D&D General Weapons should break left and right

[Micah Sweet]

Having both cheapens the magic to me. Feels like I'm a guy with a laser pistol.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yea, 2/3ed low level wizards sucked. 2ed wizard had 1/2/3/5/7 slots per day. In 3.5 you got cantrips, so your progression with them was 4/6/7/9/10. Sure, you get slot or two for high intelligence. Wohoo. In effect, your slots dictated number of turns in combat you in which you can actually be spellcaster ( and if you used slot for casting something utility wise outside of combat, that number drops). Without spells, you had low hp, low ac, low to hit in melee with slightly better one in range (dex was solid secondary/tertiary stat for wizard). In combat heavy session, low level wizard player would fire off their few spells and then sit rest of the time, maybe trying to hit something with light crossbow. SO much fun. With unlimited cantrinps, you actually feel like you are wizard. You have some magic at your disposal always.

I like crossbows. Having magic shooting out of you all the time feels more like a sorcerer thing. I think it would be cool for wizards to keep metamagic (don't know why they lost it), and give combat cantrips to sorcerers.

 

[AlViking]

Having both cheapens the magic to me. Feels like I'm a guy with a laser pistol.

While to me it feels like they are masters of the arcane that can actually rely on magic instead of being a second rate fighter. To each their own.

 

[GrimCo]

I like crossbows. Having magic shooting out of you all the time feels more like a sorcerer thing. I think it would be cool for wizards to keep metamagic (don't know why they lost it), and give combat cantrips to sorcerers.

I think preference comes from type of fantasy one grew up which shaped their view on certain classes. For me, i grew up with Harry Potter ( i was 10 when first HP novel came out). So my first contact with wizard as a concept was from that. Wands, throwing spells left and right. When i started playing d&d (around the time 3.5 hit the shelves), let's just say that i was vastly disappointed how lame wizard as a class was and how that class didn't fit my vision of what wizard should be. On the other hand, Warlock had more of that HP wizard vibe.

 

[Hussar]

Yea, 2/3ed low level wizards sucked. 2ed wizard had 1/2/3/5/7 slots per day. In 3.5 you got cantrips, so your progression with them was 4/6/7/9/10. Sure, you get slot or two for high intelligence. Wohoo. In effect, your slots dictated number of turns in combat you in which you can actually be spellcaster ( and if you used slot for casting something utility wise outside of combat, that number drops). Without spells, you had low hp, low ac, low to hit in melee with slightly better one in range (dex was solid secondary/tertiary stat for wizard). In combat heavy session, low level wizard player would fire off their few spells and then sit rest of the time, maybe trying to hit something with light crossbow. SO much fun. With unlimited cantrinps, you actually feel like you are wizard. You have some magic at your disposal always.

Yes and no though. Let's not forget that a lot of spells last more than one round. If you cast a summoning, you got critters for the entire combat (or until they died). And, pre-5e, there was no such thing as concentration (for the most part), meaning that you could have two or three different spells going on for a while.

Sure, you might only cast one spell per combat (or maybe two) but, if it's the right spell, it lasted most of the duration of the combat (even fireball, which only lasted an instant, tended to end a combat pretty quickly).

Now, it's pew pew pew all day long.

 

[Hussar]

Did people use a sword as a backup weapon? Obviously. Was it also a primary weapon depending on when, where, what the person was familiar with and could afford? Also yes.

Look, all I can say is, don't stick to that one lone article. There's a MOUNTAIN of stuff there that you've barely scratched in order to create your conclusions. As a long time gushing fanbois of TheARMA, I cannot recommend enough spending hours going through what's there.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think preference comes from type of fantasy one grew up which shaped their view on certain classes. For me, i grew up with Harry Potter ( i was 10 when first HP novel came out). So my first contact with wizard as a concept was from that. Wands, throwing spells left and right. When i started playing d&d (around the time 3.5 hit the shelves), let's just say that i was vastly disappointed how lame wizard as a class was and how that class didn't fit my vision of what wizard should be. On the other hand, Warlock had more of that HP wizard vibe.

i think for me final fantasy came before harry potter as my first proper exposure to 'wizards' which maybe caused a bit of a different impression given it's a videogame rather than literature but yeah same general sentiment, my black mage is casting fira as their standard action not plinking away with their dagger waiting for their time to cast firaga or meteor once in the battle.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think preference comes from type of fantasy one grew up which shaped their view on certain classes. For me, i grew up with Harry Potter ( i was 10 when first HP novel came out). So my first contact with wizard as a concept was from that. Wands, throwing spells left and right. When i started playing d&d (around the time 3.5 hit the shelves), let's just say that i was vastly disappointed how lame wizard as a class was and how that class didn't fit my vision of what wizard should be. On the other hand, Warlock had more of that HP wizard vibe.

I grew up on Lord of the Rings and Dragonlance. Continuous flashy magic is not what I associate with wizards.

 

[Micah Sweet]

i think for me final fantasy came before harry potter as my first proper exposure to 'wizards' which maybe caused a bit of a different impression given it's a videogame rather than literature but yeah same general sentiment, my black mage is casting fira as their standard action not plinking away with their dagger waiting for their time to cast firaga or meteor once in the battle.

By the time I played Final Fantasy I (the only one I've ever played), I had already been exposed to spellcasting as a concept and saw it as a variant, not the way spellcasters ought to be. Besides, I've always separated video games from TTRPGs and literature in my mind.

 

[AlViking]

Look, all I can say is, don't stick to that one lone article. There's a MOUNTAIN of stuff there that you've barely scratched in order to create your conclusions. As a long time gushing fanbois of TheARMA, I cannot recommend enough spending hours going through what's there.

Sometimes swords were primary, sometimes they were secondary. In addition fighting as part of an army is typically different than conflicts with small groups. I'm done arguing about this.