Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Set" data-source="post: 4523970" data-attributes="member: 41584">Total agreement here. It bugs me as well because, for all the meta-logic of 'well, mages are rare, and have better things to do,' that doesn't make any sense, since *anyone* with an average or better intelligence, wisdom or charisma can go on to become a Cleric, Druid, Bard, Wizard, Sorcerer or Adept, just by taking a level in that class. Spellcasters wouldn't be any more rare than Fighters or Rogues or Barbarians. And 'have better things to do' than make oodles of filthy cash and becoming indispensible heads of magical trades-guilds by casting Continual Light / Flame and / or researching spells to create ever-warm ovens or ever-cool storage trunks or clothing for fancy noblewomen that can change into other clothing? Doesn't that sound a *hell* of a lot better for a low-level NPC spellcaster than hoisting a dagger and a backpack and trekking into the wilderness to fight owlbears, in the hopes of scraping some gold pieces out of his poop that are leftover from the *last* wannabe archwizard who went out 'adventuring' and got his fool self eaten? The 4E notion of making non-combat spells into rituals with specific requirements, to prevent rampant use of teleportation or scrying or whatever from totally changing the dynamic of the setting, would be a good one, taken to a certain extent.</blockquote>