Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 722650" data-attributes="member: 151">Good comments, all, but I think there are THREE responses.&nbsp; The third is &quot;Don't change the rules or the world, but be exercise some restraint.&quot;There are a lot of factors that go into the complex equation that is the D&amp;D world.&nbsp; The belief that mages will dominate the world makes several key assumptions that may not be true, for an individual or a world.&nbsp; First off, how do the mages get the necessary resource to become the world dominators that are assumed to exist?&nbsp; That experience has to come from somewhere, and it certainly isn't from throwing magic missles at kobolds.&nbsp; Second, why is it assumed that the majority of magically-inclined individuals would want to undertake the risky business of adventuring in the first place.&nbsp; Just because &quot;adventurer&quot; is a profession in some worlds, doesn't mean that most people will choose it, even if given half a chance.&nbsp; Many would prefer a nice, comfortable life, using their floating disk, unseen servant and spiderclimb spells to impress the locals.Third, everybody rests.&nbsp; Arcanists have low hit points, and D&amp;D magic is more about offense than defense.&nbsp; Even Elves need to 'shut-off' for four hours every day.&nbsp; Even a 20th-level mage has to have a support structure when he's resting.Four, D&amp;D magic is mostly 'individualist' magic.&nbsp; Mage Guilds aren't usually about pooling power, they're about sharing and controlling resources.&nbsp; Mages generally don't trust each other the same way that clerics tend to do.&nbsp; They hoard secrets, develop their own magics and often only act in their own best interests.Fifth, those in power are usually interested in retaining it.&nbsp; Mages are weak when they're at low levels, and smart rulers would know this.&nbsp; Stopping them before they become a problem would certainly not be out of the question.Sixth, mages can be part of the system.&nbsp; They may work for the government, be a part of the aristocracy...or they may just believe in the system.&nbsp; Unless they are robots, they have certain value systems they were raised with: one doesn't need to be a paladin to decide not to raze a village.&nbsp; A 10 year old boy with a torch and evil intent can burn a town to the ground, and yet he doesn't.&nbsp; Becoming a mage with Burning Hands doesn't change that, necessarily.There are plenty of reasons within the standard D&amp;D setting for running a tight game without magic dominating it.&nbsp; there can be an equal reason for why it does.&nbsp; But neither requires and extensive change for this to occur.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 722650, member: 151"] Good comments, all, but I think there are THREE responses. The third is "Don't change the rules or the world, but be exercise some restraint." There are a lot of factors that go into the complex equation that is the D&D world. The belief that mages will dominate the world makes several key assumptions that may not be true, for an individual or a world. First off, how do the mages get the necessary resource to become the world dominators that are assumed to exist? That experience has to come from somewhere, and it certainly isn't from throwing magic missles at kobolds. Second, why is it assumed that the majority of magically-inclined individuals would want to undertake the risky business of adventuring in the first place. Just because "adventurer" is a profession in some worlds, doesn't mean that most people will choose it, even if given half a chance. Many would prefer a nice, comfortable life, using their floating disk, unseen servant and spiderclimb spells to impress the locals. Third, everybody rests. Arcanists have low hit points, and D&D magic is more about offense than defense. Even Elves need to 'shut-off' for four hours every day. Even a 20th-level mage has to have a support structure when he's resting. Four, D&D magic is mostly 'individualist' magic. Mage Guilds aren't usually about pooling power, they're about sharing and controlling resources. Mages generally don't trust each other the same way that clerics tend to do. They hoard secrets, develop their own magics and often only act in their own best interests. Fifth, those in power are usually interested in retaining it. Mages are weak when they're at low levels, and smart rulers would know this. Stopping them before they become a problem would certainly not be out of the question. Sixth, mages can be part of the system. They may work for the government, be a part of the aristocracy...or they may just believe in the system. Unless they are robots, they have certain value systems they were raised with: one doesn't need to be a paladin to decide not to raze a village. A 10 year old boy with a torch and evil intent can burn a town to the ground, and yet he doesn't. Becoming a mage with Burning Hands doesn't change that, necessarily. There are plenty of reasons within the standard D&D setting for running a tight game without magic dominating it. there can be an equal reason for why it does. But neither requires and extensive change for this to occur. [/QUOTE]

Verification