Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5917369" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Here's the thing about the 'combat restrictions' on spells in AD&D. They aren't really a restriction that should be counted as some sort of disadvantage. Every other class has equally serious (usually much more so) conditions on using their abilities. A thief can't hide or sneak unless the conditions are right, they can only climb walls that exist, etc. Fighters can only use their abilities when an enemy is in weapon reach of them, etc. By that measure wizard's casting restrictions are a mild conditional restriction. 99% of the time you can cast something. Really in the grand scheme of things casters get off light on restrictions in AD&D. In post-AD&D they have almost no restrictions at all. Even 4e is still quite favorable to the casters, they STILL have powers that are useful most of the time, and the fighter is STILL relying on almost 100% combat-use-only stuff. Still score one for the wizard. I think in a sense that's the main advantage of magic. I don't see why the actual spells need to be more powerful than what non-casters can do in at least some situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>