Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8783325" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Why? Why is the bard more interested in becoming a hero and investing in their power than the fighter? Why is it that they care more about personal power than the running of the nation? And, there has been talk of how this society could not last because of disparity, but how is this not worse? How is it not an even worse disparity that the vast majority of the most powerful individuals on the planet care nothing for ruling, and leave that to the plebians who have nothing better to do?Why would a wizard noble not have clout, allies, wealth and other forms of power? You keep making this claim, but you aren't backing it up with anything. If the wizard is born as the fourth generation of a noble lineage, whose family helped found the kingdom, why would they have zero allies, zero clout, zero wealth? Does teaching magic automatically erase your family's history and accomplishments?Nobles and kings can absolutely have hobbies. They can still make things, they just can't focus on it. And that isn't really a problem. Most of the best magic items that a ruling noble would be interested in only take a few weeks to make anyways. Also, magical items are generally permanent, so they get passsed down from parent to child to grandchild.Again, your perspective is &quot;You know, I could rule the nation, as is my birthright (because noble) but... you know... it's a lot of work. I've got better things to do.&quot; I think this is an absolutely horrible answer to the question &quot;why aren't mages in charge&quot; because it says that they absolutely could be, they just see running a nation as beneath them and leave it to the mundanes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8783325, member: 6801228"] Why? Why is the bard more interested in becoming a hero and investing in their power than the fighter? Why is it that they care more about personal power than the running of the nation? And, there has been talk of how this society could not last because of disparity, but how is this not worse? How is it not an even worse disparity that the vast majority of the most powerful individuals on the planet care nothing for ruling, and leave that to the plebians who have nothing better to do? Why would a wizard noble not have clout, allies, wealth and other forms of power? You keep making this claim, but you aren't backing it up with anything. If the wizard is born as the fourth generation of a noble lineage, whose family helped found the kingdom, why would they have zero allies, zero clout, zero wealth? Does teaching magic automatically erase your family's history and accomplishments? Nobles and kings can absolutely have hobbies. They can still make things, they just can't focus on it. And that isn't really a problem. Most of the best magic items that a ruling noble would be interested in only take a few weeks to make anyways. Also, magical items are generally permanent, so they get passsed down from parent to child to grandchild. Again, your perspective is "You know, I could rule the nation, as is my birthright (because noble) but... you know... it's a lot of work. I've got better things to do." I think this is an absolutely horrible answer to the question "why aren't mages in charge" because it says that they absolutely could be, they just see running a nation as beneath them and leave it to the mundanes. [/QUOTE]

Verification