New tidbit about spells and hit points.

[Majoru Oakheart]

So, having unlimited power is fun? Then why play a wizard instead a god? Since gods have unlimited and stronger power to use would that make them more "fun?"

The ability to do something cool all the time is fun. Whether that ability is jumping over the heads of enemies and doing a surprise attack from behind or shooting a fireball from your fingertips doesn't matter that much and heavily depends on your own taste.

However, that's kind of the point. If you are the type of person who likes the throw fireballs from your fingertips, chances are you didn't want to shoot crossbow bolts as your primary action in order to save spells or because you used all your spells.

People don't want "unlimited" power in terms of being able to wipe out all the people on the planet. They want infinite power as in they can keep doing what is cool about their character as much as they want.

And I don't see anything wrong with the ability to shoot a 4d6 fireball whenever you want at 10th level as being anything BUT trivial.

 

[Sun Knight]

I don't know but this whole argument is based on what is more fun and what isn't fun. If fun is having unlimited magical power and not fun is using mundane weaponry then logic dictates that a being with unlimited power is more fun than a being with limited power, thusly it would be safe to assume that playing a god would be more fun playing a mortal wizard. Since the majority of players looking forward to 4e are seeking more fun they are indeed looking for unlimited power which leads them wanting to play gods.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Everything in D&D is essentially boiled down to "combat prowess". If you don't think it is, just look through the PHB. 90+% of the rules are for combat. It's a game about combat, plain and simple.

I wholly disagree. Then why play it instead of DDM?

Those combat rules are more extensive because those are the rules that handle the "action" parts of the role-playing game, the part of the game where the activity of the participants is wholly handled by game mechanics.

The mental and social parts need far fewer overt rules for adjudication because the game itself is one that tests the mental and social faculties of the participants, but are just as important, if not more so.

I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of people that play wizards, especially at low levels, would say that having to pull out your crossbow is "not fun" when compared to having an at-will magic attack.

Then new D&D draws its inspiration from the pages of Marvel Comics with never ending at will eldritch bolt blasting characters then from fantasy fiction, sword & sorcery or otherwise.

As for me, it is totally fun to manage the magic resources of a low-level wizard. Being constrained in the spells I have and their total number of uses over a time period is part of the challenge of playing that class well. Mastering that challenge is where I derive my fun.

I don't choose to play a wizard character if I desire to be in every combat the party faces. If I want that, I'll play a fighter.

 

[Sun Knight]

And I don't see anything wrong with the ability to shoot a 4d6 fireball whenever you want at 10th level as being anything BUT trivial.

I just have to wholeheartedly disagree. When using magic becomes trivial it just cheapens the whole genre of fantasy.

 

[Gentlegamer]

It depends.

Which is more efficient at knocking down strawmen?

Not a strawman. He is taking the apparent argument to its logical conclusion. You'll need to correct the expression of assumptions if you disagree with the logical conclusion the apparent assumptions lead to.

 

[Wormwood]

I don't know but this whole argument is based on what is more fun and what isn't fun. If fun is having unlimited magical power and not fun is using mundane weaponry then logic dictates that a being with unlimited power is more fun than a being with limited power, thusly it would be safe to assume that playing a god would be more fun playing a mortal wizard. Since the majority of players looking forward to 4e are seeking more fun they are indeed looking for unlimited power which leads them wanting to play gods.

You are the Jack Bauer of logic torture.

 

[Sun Knight]

You are the Jack Bauer of logic torture.

Why, thank you.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I just have to wholeheartedly disagree. When using magic becomes trivial it just cheapens the whole genre of fantasy.

I don't understand this. Most of the fantasy I've read other than D&D, wizards are able to cast spells as much as they want with no limitation at all. Since they know the spells they can do whatever they want with them whenever they want. Sometimes, when it is convenient for the storyline, wizards will get tired and have to rest.

I was watching Conan the Destroyer on TV a short while ago and the mage in that movie must have cast 10 or 20 divination spells in an hour as they kept asking him "which way?" And that's in a "low magic" world.

 

[Sun Knight]

I know that character. How would Conan know that wizard actually casted a spell or was just faking it?

 

[Gentlegamer]

I don't understand this. Most of the fantasy I've read other than D&D, wizards are able to cast spells as much as they want with no limitation at all. Since they know the spells they can do whatever they want with them whenever they want. Sometimes, when it is convenient for the storyline, wizards will get tired and have to rest.

I think the key is that they don't keep using "damage" spells all the time. I personally don't object to expanded magical resources for wizards, as long as they are not purely "damage" or combat spells.

I was watching Conan the Destroyer on TV a short while ago and the mage in that movie must have cast 10 or 20 divination spells in an hour as they kept asking him "which way?" And that's in a "low magic" world.

It was probably a single spell with a long duration. Even if it wasn't, note well that it wasn't a combat/damage spell that he was spaming. In fact, does he ever use a damage spell at all (in either film)?