D&D (2024) Here's The New 2024 Player's Handbook Wizard Art

 

[Fifth Element]

Edit: definitely only worn for style reason. Do you notice that the lines of her face are perfectly straight. If you are short sighted and wear correction glasses, the face looks smaller behind them. If you are near sighted, the face lools wider. So no change of size = no correction factor. At least nothing to speak of.

Tangentially related, as a beglassessed person I always note when an actor is wearing fake glasses in a show or movie. You can tell from the way they reflect light. Fake ones are flat so as not to interfere with the actor's vision, so they reflect light like a pane of glass.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

For comparison. Think how hard it is to find someone wearing real glasses on model pictures.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Tangentially related, as a beglassessed person I always note when an actor is wearing fake glasses in a show or movie. You can tell from the way they reflect light. Fake ones are flat so as not to interfere with the actor's vision, so they reflect light like a pane of glass.

As it happens, I had a zero prescription in one lens of my distance glasses for a while. I have one long sighted eye and one short sighted. Monocles aren’t exactly fashionable these days.

 

[Staffan]

As it happens, I had a zero prescription in one lens of my distance glasses for a while. I have one long sighted eye and one short sighted. Monocles aren’t exactly fashionable these days.

You passed up the opportunity to legitimately wear a monocle like a sir?

 

[gban007]

Oh PLAH-EEASE! "Wealthy and powerful", "glasses are for the poor or the weak"... Those are some mighty big leaps you just made and you've just lost a lot of credibility you had with me.


Not at all, and if you read it that way, there's no point in any further exchange.

And FWIW, people "fix" (I abhore that word, but whatever) themselves all the time (or try to). You have poor vision? Do you wear glasses? If so, you are "fixing" yourself. I don't know many people who would choose to walk around blind if they could help it, and even if they choose to I wouldn't find any benefits worth the inconveniences, personally, so it wouldn't make sense TO ME!


To be clear, there is no confusion, there is only your opinion and mine. They don't agree and they obviously never will on this topic. Good day.

In Chaosmancers defense, after reading a lot of both of your posts, your messages very much come across as anyone wealthy enough /powerful enough such as the wizard in the OP wouldn't have glasses, as otherwise doesn't make sense to you, which does leave only those not wealthy enough or powerful enough with glasses.
Even in this post you go on to reinforce that people use glasses to resolve their sight issues today, which with your prior arguments implies that if could fully fix without glasses, which you've previously said wealthy or powerful characters could do, would thus fix themselves and not have glasses, leaving us with same point as before.
If this isn't your intended message, then I think you may need to consider how you are trying to convey your underlying message.
For me, I could afford Lasik or the like, but don't want to, would prefer to stay with my glasses, and I don't bring spare glasses with me when I go out and about, so I can relate to a powerful wizard also choosing to keep wearing glasses for whatever reason, and choosing the risks. It may not make sense to you, but neither myself nor the wizard have to make decisions that make sense to you, only decisions that suit ourselves as such.

 

[Cadence]

In Chaosmancers defense, after reading a lot of both of your posts, your messages very much come across as anyone wealthy enough /powerful enough such as the wizard in the OP wouldn't have glasses, as otherwise doesn't make sense to you, which does leave only those not wealthy enough or powerful enough with glasses.
Even in this post you go on to reinforce that people use glasses to resolve their sight issues today, which with your prior arguments implies that if could fully fix without glasses, which you've previously said wealthy or powerful characters could do, would thus fix themselves and not have glasses, leaving us with same point as before.
If this isn't your intended message, then I think you may need to consider how you are trying to convey your underlying message.
For me, I could afford Lasik or the like, but don't want to, would prefer to stay with my glasses, and I don't bring spare glasses with me when I go out and about, so I can relate to a powerful wizard also choosing to keep wearing glasses for whatever reason, and choosing the risks. It may not make sense to you, but neither myself nor the wizard have to make decisions that make sense to you, only decisions that suit ourselves as such.

I'm trying to think of a reason why an adventurer who needed a mundane pair of glasses and could afford to have a second pair wouldn't be ridiculously incompetent not to have started on a planned adventure without a second pair given their breakability and portability. (And now I'm wondering about the cost of glass steel lenses).

 

[Chaosmancer]

Oh PLAH-EEASE! "Wealthy and powerful", "glasses are for the poor or the weak"... Those are some mighty big leaps you just made and you've just lost a lot of credibility you had with me.

No leap at all, after all, you yourself clarified

I simply stated that if she has glowing eyes due to her magical "might", it seems like magic would be able to assist her vision so glasses would not be necessary.

Do you not think that glowing eyes and magical might translate to an attempt to demonstrate power? Are high-level, powerful adventurers not wealthy? You have repeatedly in this thread mentioned the cost of using the magic to be low for a high level adventurer. I'm not making your statements up out of nowhere, this is what you have said. If you don't like seeing what the flipside of your points are, that isn't something I feel should lose me any credibility.

To be clear, there is no confusion, there is only your opinion and mine. They don't agree and they obviously never will on this topic. Good day.

I find it interesting, you say there is no confusion, you say there are other ways to take your insistence... and yet you just repeat yourself after I try and make it clear why people are frustrated with your points.

If you aren't confused, and you understand their frustrations... then maybe we will never find common ground on this.

 

[gban007]

I'm trying to think of a reason why an adventurer who needed a mundane pair of glasses and could afford to have a second pair wouldn't be ridiculously incompetent not to have started on a planned adventure without a second pair given their breakability and portability. (And now I'm wondering about the cost of glass steel lenses).

I somewhat agree, it is a big risk in a risky environment as such. But if grew a bit like mine, with deteriorating over time, can see potential where to begin with glasses helped but weren't required, so didn't carry spare, main glasses didn't get broken at all through a period of adventuring, so when needed to upgrade glasses, didn't consider spare. Obviously I think would be more risk in adventuring, but for me in near 30 years of wearing glasses, I've only had them broken once.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I somewhat agree, it is a big risk in a risky environment as such. But if grew a bit like mine, with deteriorating over time, can see potential where to begin with glasses helped but weren't required, so didn't carry spare, main glasses didn't get broken at all through a period of adventuring, so when needed to upgrade glasses, didn't consider spare. Obviously I think would be more risk in adventuring, but for me in near 30 years of wearing glasses, I've only had them broken once.

Same, and actually the part that broke for me was often the screw getting loose and letting the lens pop out.

But, I still carry a spare set in my bag, just in case. The only reason I could for a wizard not to have a spare set, would be if they can cast mending to fix them. Which isn't unreasonable.

 

[Cadence]

I somewhat agree, it is a big risk in a risky environment as such. But if grew a bit like mine, with deteriorating over time, can see potential where to begin with glasses helped but weren't required, so didn't carry spare, main glasses didn't get broken at all through a period of adventuring, so when needed to upgrade glasses, didn't consider spare. Obviously I think would be more risk in adventuring, but for me in near 30 years of wearing glasses, I've only had them broken once.

I completely understand IRL (for the careers I picture most of us having) not having a back up pair and not wanting Lasik