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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5699620" data-attributes="member: 6679551">I think this is an excellent post because it describes the elephant in the room.   You point out something that seems almost self-evident:  But why not?  So why wouldn't a caster describe it as a level or tier or order as that is the most accurate way to describe it?  I mean, Wizards in particular are one of the most didactic classes why wouldn't they use precise language to describe their mastery of magic? As you point out, the cost of making scrolls is a 50ft banner that says, "You are now level X, please pay Y amount to make the scroll." It is quite fascinating for me to read the responses and see that there seems to such consensus that despite magic working in "levels" and everyone agreeing that Wizards would have figured that out, nobody wants the Wizards to think of it as such.  It's not like magic was invented just before one's campaign.  Wizards have been wrestling with the art of magic for eons, attempting to learn its secrets and master it through sheer force of intellect.   Not one of them would decide to simply describe things in levels...despite their understanding that's exactly how magic works even if they don't understand why it works?   Really? People really think Wizards wouldn't say, I'm a 1st Order, or 3rd Order Wizard? I certainly can understand that they might not use the exact word "level" but nobody thinks that they wouldn't have strict classifications for their level of ability...given that the level model describes it perfectly? For a babarian, or shaman, where we can insist they don't have a literal school to train at, I can see how the practicers of the profession would not think of themselves in such rigid terms.  But Wizards? They would eat that up.  They would feast on anything that allowed them to neatly organize things. One of the questions that naturally comes up for me is whether D&D originally intended for the in-character classes to recognize their advancement occured in levels. In 1e, characters literally had to go train based on the average letter grade the DM gave them over their adventures (seriously).  In 3.x it's not clear to me what the leveling process is.   Does 3.5 take any definitive stance on this subject?   Good post, by the way.</blockquote>

Verification