JeffB
Legend
Doug McCrae said:The game world is assumed to be close to real world medieval, but many feel that the 'realistic' consequences of certain spells, magic items and monsters would cause the world to look much more modern.
For example would castles survive long against flying monsters and spellcasters? Would close formations of troops exist when wizards are slinging fireballs on the battlefield? Would the black death have had the effect it did, when the wealthy and powerful can receive cure disease?
I see what you mean. But IMO, this is thematic. The rules (all editions) provide for cure disease and fireballs and whatnot, but this is really dependant on the campaign setting's themes and later rules editions where it became more commonplace/accepted.
Were all these magics available in those earlier rules editions? Absolutely.
Were they meant to be common? it's certainly not implied in earlier versions of the game, where magic items/spells/healing was encouraged to be "rare", and there were harsher consequences when receiving/using such magics (i.e. ressurection/system shock, tougher level loss from draining, save or die poisons,etc., etc.).
If there are a gazillion mages, and high level magic and cleric spells are common..well yeah, I can see the issue. Again though, this is something that evolved over time in campaign material and later editions of the rules. The game was not originally designed to suit or cater to such campaigns. It was meant not to really simulate the high fantasy of late 1E/2E Era Realms or Eberron...it was designed to suit campaigns of the S&S Genre and to a certain extent a "tolkien-esque" feel. Where magic is not unheard of, but yet, there aren't 12 high level mages living in/temples to a half a dozen gods who provide healing in the local hamlet/dale.
As is being bandied about in another thread, D&D has evolved into it's own stamp of Fantasy genre in the past 15-20 years.