Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DM_Blake" data-source="post: 3911787" data-attributes="member: 57267">I don't know that I agree.Maybe I've just been playing D&amp;D for 30+ years, but wizard doesn't strike me as having to be pretentious or powerful.On the other hand, someone who can magic missle 3 or 4 times a day can slaughter a typical commoner with ease. Burning hands memorized a few times could burn a tavern to its foundations in no time. And charm person could virtually turn a commoner into a slave for weeks on end.So by that definition, even a first level wizard is pretty high-falutin by commoner standards.And as for gandalf, what spells did he ever cast? Light, ghost sound (or ventriloquism), speak with animals. All low level stuff. Heck, when he had to fight anything, he fought with a sword or staff. He basically kicked the Balrog's butt with grappling and swordsmanship. I figure he was a multiclass FTR 15, WIZ 2, more or less.No, terms like Archmage sound pretentious and powerful. Wizard is just an arcane caster.In fantasy fiction, almost anything I've ever read that has wizards in it has very few of them. For example, there were 3 wizards in Lord of the Rings, with mention of a 4th. In that kind of world, wizards are special because they're rare. Most commoners have never even seen one. That rarity makes them seem special.In D&amp;D, wizards are on every street corner. A dime a dozen. Every small village has at least one, and many cities have entire guilds of them. Not rare. Not special. Powerful compared to commoners. But even wizards have to start somewhere.A level 1 wizard is a puny wizard, but still a wizard. A level 1 fighter is a puny fighter, but still a fighter. However, a level 1 warlord as probably never even been to a war, let alone been a lord of an army at war.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DM_Blake, post: 3911787, member: 57267"] I don't know that I agree. Maybe I've just been playing D&D for 30+ years, but wizard doesn't strike me as having to be pretentious or powerful. On the other hand, someone who can magic missle 3 or 4 times a day can slaughter a typical commoner with ease. Burning hands memorized a few times could burn a tavern to its foundations in no time. And charm person could virtually turn a commoner into a slave for weeks on end. So by that definition, even a first level wizard is pretty high-falutin by commoner standards. And as for gandalf, what spells did he ever cast? Light, ghost sound (or ventriloquism), speak with animals. All low level stuff. Heck, when he had to fight anything, he fought with a sword or staff. He basically kicked the Balrog's butt with grappling and swordsmanship. I figure he was a multiclass FTR 15, WIZ 2, more or less. No, terms like Archmage sound pretentious and powerful. Wizard is just an arcane caster. In fantasy fiction, almost anything I've ever read that has wizards in it has very few of them. For example, there were 3 wizards in Lord of the Rings, with mention of a 4th. In that kind of world, wizards are special because they're rare. Most commoners have never even seen one. That rarity makes them seem special. In D&D, wizards are on every street corner. A dime a dozen. Every small village has at least one, and many cities have entire guilds of them. Not rare. Not special. Powerful compared to commoners. But even wizards have to start somewhere. A level 1 wizard is a puny wizard, but still a wizard. A level 1 fighter is a puny fighter, but still a fighter. However, a level 1 warlord as probably never even been to a war, let alone been a lord of an army at war. [/QUOTE]

Verification