at least one sub-class that uses spells in some way, or 40 sub-classes, with only 6 that cast no spells whatsoever (and one of those still uses supernatural Ki, so more like 5).  7 out of 8 sub-classes are magical.  <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937.png" title="Person shrugging    :person_shrugging:" data-shortname=":person_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

Verification