In a world where the quadratic wizard could exist, the quadratic wizard wouldn't...

[nightwyrm]

Politicians are a weak comparison. Kill one, and another takes that position. Wizards, on the other hand, are not automatically replaced.

Wizards are more like people who invent and build all sorts of weapons of mass destruction.

Wizards are neither politicians nor the scientists who build the WMDs. They are the WMDs. High level wizards are sentient nukes, who can build and fire their own nukes....Or maybe Skynet might be a better metaphor.

Removing or controlling wizards by the masses of peasantry are as much a pipe dream as nuclear disarmament/non-proliferation.

In any case, why is this thread in the 5e forum?

 

[Li Shenron]

exist.

If wizards can ascend to "godlike" power, then they would constantly be hunted down and either regulated or eliminated. It doesn't make sense for all of the PC races to let a small subset hold exponential power over the vast majority. I'd imagine that in a world where monsters, undead, and combat are commonplace, then eliminating a great threat, like a potentially all powerful wizard, wouldn't be out of the question either.

Even lawful good aligned wizards would be feared, because they would represent an imbalance in the world, and they would be rigorously hunted by the forces of evil. Perhaps even the forces of good would consider the lawful good wizard a threat because they could still represent tyranny.

Uhm... does our world hunt down and eliminate politicians, businessmen, scientists, and the uber-rich...? They are a threat only those who behave like a threat. And even those who aren't exactly helpful to the world but rather more interested in their own benefit only, they aren't still just tolerated, they are often followed and revered because others can get some advantage.

I think that the kingdom or organization which hunts down wizards is a nice plot device for a campaign, and perhaps even a worldwide hatred for arcane spellcaster can make for an interesting setting, but I would never think this should be what happens! In a more realistic fantasy world, there would be many more people who would look at wizards to get something from them.

 

[Mattachine]

Yeah, this isn't really a 5e topic.

 

[Li Shenron]

Yeah, this isn't really a 5e topic.

I suppose the underlying point was that the OP hopes for 5e to have less-than-quadratic wizards.

But yeah, could also be a very general topic.

 

[Plane Sailing]

In any case, why is this thread in the 5e forum?

I agree. Moved to General (whooosh!)

 

[Drowbane]

You were thinking of the quadrilateral wizard. Completely different situation.

2e: Can Rogue Modrons even be Wizards?

edit: dur, Quadrones (the type that become "rogues" most often) have 6 sides... but I knew what I meant!

 

[Kaodi]

Uhm... does our world hunt down and eliminate politicians, businessmen, scientists, and the uber-rich...?

It is called a revolution, and they do happen from time to time.

But beyond that, in a world like wizards would be heavily regulated and likely subject to restrictions on their magic. Possession of an illegal spell could lead to confiscation of your spellsbooks. And a wizard without a spellbook has very little power. And then there are the taxes. Wizards who do not comply with the authorities probably would be hunted down and killed, the way anyone carting around incredibly dangerous and lethal weapons would unless sanctioned by the government.

On a related not, it is kind of strange how in 3.X wizards never seem to take Spell Mastery, yet if reality worked like D&D, platinum to a copper that every single wizard would take that feat at least once, if not multiple times.

 

[Li Shenron]

It is called a revolution, and they do happen from time to time.

Well that's a very different thing. Revolution is replacement of leadership with another of the same kind, but different ideas. I mean, a revolution normally does not go against all politicians or all the riches (as a concept) and replace them with something entirely different, but rather goes against politicians of colour A and swaps them with politicians of colour B. OR you can see it as going against all current politicians and replacing them with non-politician who then become the new politicians... (this is a large simplification, but still).

If in a setting, society is after wizards because they are perceived as a threat, this is somewhat more like racial prosecutions than revolution IMHO.

I'm not saying you cannot do it in a campaign setting, it can certainly be a good background for adventures. I'm just contesting the idea that this is what should certainly happen.

 

[Kaodi]

If in a setting, society is after wizards because they are perceived as a threat, this is somewhat more like racial prosecutions than revolution IMHO.

Racial prosecution? Wha...?

 

[Li Shenron]

Racial prosecution? Wha...?

Well, the OP's first post immediately reminded me of two things, one imaginary and the other historical: the possible prosecution of mutants in X-Men (not exactly racial since family relationships are not relevant, but close) and prosecution of the jew during fascism (the propaganda of which involved making them feared on the presumed ground that as a whole they were rich, powerful and plotting therefore a threat). This is why the term came to my mind.

But perhaps it's best to stop here before risking infringing some forum rules.