Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8522471" data-attributes="member: 6790260">The thing is, Gandalf is ONE archetype the D&amp;D Wizard draws on. It also draws on a whole mess of OTHER Wizard archetypes too. Basically all of them, though particularly Jack Vance (hence the term &quot;Vanican&quot; spellcasting, though it rather quickly diverged away from his work too, because Vance's wizards use swords.)As I said before, one of the problems with D&amp;D class design is that there's almost nothing that works as an actual throughline for the design of all classes, even if you restrict yourself to just the &quot;core four.&quot; Wizards take a smattering of the tropes from basically every fantasy wizard ever (that is, up to the point that D&amp;D was published), which is why they're such a sprawling tangle of ideas and so difficult to both balance and make flavorful. (Well, that and there's a subtle, possibly not-fully-conscious effort to boost Wizard power, per Rob Heinsoo's comments from the 4e design period, but that's a different issue.) Meanwhile Clerics have a bunch of really specific features like Turn Undead and Domains and stuff that are pretty much unique to the way D&amp;D does things, and which have little to no representation in fiction that doesn't arise from D&amp;D itself (directly or indirectly).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8522471, member: 6790260"] The thing is, Gandalf is ONE archetype the D&D Wizard draws on. It also draws on a whole mess of OTHER Wizard archetypes too. Basically [I]all[/I] of them, though particularly Jack Vance (hence the term "Vanican" spellcasting, though it rather quickly diverged away from his work too, [I]because Vance's wizards use swords.[/I]) As I said before, one of the problems with D&D class design is that there's almost nothing that works as an actual throughline for the design of [I]all[/I] classes, even if you restrict yourself to just the "core four." Wizards take a smattering of the tropes from basically [I]every fantasy wizard ever[/I] (that is, up to the point that D&D was published), which is why they're such a sprawling tangle of ideas and so difficult to both balance and make flavorful. (Well, that and there's a subtle, possibly not-fully-conscious effort to boost Wizard power, per Rob Heinsoo's comments from the 4e design period, but that's a different issue.) Meanwhile Clerics have a bunch of really specific features like Turn Undead and Domains and stuff that are pretty much unique to the way D&D does things, and which have little to no representation in fiction that doesn't arise from D&D itself (directly or indirectly). [/QUOTE]

Verification