Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 5968212" data-attributes="member: 32536">My question is... how on earth are wizards and fighters any different here?In your example alone, you say that wizards are justified in doing anything and everything they want because they study and train to do such things. Yet studying and training is not sufficient as justification for letting a fighter do what ever he wants? This doesn't make any sense. Not only to both classes have an equal amount of justification, they have the exact same justification. Both classes acquire skills through training and study. In fact, because of the way the 3E and 4E experience chart works, it could be said that the two classes both involve the exact same amounts of training and study.The only justification for wizards is a hollow &quot;they're magic! wooo&quot; &lt;insert wiggling fingers&gt;. D&amp;D has never even justified the idea of magic or put it into a logical metaphysical context. After all, creating such a context would necessarily weaken wizards, and it seems that is unacceptable to fans... Really though, any attempt to actually justify wizards and magic would result in them being weaker than they are now, because they only enjoy their 3E levels of stupidly outrageous power exactly because magic doesn't have any systematization or in-fiction justification.You could make the argument that magic doesn't need such a justification, but then we're right back to the point of it being a double standard that physical abilities require justification but spellcasting doesn't.This argument just doesn't hold water.Because we want it to mimic those sources.Is that not good enough for you? It's plenty good enough for me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TwinBahamut, post: 5968212, member: 32536"] My question is... how on earth are wizards and fighters any different here? In your example alone, you say that wizards are justified in doing anything and everything they want because they study and train to do such things. Yet studying and training is not sufficient as justification for letting a fighter do what ever he wants? This doesn't make any sense. Not only to both classes have an equal amount of justification, they have the [i]exact same[/i] justification. Both classes acquire skills through training and study. In fact, because of the way the 3E and 4E experience chart works, it could be said that the two classes both involve the exact same amounts of training and study. The only justification for wizards is a hollow "they're magic! wooo" <insert wiggling fingers>. D&D has never even justified the idea of magic or put it into a logical metaphysical context. After all, creating such a context would necessarily weaken wizards, and it seems that is unacceptable to fans... Really though, any attempt to actually justify wizards and magic would result in them being weaker than they are now, because they only enjoy their 3E levels of stupidly outrageous power exactly because magic doesn't have any systematization or in-fiction justification. You could make the argument that magic doesn't need such a justification, but then we're right back to the point of it being a double standard that physical abilities require justification but spellcasting doesn't. This argument just doesn't hold water. Because we want it to mimic those sources. Is that not good enough for you? It's plenty good enough for me. [/QUOTE]

Verification