How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?

[triqui]

It's probably been mentioned, but Discworld handles it like this:
1. Everything is magical. In fact, Carrot's sword is notable as being the least magical known object on the Disc.
2. Everything runs on stories

These two things mean Mr Fighter Face can go toe to toe with mad mages and abominations without breaking a sweat.

That's what I call the "Incredibles approach". If everybody is special then nobody is. In a game about Harry Potter, there is no such thing as a balance problem among mages and non-mages, becouse *everybody is a mage*. Just like there is no problem with a player race having vampiric powers if you are playing Vampire and everybody is a vampire.

The problem comes when magic and mundane users play together. Ars Magica acknowledge this imbalance issue, and thus make people to play with different characters, so everybody can play his mage once in a while, while the other players use "mundane companions" meanwhile.

Thing on this: if you make a game where you can be "human", "dwarf" and "elf", and humans and dwarves are basicallly similar in power level, but elves can do anything they want, are completelly inmune to most effects, can have higher level, use a different base attack bonus, and have access to a different subset of skills (like "fly" instead of "jump" and "see invisible" instead of perception") then everybody would claim that this race is unbalanced, that this is unfair. Even 3e players would say so. That's why nobody allow players to play with, say, a dragon, or a Balrog. However, when the unbalance come from some "player template" arbitrarely named "class" instead of some "player template" arbitrarely named "race", then a lot of people do not see a problem with one class being in a completelly different attack mechanic (ie: autohit spells and saving throws instead of BAB), inmunity to most things (like "protection from elements" or "stoneskin") or access to a completelly different subset of "skills" that are completelly better (like "scry" instead of "perception", "invisibility" as "stealth" or "detect thoughts" instead of "sense motive")

 

[pemerton]

Pawsplay, thanks for the post. What you say makes sense - but I couldn't help but note this:

Ultimately, I tend to fall back on a two cleric, one magic-user, one elf fighter/magic-user as the mainstays of my party.

That suggests that, even if rememorising spells was hard, being a wizard rather than a warrior was still a reasonable choice!

 

[I'm A Banana]

That's what I call the "Incredibles approach". If everybody is special then nobody is.

Well, as far as D&D is concerned, not everyone is special.

The PC's are special. They're the Heroes in this Heroic Fantasy. They're the Incredibles. They're Batman and Superman and Conan and Merlin all joining forces.

Everyone else (aside from perhaps allies and rivals and enemies and other characters who might challenge or join with the Heroes) is basically a Level 1-3 Commoner or Warrior. Townsfolk. Beat cops. Army grunts. Beet farmers. Heck, craftsfolk. Magic item tinkerers.

All I'm really concerned with is making sure that the spellcasters don't get to feel more special than anyone else in the party, and that everyone in the party gets to feel more special than the dudes driving the turnip cart.

Discworld is a little more democratic than that, of course, but Discworld is more strongly Comedy than Heroic Fantasy, and potential chaos and disruption from everyone being potentially awesome aid that feel. Not that you couldn't have a D&D with that idea, but it's better addressed in flavor than mechanics, IMO.

 

[triqui]

Well, as far as D&D is concerned, not everyone is special.

The PC's are special. They're the Heroes in this Heroic Fantasy. They're the Incredibles. They're Batman and Superman and Conan and Merlin all joining forces.

Everyone else (aside from perhaps allies and rivals and enemies and other characters who might challenge or join with the Heroes) is basically a Level 1-3 Commoner or Warrior. Townsfolk. Beat cops. Army grunts. Beet farmers. Heck, craftsfolk. Magic item tinkerers.

All I'm really concerned with is making sure that the spellcasters don't get to feel more special than anyone else in the party, and that everyone in the party gets to feel more special than the dudes driving the turnip cart.

Yes, that was my point. In a Harry Potter game, where the PC are all mages, they are "special" compared to maggots. But all the players are "equally special", so there's balance among them. The problem arise when 1 of the players is special, and the rest are not. In the sense that one of them has all the goodies, while the rest are just "support casting"

 

[pawsplay]

Pawsplay, thanks for the post. What you say makes sense - but I couldn't help but note this:


That suggests that, even if rememorising spells was hard, being a wizard rather than a warrior was still a reasonable choice!

Only by way of necessity. The elf, you see, has to be MU-fighter. If you go with two magic-users, you probably die. I had two clerics to try to keep my front line alive, and I used an NPC fighter on my front line, because that usually didn't work. I wanted two MUs because, you know, trolls. You really can't beat Pool of Radiance without area effects, but you can't do it without high hit point front line guys who can take out countless numbers of kobolds and orcs, either.

 

[Banshee16]

I used to play the Gold Box TSR computer games, including Pool of Radiance. In my experience, spell memorization was a big issue, as this computer game brought to life in a way more prominently than a human-mediated game. Taking into account the prevalence of wandering monsters, which could occur hourly, it was difficult to find the 2-3 hours needed to rememorize. If you were lucky, you might be able to replenish. However, after a couple of memorization periods, your characters would tire, and need to sleep again.

The way this usually played out was that, generally, I would head out with a wide selection of spells, go as far as I could before they were exhausted, then try to head back to a "safe" location (i.e. low wandering monster area, like the bottom of a well, or one or two completely closed rooms, or the inn in town). OTOH, when I knew I was heading into trouble, I tended to load my magic-users up with all the stinking clouds and fireballs I could, arm each cleric with one hold person and all the cure spells I could carry, and attack my opponents fresh. If my cleric were rendered unconscious, I would sometimes have to resort to cheating on my save games, as it was sometimes necessary to rest for days for an unconscious cleric to revive, and then be able to heal themselves. Ultimately, I tend to fall back on a two cleric, one magic-user, one elf fighter/magic-user as the mainstays of my party.

3e is a picnic by comparison. All you need is eight hours of sleep, and if you get interrupted, you can make up for some lost time. Memorization doesn't take all that long. OTOH, if you run out of spells completely, you are kind of screwed, but you really aren't any worse off than your AD&D counterparts who had to try to squeeze in an extra period of memorization in a day. My PCs always just use staggered shifts (generously configured for the benefit of casters) and camouflaged their position. Sleeping in "dungeons" was almost unheard of, though a couple of times they did construct a small improvised vault inside of a "clear" dungeon.

I find in practice, in 3E, including random encounters that can disrupt the party while they are resting makes a big difference. Occasionally, they just find a new spot to camp and rest up again, and get lucky with no encounters the second time......and then other sessions, it results in a downward cycle of attrition where they still haven't rested enough to replenish spells, they've expended more of their spells on random encounters, have used up their healing magic, are more damaged than before, and when they try to rest, 3 hours into it they get hit by another random encounter.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

Even professional soldiers. Which do you want beside you in a fight? Twenty fighters? Or twenty people who go into fights with crossbows and spells like Silent Image to provide concealment/false targets and Colour Spray for when things get up close and personal? Fighters only start coming into their own when you get more than two serious fights per combat day. Which yes, adventurers do. But almost no one else does - not even soldiers.

Given that both Color Spray and Sleep have Will negates saves, I'm still leaning toward the fighter.....unless you're talking about your whole unit consisting of 20 lvl 1 mages, so that whe they run into 20 lvl 1 fighters. If in any way the fighters outnumered the mages, the fact that half the fighters would pass their save (or rather, 45% of them, I think) would leave several of them who could easily do the 4 hp dmg needed to kill the spellcaster.

And for bouncers, last time I went to a bar, they had to get involved multiple times. And these weren't bad bars........but any time you get young men + alcohol, with women in the environment....anyways, the bouncers would need more than one or two spells in their shift.

I'm not saying that spellcasters are valueless. Obviously, they're of immense value. But the limited availability of their powers means that other characters who can do stuff all day long (ie. rogues and fighters) do have value, because their abilities don't expire. It would be a different matter if offensive and defensive capacity was negatively affected as hp are reduced, but that's not the case.

Banshee

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Re: Bouncers

Not every bouncer needs spells. In the RW, bouncers generally work in teams, each having a certain skillset and responsibilities. A metal bar I used to frequent had a bunch of 300lb muscle-slab guys for most stuff, but when things got nasty, they got Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee was a shade over 5'5"...and if you didn't leave when told, he'd do a leaping spin kick to your jaw.

In a fantasy setting, things could work the same way: brunette for the mundane stuff, but when things get messy, you call in the Bouncer-Mage.

Simon Green had something like this in his Hawk & Fisher stories. Most stuff was handled by mundane guardsmen, but when magic got involved, S.W.A.T. (Special Wizardry And Tactics) was called in.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Even professional soldiers. Which do you want beside you in a fight? Twenty fighters? Or twenty people who go into fights with crossbows and spells like Silent Image to provide concealment/false targets and Colour Spray for when things get up close and personal?

There's a reason modern forces don't have all of one kind of soldier: there's a countermeasure for every kind of tactic. Combat in a fantasy world would be much like modern warfare. Depend too much on one kind of soldier- powerful though he might be- and the enemy can easily defeat you.

A bunch of arcane spellcasters might be truly formidable, but if they get hit by a silence spell...

 

[Hussar]

There's a reason modern forces don't have all of one kind of soldier: there's a countermeasure for every kind of tactic. Combat in a fantasy world would be much like modern warfare. Depend too much on one kind of soldier- powerful though he might be- and the enemy can easily defeat you.

A bunch of arcane spellcasters might be truly formidable, but if they get hit by a silence spell...

This, right here, this is the crux of the issue.

The magic system is more or less dictating the setting. The idea of a specialist team and modern day soldiery is anachronistic to say the least. The average soldier in a modern army is far and away more educated than a medieval soldier for one.

The idea that a feudal lord would allow small units to have this kind of responsibility and freedom without a gentleman officer standing over them to make sure they stay put and don't get into trouble is very, very out of place in a stock fantasy setting.

Heck, even the LotR Fellowship, other than Sam, virtually all the Fellowship are nobles or upper class members of their respective societies. There's a reason for that.

The kind of societal changes required to allow a modern day army to function would have an enormous impact on the setting.

I mean, how many feudal lords would be comfortable allowing a peasant soldier with a Charm Person spell?