D&D 5E Cost of Attending Wizard School

[snickersnax]

Either way, depends on your game worlds I guess. To me 1st levels are professionals. From their they begin their ascent into world-shaking legends. 5th level wizards are beings of fear and awe since they can potentially incinerate a small town with a few words and gestures.

A 4th level Wizard in my game world named Roberts would expect people to call him 'Master Roberts', and would be addressed as 'His Potency, Master Roberts'.

For you other low fantasy gamers do you use 5e proficiency progression?
Meaning 1-4th level is +2, 5-9 is +3? or have you adjusted this to reflect that there is a significant difference between 1st and 5th level in ability?

 

[Salthorae]

For you other low fantasy gamers do you use 5e proficiency progression?
Meaning 1-4th level is +2, 5-9 is +3? or have you adjusted this to reflect that there is a significant difference between 1st and 5th level in ability?

Hah, am I a low fantasy gamer? I'm a mixed bag I guess. My post was more from the perspective of a commoner or the general NPC out there, but for the purpose of discussion:

I do still use the standard progression. 5% (10% with expertise) better is a big increase in the Bounded Accuracy framework.

That said, most of the big difference isn't in things you're proficient at necessarily. It's the class abilities themselves that provide the big jump. Casters get that all-important 3rd level spells ability, martial characters are now twice as fast with their weapons in melee than they were yesterday, rogues can dive away from danger and halve their damage suddenly as well as bumping their strike ability another 50%.

 

[Celebrim]

For you other low fantasy gamers do you use 5e proficiency progression?
Meaning 1-4th level is +2, 5-9 is +3? or have you adjusted this to reflect that there is a significant difference between 1st and 5th level in ability?

One of the reasons that I didn't switch from 3e to 5e is I don't like how bounded accuracy tends to treat skill competency. While I do love the advantage/disadvantage mechanic in theory, the total some of how it treats skills is not something I like. I expect characters to have broad competency, and it's hard to have the sort of competency I expect using the math that 5e is using to keep a level playing field. That desire to level the playing field has some advantages in the combat sphere, but doesn't work out as a general methodology.

YMMV, of course.

 

[Celebrim]

In standard 5e rules it only takes a month or 6 to get to level 20. But I'm like you and slow it down.

I don't really know how 5e plays, but in 1e AD&D, 3rd edition, or Pathfinder, getting to 5th level could take say 80 hours of gaming. You could probably do that in 3 months of real time if your group was really into it, but more likely as a adult you are talking about between 6 months and a year.

In game you might have a month or two transpire in that process, so your characters would be aging slower than you are.

 

[BlivetWidget]

At the end of the day, despite the recommended rate of character progression in the 5e rules, I feel like anything works because those recommendations are not mechanically enforced. The rules work just as well for a game where you practically montage your way to 20th level as it does for one where it takes a lifetime to get that far.

 

[Unwise]

Oh man, in one of my games half my players are American and play D&D to get away from thoughts of crippling student debt. This is definitely something I can't include.

In a 2 player game I run though, they are both magic graduates who have to go adventuring to have any hope of paying off their debts without being indentured to their masters for another 10 years. At least in their cases it is not hitting too close to home.

 

[BlivetWidget]

@Salthorae After much fussing, I managed to get the core of my wizard notes down to 60-ish pages and up on DMs Guild here. Thanks for the push!

@Unwise ha, indeed! Without getting into the politics of the real world too much, education costs here are definitely on the crazy side. I was fortunate enough to pay my way with scholarships, but that's obviously not the norm. My wife told me that after she graduated, her college tripled their tuition and it increased applications to the school. So from a capitalistic viewpoint, it's hard to blame them for doing it because they must still be below the supply/demand curve intersection. From a "we're all better off if everyone is smarter" viewpoint though, I find it concerning.

 

[nexalis]

I think your numbers are a bit skewed. Approximately 75% of the staff are adjunct professors who basically work for peanuts and don't get any benefits, so your professor's salaries are grossly overestimated. On the other hand, you've completely missed the vast sums of money that are needed for the new quidditch stadium, the chancellor's salary, the coaches' salaries, and the ever-burgeoning blackbox of so-called "administrative" functions needed to manage a university in a modern competitive market. These will account for approximately 95% of your overall costs though they have little to do with the quality of the education you will receive. You will be saddled with crushing mortgage-sized debt for the rest of your adult life, and the problem will be passed on to your children. Better to just be a fighter unless you come from the noble background.

 

[Salthorae]

@Salthorae After much fussing, I managed to get the core of my wizard notes down to 60-ish pages and up on DMs Guild here. Thanks for the push!

@Unwise ha, indeed! Without getting into the politics of the real world too much, education costs here are definitely on the crazy side. I was fortunate enough to pay my way with scholarships, but that's obviously not the norm. My wife told me that after she graduated, her college tripled their tuition and it increased applications to the school. So from a capitalistic viewpoint, it's hard to blame them for doing it because they must still be below the supply/demand curve intersection. From a "we're all better off if everyone is smarter" viewpoint though, I find it concerning.

Those are really cool looking from the sample pages!!

 

[generic]

I think your numbers are a bit skewed. Approximately 75% of the staff are adjunct professors who basically work for peanuts and don't get any benefits, so your professor's salaries are grossly overestimated. On the other hand, you've completely missed the vast sums of money that are needed for the new quidditch stadium, the chancellor's salary, the coaches' salaries, and the ever-burgeoning blackbox of so-called "administrative" functions needed to manage a university in a modern competitive market. These will account for approximately 95% of your overall costs though they have little to do with the quality of the education you will receive. You will be saddled with crushing mortgage-sized debt for the rest of your adult life, and the problem will be passed on to your children. Better to just be a fighter unless you come from the noble background.

This makes me wonder, are Druids effectively unlicensed herbal therapists who couldn't afford to go to medical school?

Are Warlocks lone geniuses who taught themselves with the help of a mentor?

Are Sorcerers just 'magic geniuses' who are too intelligent for university?

Are Clerics faith healers whose therapies actually work?

Are there Wizard scholarships?