Thread 96246830

How are wizards not the most OP fantasy class by a landslide?
How are you even supposed to defend yourself against shit like this as a non-magic wielder? Even the best swordsman, the best archer, the best whatever in existence gets one-shotted by a spell that hits your internals.

Simply stab the fucker. There is no spell that can protect you from stabbing.
>a-a-actually there's tons-
GET STABBED NERD.

>>96246830 (OP)
>How is X not Y
>D&D 5e is implied
Kill yourself

>>96246830 (OP)
The wizard can't fireball what he can't see.
The wizard can't cast testicle torsion on the assassin I've hired if it's a woman.

>>96246830 (OP)
Most baby wizards are also made out of tissue paper. And cantrips can only do so much against a pack of angry goblins.

>>96246830 (OP)
Sorry Whizzards, but in the real world the Sorcerer get the girl

>>96246830 (OP)
>This shit again

Is anyone new and retarded enough to take this bait any more?

>>96247103
I might be.
The only experience with D&D I have, is
1) watching the movie
2) talking to my girlfriend about maybe playing the video game
If I am a purely physical fighter, this would immediately end the fight. I guess it depends on the engagement distance, but if he is outside of immediate striking range, a testicular torsion spell would end the fight immediately.

>>96247625
Thing is that these debates never highlight the fact most D&D campaigns start with wizards being so feeble that the best they can do is put someone to sleep or do the equivalent of hit them with a lighter. You don't get the testicular torsion kind of spells until you're a high enough level, before which martials can and will bully the shit out of you if you aren't smart about using your craft.

>>96247625
>if he is outside of immediate striking range, a testicular torsion spell would end the fight immediately.
Nigga it doesn't exist. It's a shitpost.

>>96246840
*wizard stabs you back harder cuz were playing classless*

stfu chad

>>96246830 (OP)
Maybe if you had ever read a rulebook you'd understand why.

>>96246830 (OP)
Why would Wizards, and not Clerics or Sorcerers, be the strongest if we're talking literally? Clerics and Sorcerers get given a significant amount of their power AND can spend their free time honing the powers they already have, unlike Wizards who have to build up from nothing.

Wizards should honestly be the least powerful caster class if we're considering realism.

>>96246830 (OP)
>How are wizards not the most OP fantasy class by a landslide?
Because characters of the same "level" are meant to be of approximately the same "power." Thus, a 1st level wizard is meant to be about as dangerous as a 1st level fighter, and a 20th level wizard is meant to be about as dangerous as a 20th level fighter. Therefore, the 20th level fighter is basically a demigod, not just some dude, and if you kicked him in the balls he'd laugh it off.

If you want to be a wizard who bullies the martials, simply play a game that is not D&D and is not built on the premise of a small band of similarly-dangerous heroes with varied skills, but instead on being a cool wizard who gets to bully mundanes, such as Ars Magica, Mage: the Awakening, or Earthdawn.

>>96247746
/tg/ is allergic to games. We even have that one faggot that's so deprived of games, that he forgot what they are and came up with some arbitrary definition about what is and isn't a game.

>>96246830 (OP)
Because only in systems like DnD does magic not have a cost. For most varieties of wizard in fiction, what they can do is heavily limited by the rules of magic or the cost of magic. Which leaves them powerful, but with weaknesses that can and are exploited to defeat them.

>>96247862
That and DND magic is supposed to have drawbacks such as casting time, components, and spell slots, but most games and adaptations skip those out of apathy or brevity, so a lot of their limitations are dropped for the sake of making a more smooth running game that tips the balance of power far more in their favor

>>96247777
>Wizards should honestly be the least powerful caster class if we're considering realism.

I have long been of the opinion that casters in DnD should be on a sliding scale between power and freedom. The more powerful you are, the less freedom you have to use that power because you are in debt to whatever is loaning you that power.
Clerics are very powerful, but at the cost of being their god's bitch. The tenets of their religion are ironclad akin to a paladin's code, and the god can make unreasonable demands of them on a whim because they can take away the cleric's powers in an instant. You don't even have to do anything *wrong* per say, just mildly sassing you god could be enough. Gods are petty.

Warlocks and Druids and the like form the middle ground, where they have power but not without restrictions. Walocks have their patron, Druids have to follow the rules of nature. These codes are important to follow, but its not as severe as the cleric which has to assume that their god is watching them over their shoulder every moment of every day. Nature rarely makes demands that you go do its dirty work.

And then at the lowest end of power, you have wizards and bards and the like. People that have managed to create their own magic from scratch, which leaves them with the greatest amount of freedom but they are always going to be *objectively* weaker in magical might than someone who is bumming their power off of a god or something. A mortal simply cannot match the gods in strength on their own, and the difference in magic reflects that.

This creates interesting roleplay opportunities, because the strongest classes come with strings attached that the GM can tug on whenever they want, and multiple people in the party serving different masters can end up in conflict with each other as a result. Wizards get to avoid all of that, but at the cost of knowing that even after decades of intense magical research that they are limited to the kiddie pool of magic.

>>96247862
>Because only in systems like DnD does magic not have a cost.
What utter nonsense.
>For most varieties of wizard in fiction, what they can do is heavily limited by the rules of magic or the cost of magic
It's limited by arbitrariness or not at all and they actually get treated like the godlike figures they are, such as in LOTR.

>>96247895
In 20 years of playing rpgs, I have never met anyone IRL that has ever tracked components that were not measured in thousands of gold like diamonds. No one has the fucking time to give a fuck about how many balls of lint and pinches of bat shit the wizard has in his inventory. Its a bat limiting system, because they say 'you need this' but its entirely non-interactive. NONE of the shit that you use as spell components is stuff that you find as treasure, so the only way to get it is to go out of your way to acquire it in town or whatever. Which means that the GM either has to stock every town general store with a bunch of weird bullshit, or they have to make a quest out of restocking the wizard's basic supplies.

Imagine a world where people stick to this, and every 3-4 sessions the party has to drop everything and go back to the bat cave so the wizard can restock on bat shit for their fireball spells. No one else benefits from this, just the wizard who considers it essential and won't do anything else until he has re-armed.
Oh, the plot has the villian fleeing to the elf kingdoms in the north? Ooooh, sorry. I can't go with you guys. That would take me too far away from the bat shit caves, I wouldn't be able to restock for my spells. Lets find something else to do that is within comfortable travel distance from this vital resource I have to build all of my decisions around.

There are good ways to do spell component type restrictions, but DnD isn't it. Its so cumbersome that people just choose to ignore it whenever possible. Which the game itself even gives you multiple ways to do, because even DnD thinks this bullshit is tedious and best ignored.

>>96247964
Exactly my point when I say that shit gets dropped for brevity. Imagine the sheer amount of tedium it'd be for the DM to demand the players explain how they're handling the verbal components of spell casting, like if they decide that the acoustics in a cave begin to matter whether or not you can even properly hear your own chanting.

Doesn't negate my point that it tips the scales in the caster's favor, nor does the idea of spell components have to be bad, but I fully agree D&D incorporates the idea terribly.

>>96246830 (OP)
depends on the power level of wizards.

>>96247919
>and they actually get treated like the godlike figures they are, such as in LOTR.
Anon, WTF are you talking about? Wizards are *super* heavily restricted in LOTR. Gandalf can't do *shit* on his own without special permission.
Gandalf is mostly limited to guiding others and putting them on the right path. There is a reason that he needed to find a bunch of dwarves and point them in the right direction to go to the lonely mountain and kill Smaug, he can't do it himself so he needs to put together a Suicide Squad to do it for him. Gandalf fights most of his battles with a SWORD, and has to run away from orcs and goblins most of the time.
Gandalf doesn't fly or teleport, if he wants to get somewhere else fast he needs to call in favors from other magical beings like Shadowfax or the eagles.
Gandalf skips out on most fights, what fights he does participate in he largely just swords at them. The only explicit attack spell I can think of that he ever used was throwing burning pinecones at some goblins in the hobbit.
Even when Gandalf goes all out against other magical beings, he got his ass kicked by Saruman and died fighting the Balrog. Not exactly godlike power on display here.

Physics is lethal and brutal as all hell.

In plenty of fantasy fiction you have the author making lightning move slower or the martials are fast enough to dodge or even block bullets, and only under very specific circumstances (…only when he rolls to dodge for some reason).

Magic/physics is always crippled in these stories. Give someone the power to shoot lethally explosive kinetic force from their index finger (and never mind how such a thing makes any sense whatsoever - this is just making them all the more horrific if you bother to consider the alien/inhuman implications, such as who or what is the thing responsible for ignoring evolution of the conservation of mass, etc) and you have made a true fucking monster.

We can at least take away peoples guns. We at least know guns are all the same.

Also, it’s just a fact that sufficient cunning is the superior form of fighting. You try to prevent or stop the fight altogether, either before or during the fight. This is next gen warfare. Psychological control. Planning and preparation.

And then you realize that sorcery in our histories tended to be chalked up to the horrors of coincidence and circumstance. The ability to kill a man a thousand miles away anonymously from the safety of your basement is more terrifying than any sniper could ever hope to be. You can take out kings and politicians. It’s like the equivalent of paying an invisible higher dimensional alien to squeeze an enemy’s heart into a pulp. It’s like asking a higher dimensional being to play with mass like fucking play dough.

>>96248040
>Anon, WTF are you talking about? Wizards are *super* heavily restricted in LOTR.
The Wizards in LOTR are literal angels, anon. They are God's personal top guys.
>without special permission.
Wizards having their own societal rules that they abide by isn't part of the argument, nor does it help any point you've attempted and failed to make. As with many brown-spirited subsapients, you are just incapable of understanding the idea between "Cannot" and "Does not."

>>96248095
>In plenty of fantasy fiction you have the author making lightning move slower or the martials are fast enough to dodge or even block bullets, and only under very specific circumstances (…only when he rolls to dodge for some reason).
Dodging lightning is easy, since the wizard has to literally start chanting his wizard spell and waving his hands all around.

>>96248119
Okay, but once it’s finished being cast? It’s like arguing you can outrun a nuke’s radius of total annihilation once it’s been dropped. Some forces of nature you can’t run from.

>>96248149
The Flash could

>>96248119
Dodging bullets is easy, since the cop has to literally cock his gun and wave it all around.

>>96248161
No, he just pulls the trigger, which takes a fraction of a second. It's more like dodging a grenade by hearing the guy shout "grenade!" and throw the grenade.

>>96248166
No he has to draw it, load it and aim it, easily taking several seconds so I can predict it and move out of the bullets path.

>>96248097
Cool ad hominem. Can't help but notice that you didn't refuse of my points and are just hoping no will will notice your empty attempt to declare victory from a losing position.
If you want to assert that wizards in LOTR are godlike figures, its on you to support that with evidence and arguments. I've already explain my position in detail, put your money where you mouth is.

>>96248159
The Flash is a veritable wizard. Same way Iron Man is a variable wizard. “Dude, Speed Force”, “Dude, Science & Technology”.

>>96248166
“FIREBALL”
“LIGHTNING BOLT”
“RASENGAN”

Why do wizards always have to blow their cover by yelling like idiots. Kind of like how in movies the protagonist shouts “HAH” before he strikes. Goddamnit.

>>96248174
No, he literally only has to flick his wrist and pull the trigger to hit me wherever I move to (unless I move behind cover). The process of casting a spell in D&D takes several seconds and requires you to talk.

>>96248181
If true, then 20th level Fighters are also Wizards so what does it matter? (Frankly, probably way before 20th level.)

>>96248181
Guess Summer vacation still hasn't finished for some underage kids again

>>96248190
Verbal components, anon. Vanician magic's kind of a bitch that way.

>>96248181
Unironically, I have been saying for years that the Flash is a wizard that casts spells with his legs. There is just too much bullshit that the speed force gets used to do that has *absolutely nothing* to do with going fast.

>>96248175
>Erm, ad hominem?
Not an argument.
>You didn't refute me
You didn't have any points to begin with, you just made claims that were false and easily shot down. Sorry, better luck next thread.

>>96246873
>can't cast testicle torsion on the assassin I've hired if it's a woman
He can cast endometriosis on her.

>>96248192
No, he literally has to reach down, unstrap it from his holster, slowly pull it back, load it, cock it, flick the safety off, scream "DROP THE KNIFE!" and only then take a stance and aim.
Me? I'd already have ripped his head off with my martial might heh, and if he DID shoot I could just dodge it by predicting the bullet trajectory based off his hand and eye movements.

>>96248194
>Verbal components, anon
So scream it in Latin or something instead. Something confusing. Oh wait, I forgot that spells are basically AI programs that wait for User Vocal Input…

>>96248192
>If true, then 20th level Fighters are also Wizards
If they argue slicing mountains in half yeah

>>96248226
Pretty sure a lot of settings already do that, anon. That and sometimes it's easier to train some dipshit to remember the word "fireball" than it does to make them remember "augue" cause they're dumb like that.

>>96248202
So you know you're wrong then. Cool. Moving on.

>>96248190
>>96248194
Technically verbal components just means that they have to say something to use the spell. In-universe, this would be some kind of incantation or words of power. The problem is in an audiovisual medium, that takes more time than the fight choreography wants to deal with and it doesn't tell the audience what is actually *happening*.
You shout 'Mega Death Symphony' when casting Mega Death Symphony because thats how the audience knows what you are doing is Mega Death Symphony. Otherwise, all they know is that you yelled "Alam yes shotor kas sune var alias ver camon!" and something flashy happened.

>>96248192
>If true, then 20th level Fighters are also Wizards
The only thing a 20th level fighter can do is attack more times so not really. Hell even I can swing a sword more than 5 times in 6 seconds.

>>96248253
>You proved me wrong? W-well let's just move on
Kek, I accept your concession kiddo.

>>96248256
He can shrug off spells whenever he feels like and has 20x normal human meat points.

>>96247103
It's more the fact that there's nothing better to do on this board, any more.
Discussions nowadays are only about lore, worldbuilding, or preferences, and even then, they have little to no impact on gameplay, if they have anything to do with a game at all.
Most of the time, a game isn't even specified for discussions, and more often than not, the topic devolves into one of anime, comics, films, history, literature, television, or video games.
And it's more common anyway to see threads that aren't meant for discussion whatsoever, just shit-flinging or pissing and moaning.

This is /tg/ - Everything But Games.

>>96248267
>He can shrug off spells whenever he feels like
He can't resist most, actually.
>and has 20x normal human meat points.
True, although casters are still tankier thanks to Shield.

>>96248292
The 20th level fighter is mechanically capable of fighting and defeating the 20th level wizard. This is, in itself, "wizardry" by the same logic that Iron Man is a wizard, where superhuman competence = wizard.

>>96248312
>The 20th level fighter is mechanically capable of fighting and defeating the 20th level wizard.
Depends. Does the Wizard actually play optimally?
If so then no, he wins every single time with no contest.

If the Wizard were to stand still and do nothing the entire fight though, the Fighter stands a decent chance.

>>96248325
You mean it depends on if the game is D&D or not

Wizards sometimes add in components to their spells that don’t matter. Such as waving hands around or speaking funny words. It ups their seeming.

“The more effortless the magic appears the more men fear the magician”

Magicians know that ignorance is also a weapon. It’s what makes something magic even. Mystery.

>>96248329
Oh sorry, I assumed we were talking about games that people actually play yeah. Did you have a different system where "Level 20 Wizard and Level 20 Fighter" exist that isn't D&D or a derivative?

>>96248280
Its a consequence of the general fact that 4chan, as a site, is dying. /tg/ is actually more active than the vast majority of the boards on the site now, but its still lacking a critical mass of users needed to really keep discussion alive, and the people that *are* still here are largely the same people that have been here for a decade or more, so there is very little new to discuss.

Boards like /a/ manage to keep themselves alive because they have a neverending stream of new content to talk about, but boards like /tg/ really only have the same handful of games and franchises now as we did in 2009 and then in 2019. Assuming we are still here, the average thread on /tg/ will *still* be about 40k, dnd, and MTG when we hit 2029.

>>96248312
>The 20th level fighter is mechanically capable of fighting and defeating the 20th level wizard.
Incapable*
I cast True Polymorph. Convergent Future causes you to fail your roll automatically and become a newt, which I then proceed to keep and cherish as a pet forever.

>>96248342
I prefer when magic is like this. How much of a ritual is truly necessary? Like the mad scientist poking at shit he does not understand, or trying new things he just shouldn’t.

>>96248343
I played Iron Kingdoms before where this kind of matchup isn't anywhere as lopsided. Though judging by your language, I'm going to presume you'll dismiss it out of hand before I go further.

>>96248349
What a dumb take. It's not dead or dying, it's just a demographic shift.

>>96248375
Is magic even magic if it’s not at the edges? Otherwise it’s at risk of no longer being seen as magic… Even if a society uses the word magic to refer to a thing, it still isn’t safe from being out-magic’d by something even more amazing/“magical”.

>>96248370
True Polymorph lasts one hour and if you damage me enough to knock me out of it (trivial, for a newt), then I just pop out with mild damage and stab you for being a retard who doesn't understand how the game's basic mechanics work.

Good to know """optimal""" Wizard play still loses.

>>96248397
True Polymorph is permanent, retard. Way to prove you don't play games.

>>96248383
>>96248383
Iron Kingdoms doesn't have Fighters or Wizards, doesn't go up to 20th level, and is played be nobody.
Sorry you were too retarded to follow the discussion, try again.

>>96248425
I play it, so thank you for proving me right

>>96248406
Nobody plays with 9th level spells, the game doesn't exist at that level.

Anyway, just bite yourself to break out.

>>96248431
>I play it
So like I said, it is played by nobody.

>>96248434
>Gets proven he doesn't know how the game works
>"N-nobody uses those mechanics! They basically don't exist!"
Nogames coping.

>>96248444
Yes, I do not play D&D at 17th level, neither do you, faggot.

This post is also an implicit admission that I am correct that the newt can bite itself to break out, btw.

>>96248434
>Anyway, just bite yourself to break out.
Newts don't do HP damage so this wouldn't work.
Besides, there's an even funnier option: You can just turn the helpless fighter into an inanimate object, like a chair.

>>96248436
Someone's mad they've been proven wrong and can do nothing about it

>>96248455
>Yes, I do not play D&D
You could've stopped right there for better accuracy, gamelet.
>Neither do you
Technically true as I have a campaign running at 20th level, not the 17th level.
>Y-you implicitly admit-
Coping after you didn't know how spells worked is cute. I bet you've never even read the rules before.

>And then you realize that sorcery in our histories tended to be chalked up to the horrors of coincidence and circumstance. The ability to kill a man a thousand miles away anonymously from the safety of your basement is more terrifying than any sniper could ever hope to be. You can take out kings and politicians. It’s like the equivalent of paying an invisible higher dimensional alien to squeeze an enemy’s heart into a pulp. It’s like asking a higher dimensional being to play with mass like fucking play dough.
He’s right you know
How do you best something that can’t be seen or targeted or countered in any way
Magic is looking at you inside and out

>>96248476
>Technically true as I have a campaign running at 20th level, not the 17th level.
You lie as easily as you breathe. Concession accepted.

>>96248388
No, its actively dying. 4chan as a site has nearly 60% less activity in 2025 than it did in 2015. That measures just total post activity overall, it doesn't measure quality of the post or where those posts are happening/what board.
And if you look around, you see a lot of what people have been calling bot posts for years. Low effort single line OP's posting a vague question, and then that "person" never comes back or replies. Just firing the thread off into the aether and then immediately abandoning it. Which is fairly blatantly an attempt to artificially generate the illusion of activity on the site so remaining users don't see so blatantly how bad things really have gotten. Keep in mind, bot posts still count as posts in the activity metric saying we've slowed down by 60% in the last 10 years. So the real numbers are lower.

>>96248475
>Proven wrong
Yeah, you were. And you seem awfully pressed abou tit.

>>96248481
>Y-you're lying!
Kek, you're a nogames who couldn't even read a spell. Ez win, come back tomorrow so I can body you in a new thread.

>>96248487
I accept your projection concession

>>96248463
>Newts don't do HP damage so this wouldn't work.
They don't have canon stat blocks, but yeah. Smash your head against something, jump off a bridge, whatever. Too bad anon is too busy gloating that I misread a spell to actually engage with the fact that his stupid plan (which requires using Matt Mercer's homebrew btw) doesn't work.

>>96247777
Holy Quads confirm

>>96247916
wouldn't Sorcerers have both power and freedom?

>>96248495
You are lying. Obviously. You can't just put stammering stuff in your misquote.

It's trivial for the newt-Fighter to break free from his newtdom by damaging himself. You refuse to engage with this and rely on "ummm, you misread the spell with a listed duration of 1 hour that literally says "The spell lasts for the duration, or until the target drops to 0 hit points or dies."" because you know you are wrong and stupid.

>>96248499
>Smash your head against something
Also wouldn't work.
>Jump off a bridge
Could work, but then you won't ever have the opportunity so it doesn't really matter.
>Whatever
You were strained to come up with more than 2 possible ideas for a newt to commit self harm?
>Too bad anon is too busy gloating that I misread a spell
Actively proving you don't know how the game works while claiming others don't is pretty funny, let's be fair. It's like when a republican politician gets outed as a flaming homosexual a day after railing against it in congress.

Listen. If magic can be made fair for the sake of martials surviving it, then magic can be made unfair for the sake of martials not surviving it.

If lightning can be slowed down into silly putty, then it can be left alone, and made to be lethal and not dodgeable.

>>96248523
>Also wouldn't work.
Ah, I forgot, it's literally impossible to damage yourself. You are such a fucking pathetic loser, just like all Wizard supremacists.

>>96248521
>Y-you're lying!!!!
This is the state of nogames. They're so gameless they cannot even imagine others playing games.
>It's trivial
You wouldn't know because you don't know how to play the game. Go give it a read for when you come back and lose another argument to me.

>>96247777
In history, the classical, trope wizard was synonymous with the ceremonial theurge. They were petitioning gods and angels and other divines, and these people had sought to unify with them.

Only an idiot thinks wizards have nothing to do with higher alien powers. Dungeons & Dragons is pure rot, pure de-education.

>>96247103
yes anon, we keep making new people

>>96248535
>Ah, I forgot, it's literally impossible
If you can find me a quote in the rules where it says you can cause damage to yourself by just "smashing your head against something", feel free to say it would work.
>You're a pathetic loser if you prove me wrong
Kek, well there goes your temper. Sorry that you don't know how the game works, maybe some day you'll find an AL that will tolerate you or something.

>>96248539
You are nogames, you know you are nogames, I know you are nogames, so why are you pretending not to be nogames? Encyclopedic knowledge of 9th level spells is the most nogames shit possible, sorry. No one who actually plays D&D needs to know that, it's just out-of-game bullshit, like grabbing a subclass from Matt Mercer's homebrew to try to win an internet argument.

>>96248552
>If you can find me a quote in the rules where it says you can cause damage to yourself by just "smashing your head against something", feel free to say it would work.
It is a TTRPG; the rules are intended to emulate the fictional world, not to cover and precisely define every edge case, especially in 5e, where the only rules are for combat.

If you believe smashing your head against things does not deal damage, feel free to do it for the next couple hours as hard as you can.

>>96247777
Wrong. The greatest wizard is the god that lends their magic to lesser wizards. All gods are wizards. A sorcerer is made by a god/wizard, the way magic in Ancient Greece was seen as the gift of the gods. Odin was the foremost wizard and god of wizardry.

Specifically, inherent superpower magic, or magic working or miracle working, that of Thaumaturgy, was seen as lesser to Theurgy/Goeteia, which summoned the entities that gave you your Thaumaturgy.

Summoning magic was always the more powerful of the two. Typical spell casting is lesser magic. You summon gods to do the big feats.

>>96248557
>You are no games, not me who can't even imagine games!!!!
Whatever helps you sleep at night gamelet.
>Knowing how the rules work? That's nogames behavior!
Kek, the funny thing is we all know you hastily googled what true polymorph does, glanced at the duration, skipped the spell description and then were utterly flabbergasted when you were told the spell doesn't work the way you thought it did.
Sorry, shoulda read the rules and played a game or two first! Lmao

>>96248582
Please, keep repeating over and over that you must read through and memorize the entire PHB spellbook to play D&D. Everyone who has ever played D&D knows you are a lying retard.

>>96248580
>Summoning magic was always the more powerful
Makes sense. If a wizard can’t do something they resort to calling upon a being who can, or can teach them. Like how Solomon was favored by God, and enslaved demons to learn from them. Or he was already given knowledge by God. One or the other, depending on the myth.

>>96248578
>It is a TTRPG, [Long cope about why he should be allowed to ignore the rules to benefit himself]
Yawn. The rules are extremely clear about how damage works, not my problem if you can't handle that.

>>96248594
>Heh, you can actually read things and understand the game?
>Guess you must have memorized the entire PHB, huh? Pathetic, how dare you be better than me you piece of shit
Seethe, cope, mald, die mad about it, etc.
>Everyone who has ever played D&D
You obviously aren't included in that el em ay oh

>>96248602
Yep. Smashing your head against things deals 0 damage, so feel free to do it for the next couple hours. Filtered, buh-bye.

>>96248614
>Doesn't know how filters work either
Nogames and a newfag? No wonder you're so soft skinned.

>>96247103
I feel like taking it.

>>96246830 (OP)
Vast majority of Wizards, even the most powerful and autistic, don't think like a munchkin/powergamer, or even the average tabletop nerd who's fine with not being the strongest and just wants some optimization.

They don't know about every spell in existence, much less most of the bonkers combos that players have come up with. Even if they did, remember that anti-magic shit does exist.

What a worthless thread. Like 1/3rd of it is just this fucker >>96248619 smugposting at random people.

>>96248602
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/basic-rules-2014/adventuring#Suffocating

Go ahead and stop me from holding my breath.

>>96248095
wow it's almost like physics and magic aren't the most important things in stories

The most powerful and crippling spell of all is actually the ”You’re Gay Now” spell. Imagine if a wizard went around casting that with no sense of right and wrong. Horrifying.

>>96248680
Causality is THE most important thing in a story anon. Otherwise a story is not a story.

>>96248669
The epistemology obsessed fag who can’t not seethe at physics? Yeah he’s a real fag.

>>96248671
>The fighternewt holds its breathe
>Immediately loses the fight because it would instantly go from a suffocating newt to a suffocating human fighter, and be at 0 HP
Not the best plan, but it would keep you from being newtified permanently, unless the wizard prepare two True Polymorphs.
Ahh, wait.
>Newts breathe through their skin
Guess it wouldn't work anyways. Good try though.

>>96248669
>Getting so mad he ragequits the thread
Holy shit imagine losing an argument this hard

>>96248434
>Nobody plays with 9th level spells
This is so painfully and obviously written by someone with no experience in the hobby. The first thing every other new DM does after running a "normal" game or two is try running things at level 20 just to see what it's like. There are even specific Adventuring League modules like Those That Came Before which cater to this and are built for parties that start at Level 17+.

Besides that, it's obvious that you're just shifting goalposts after being proven wrong instead of genuinely engaging with the point. True Polymorph is a win buttion, but there's more ways to win than true polymorph, and most of them are below 9th level spells, like
>Simulacrum
>Maze followed by buffing
>Dominate Monster
>Just teleporting
>Just flying
>Plane Shift
>Forcecage
>Etherealness
>Mental Prison
>Eyebite
>Contingency+Anything else
And so on and so forth. Even a 14th Level Wizard could destroy a 20th level fighter every single time, at least in 5e.
In 3.5e, the fighter is worse in some ways but he at least has some burst damage options that could win if the Wizard doesn't have any contingencies and he wins initiative, which is better than needing the Wizard to be functionally braindead to win.

>>96246830 (OP)
Because such spells do not automatically exist in all settings. Magic can be difficult, dangerous, or limited in scope—it isn’t simply “whatever I want, whenever I want”

>>96248682
Imagine suddenly wanting to suck your bro’s cock after some strange spell hits you in the ass.

>>96248935
Hot.

>>96248204
The next batch of assassins I've sent have had their reproductive organs surgically removed. I will outwizard the wizard.

>>96249378
The Wizard casts mass telekinesis and unties all of their shoe laces before running away.

>>96246830 (OP)
Traditional games?

>>96249378
The wizard casts "phantom pains" on the removed genitals.

>>96248691
i see you haven't experience many stories lately

>>96250211
he can't magick what he can't see - unless you are suggesting that he has a trophy room full of mounted one-eyed snakes and monty pythons...

>>96250869
It's an area spell radiating from his body, that makes anyone within a certain distance of him feel intense, crippling pain in any limbs or appendages they have lost or suffered injury to since they were born.
He doesn't even need to know they're there for them to get hurt.

>>96249419
The next batch of assassins is armed with boot-shaped clubs
>>96250211
The next batch of assassins performs a presentation on why his "pain" spell is inferior in every way to how I apply pain without any magic. Then they attack him.

I will outwizard the wizard, I have enough assassins to do so.

>>96251496
The wizard has an anti assassin field; anyone he can't see who has intent to harm him falls into a coma when they try to enter it.

>>96248814
Not that anon but 3.5e still had plenty of bullshit to pull on Martials, let's not pretend that the Caster vs Martial divide was somehow good back then as well. 4e was arguably the only system to try closing the gap by making Martials able to do more shit.

Besides that, the balancing act of Casters has always been some form of resource management: unlike videogames where wizards suck up close or can't tank damage at all, DnD wizards are capable of doing most things a fighter could do, and often do them better. The balancing act was that they had limited spell slots, and a proper DM would toss a minimum of 3-4 encounters per long rest if not more, so the wizard couldn't afford to unleash all their insane shit in one fight because they'd be baggage for the next 4. By contrast, fighters and other martials retained their strength regardless of attrition.

5e has serious balancing issues but a huge part of it is that DMs no longer properly pace dungeons or factor in poor weather, lack of food and sleep, traps etc into their adventures. Of course wizards are going to dominate in 1 fight per long rest games, they can throw out all their shit for maximum DPR whenever they want. They were intended to be whittled down over time. Of course, if you actually implement this or start including enemy wizards/anti-caster techniques players will have a tantrum.

If magic is wonder, or mystery, horror, etc, then should a wizard not be able to stop a man’s heart through sheer exposure panic?

>>96248095
Can you stop pastaing?

inb4 “shut up wonderfag”

>>96251889
He's one of at least four terminally autistic posters on /tg/ with a hyperfixation on magic and wizards, they all feed off each other like a circular human centipede.

>>96251939
Martialfags obsess over casters far more than than the casterfags, you cunt.

why are you obsessed with aliens now?

>>96247780
dnd 2e- to 5e is literally wizards and other magic casters do all the cool shit martials eat shit the ttrpg.

>>96251948
Here's one

>>96251948
Because aliens are fun.

>>96247702
Unless you put said martial to sleep. Which doesnt take much in the way of brains. From 1st lvl, they sweep martials

>>96251965
Because aliens are fun.

>>96251519
And while they're inside it.
Also, the barrier makes any projectiles, energy or physical, fizzle out.

>>96248548
why is everyone on this sight cursed with monochrome vision?
DnD wizards are basically scientists of the arcane in most canon settings who can petition gods and divines but more like a business man petitions a bank for a loan.
Wizards in dnd are obviously not the same as wizards outside of dnd?

>>96252030
>DnD wizards are basically scientists of the arcane in most canon settings who can petition gods and divines but more like a business man petitions a bank for a loan.
This is indistinguishable from priests, or the Hermetic, yeah. Hermetic logic is the thing that led up to modern day science. There’s a reason why astrology as well as alchemy still exist at present in their modern day forms, astronomy and chemistry, respectively. The third of the Hermetic fields, that of theurgy, can be chalked up to “aliens” in modern day.

>>96252030
>>96252062

>>96251913
>inb4 “shut up wonderfag”

>>96252030
>>96252062
The learned men, or “scientists”, or the past were usually just priests and monks and other spiritual leaders, who bothered to question or understand nature. If you go by the scientific method, which relies on observation-theory, then religion is a precursor to science. The ancients who looked to the night sky and saw the stars as the gods. That was an observation. It led to a theory. It started religion.

The word “magic” comes from an order of learned astrologer-priests. They became so well known that the Greeks eventually lumped higher learning in with magic, not just superstition or hocus pocus, purely.

The foremost wizards in European history were usually Christian monks like Roger Bacon, or Albertus Magnus, or Christian intellectuals like Isaac Newton, who was called “the last of the magicians”. Roger Bacon was called a wizard because he had an interest in machines.

>>96252030
DnD wizards don’t call on the gods to do their magic. Wizards in DnD are basically lesser wizards going by history. But, then you remember that the Weave IS a god, that of Mystryl, or Mystra, etc.

In history, the ability to perform magic or miracles, that of Thaumaturgy, was seen as lesser to summoning magic, or that of Theurgia/Goeteia. Calling on the beings who gave you your magic is far grander than simply doing the magic they gave.

>>96252145
Is all Arcane magic in all d&d campaign settings sourced to some deity or being?

>>96252179
Even if a given setting says it isn’t, it still absolutely is, by way of the author. It’s far too convenient. Far too constructed, even as far as the in-setting inhabitants go. It’s not something they’d implement.

See >>96248058 for more.

>>96252196
>Causality, evolution, is a blind idiot that won’t make or entertain silly human religion or belief systems, including hocus pocus. So what is? What’s entertaining it?
This is actually a very good point. You’re free to say “the author”, too, as you say. Perhaps the fourth wall is unavoidable at the end of the day…

>>96252126
All Not Even Wrong because we are not talking about history.

>>96252145
>But, then you remember that the Weave IS a god, that of Mystryl, or Mystra, etc.
The Weave is supported by rather than fully synonymous with the deity "of magic", as demonstrated by the competing Shadow Weave from a different goddess. While no few of the nastiest shenanigans are exclusive to those dedicated to said associated deity, it's not even the only way to manage magic in Faerun, while the only other official setting with such a thing is Masque of the Red Death; in most of them it's just a category of phenomena terribly convenient from the perspective of getting shit done without infrastructure. The magic that outdoes modern industry is rather few and far between, with older editions explicitly equating modern weapons to powerful magical enchantments.

>In history
Again, Not Even Wrong.

>>96252196
Yet more not-even-wrong, because the author is not a part of the setting. It is in fact such a widespread practice to ignore them that it gets its own term, "Death of the Author". To insist on laundering your priors the setting intentionally ignores through the author is yet more Not Even Wrong, it is a fundamental category error rendering the entirety of your position utterly invalid for the conversation.

>>96252218
Screenshot to prove you aren't just self-replying.

>>96246830 (OP)
Well gee golly gosh I suppose that question would depend on the capabilities of wizards in a given setting and system.

>>96252258
I’d do that, but you’d just claim I edited it. You schizos are all the same.

>>96252258
>The Weave is supported by rather than fully synonymous with the deity "of magic", as demonstrated by the competing Shadow Weave from a different goddess.
That actually reinforced the notion, once, since it was treated like ‘water and oil’, that the medium for magic is the mediator itself, but then you have 5e (the first 5e book in fact) that claims all arcane magic in the DnD multiverse is sourced to the Weave, which is utter bullshit, since it’s trying to make the Forgotten Realms a lot more important than it is. This is clear writing infringement, like how they retconned memory in favor of spell slots, and then mashed the two together when wizard fags got butthurt.

And THEN you remember that Ao is on the same tier as whatever the hell arcane deity Vecna is subservient to, implying it’s Ao-tier beings (who are themselves subservient to some unnamed speaker—obviously a nod to the DM, or author) who are responsible for arcane magic.

And yes, Vecna’s snake god was written as a massive “fuck you” to the Weave. It’s also apparent that the Lady of Pain (who is another horrible character possibly made to make fun of Loraine Williams) is on the same tier as Vecna’s god.

Oh, and if you’re a high enough level in the Mystara setting, you can literally see yourself as a game piece on the board.

>>96252258
>getting shit done without infrastructure
What’s funny is spells wouldn’t work without some sort of background (I don’t care if it’s quantum or higher dimensional or whatever) to account for how overly constructed it is. Spells are by the way they work occult infrastructure not at all sourced to man. Man isn’t able to make that sort of convenience on their own. It’s why spells are frequently compared to a kind of AI program that’s just… in nature.

>>96252258
>Not Even Wrong
>Yet more not-even-wrong
Translation: You’re correct but it’s the worst sort of correct; utterly useless for a game.

>>96252381
>What’s funny is spells wouldn’t work without some sort of background (I don’t care if it’s quantum or higher dimensional or whatever) to account for how overly constructed it is.
It does not have to be a constructed thing in-universe. Your failure to suspend disbelief is not some grand observation, it's missing the point and screeching completely fucking invalid non-sequiturs.

>>96252394
No, it's saying that being correct in a specific theoretical framework about real-world sociology and comparative mythology has no bearing on game design or literary critique.

>>96252343
The Serpant, the Lady of Pain, and Ao, etc, are all a part of the ‘Ancient Brethren’.

>>96252407
>It does not have to be a constructed thing in-universe
Considering the way the spells work? Or just how (unintelligent) causality wouldn’t allow for such constructed convenience?

Not so sure about that.

Something either comes into being unintelligently/evolutionarily or intelligently/technologically. Remember that technology is just applied reality.

Magic in 99.99% of fiction is far too conveniently constructed for unintelligent evolution to be behind it alone. Even if it’s just the author.

>>96252258
>. It is in fact such a widespread practice to ignore them that it gets its own term, "Death of the Author".
Death of the Author is an essay about advantages of ignoring the official autorial intent written in a time when most literary analysis hinged heavily on using author biographies to interpret the work.
Don't pretend to know concepts when you're hearing words and assuming they have out of context meaning. Someone wrote a text much more interesting than anything you've offered to the world, don't pretend you could intuit everything they wrote just by hearing the name because you're dumber and dedicating much less time to the task.

>>96252407
>Your failure to suspend disbelief
This can only go so far. There are things that cannot he hand waved even in fiction and to turn your brain off (suspend your disbelief) requires you to accept just how wrong it is. Ignorance is also enforced.

>>96252447
>Magic in 99.99% of fiction
is your sample group just games where magic is a tool for the players just like every other mechanic?

>>96252480
If it comes from the hands at all, and the human still looks 100% human, it’s quite artificial.

>>96251913
>>96252109
shut up wonderfag

>>96252447
>Or just how (unintelligent) causality wouldn’t allow for such constructed convenience?
Only according to our particular laws of physics. The base counterfactual is that they did.

>Remember that technology is just applied reality.
Most usage is with regard to external devices, hence why "technique" is a different word from the same root.

>Even if it’s just the author.
If it is just the author, then all your pontificating is irrelevant to the setting's internal context.

>>96252453
>Don't pretend to know concepts when you're hearing words and assuming they have out of context meaning.
That I see it in discussions of fiction quite routinely says otherwise, ivory tower dweller. It may be drawn from the title of a specific paper acting as a counter-point, but has since become a vernacular term.

>>96252467
>This can only go so far.
Which is much farther than you can take it.

>There are things that cannot he hand waved even in fiction and to turn your brain off (suspend your disbelief) requires you to accept just how wrong it is.
Not really, the willful subset is just a semi-conscious decline to contemplate. This significantly reinforces my assumption that you have a genuine inability to wrap your head around opposed priors on their own terms.

>>96252485
Or the background the human exists in is different such that recognizable processes acquire unrecognizable side-products to their real-life functions. Among other explanations.

>>96252485
what's the underlying logic in harry potter magic?
Have you read Vance or Moorcock? Their magic is just shit that happens to you and the people who can exploit it basically live in a parallel reality unrelated to everyone else in the world.

>>96252538
>but has since become a vernacular term.
no, you interact with retards who spew terms to pretend to have authority on a topic while they couldn't be bothered to read 10 pages about it. I'm sure you have a much more indepth understanding by reading exclusively twit long posts by randos because you're just smarter than everyone else and don't need to listen to other people.
Have a great life.

>>96252602
...What do you think a "vernacular term" IS? I am effectively saying "it's not a formal technical definition, but that doesn't matter because the legion of screeching retards use it otherwise and definitions must describe that".

>>96252509
Yeah, wonderfag, shut up

>they think magic has nothing to do with wonder/mystery
Even in Dee en Dee, magic is associated with mystereeeee, and it's why the goddess of magic is even named Mystra/Mystryl, and titles such as 'mother of magic', or 'mistress of mysteries', etc.

>>96253342
How many times and ways does it have to be put for you to get that "depends on the author" is very different from "whatever the fuck" because of contextual distinguishing of multiple definitions of the word "magic" like which setting you're talking about?

>>96246830 (OP)
>>96244138

>>96247707
I used my class ability spell research. I created testicular torsion. I paid the gold to scribe it in my spellbook. Get fucked jock.

>>96253342
Magic in /tg/ is a gameplay function, you nitwit. You're arguing fluff and throwing a melty anytime someone asks you to point out what benefit said fluff is to the actual gameplay.

>this thread
>again
>guaranteed 350+ replies of unadulterated peak autism

every single fucking time. my hat's off to you, magicanon, you are a master of your crafter

>>96253507
Given how much he spams, it's not so much a craft as the mods are apathetic as fuck

>>96253513
still, you'd think that these retards would figure it out, back to back to back like it is, but they never do
and anons, of all people, should goddamn know better so they very clearly deserve to be trapped in this thread until the sun tears itself from the sky

>>96253527
It'd be far less of an issue if he didn't bump and samefag himself all the time, and again if the mods actually gave a shit instead of jerking off on their discord

>>96251991
Because they stole his butthole.

>>96251584
>The balancing act was that they had limited spell slots, and a proper DM would toss a minimum of 3-4 encounters per long rest if not more, so the wizard couldn't afford to unleash all their insane shit in one fight

See anon, the problem is that you need one good spell to end an encounter. 3-4 encounters might be enough to tire out a lower level wizard, but once you have 4th and 5th level slots all trying to exhaust the wizard does will make him optimize a spell list and start bringing better gear.

>By contrast, fighters and other martials retained their strength regardless of attrition.
This also isn't true, Martials are much more vulnerable because their resource is HP. Occasionally they will get a few uses of an ability as well, which is always almost useless compared to casting.
And HP, unlike the Wizard and his spells, is something you can't actually control the burn rate of. If the Wizard wants to play it safe and save his real game breaker spells? He can just do that.

>>96248391
>Is "incantations and rituals" even "incantations and rituals" if it’s not at the edges? Otherwise it’s at risk of no longer being seen as "incantations and rituals"… Even if a society uses the word "supernatural forces" to refer to a thing, it still isn’t safe from being out-"supernatural force"’d by something even more amazing/“exciting”.

Hey, three different definitions all used to try and semantically overload the sentence into idiocy. So much clearer this way.

>>96248529
So what? Were playing a game, not feeding your caster power fantasies.

>>96252030
>why is everyone on this sight cursed with monochrome vision?
Because they think they're genius intellectuals here to educate and teach us poor deluded low IQ "D&D" players about the true history of magic and "wysards". The problem is that most of us arguing back arent pseudointellectuals desperate to return to some past glory of history. Its shit we all know and dont fucking care about. But they're going to troll and keep persisting in being an annoyance till we acknowledge their genius and learning, despite being pseudointellectuals and midwits rehashing shit we already know and don't care about.

>>96254540
Genuine question: Why does the superiority of casters to martials make you seethe?

>>96254559
Caster superiority makes martialtards seethe because they have no alternatives. They are typically friendless troglodytes, and their only way to engage with the hobby is to play D&D or a clone of it, which all happen to make casters objectively better than martials.
They hate it, but they're stuck with it because they're too insufferable to get over their emotional insecurity. Hence they either deny it exists or openly seethe at it.

>everyone who disagrees with me is a seething martialtard
>everyone who doesn't suck me off is a seething martialtard
No one plays martials, get better bait next time. Do "gods are aliens", I want to see you sperg about christcucks.

>>96254621
Nobody cares about a dead religion except 16 year olds on xitter, anon.

>>96252381
>What’s funny is spells wouldn’t work without some sort of background (I don’t care if it’s quantum or higher dimensional or whatever) to account for how overly constructed it is.
Well, in most games you only get to see the modern techniques and spells. You are not privy to the tens of thousands of years of study, refinement, and learning that went into the various forms of spellcraft. You dont get to see how various magical creatures evolved (whether naturally or artificially), you dont get to see the way the gods change and grow. All of this only reveals only one thing, you are stupid and unable to conceive of a history for a world unlike ours where actual spellcraft worked and required many years of refinement.

All of these posts that talk about how you cant suspend your disbelief about how spells work and how they seem entirely too artificial or the even more idiotic "must be lost future tech" only reveal yourself to be stupid and limited. It is also a revelation that you are entirely ignorant of a great deal of pseudoscience and debunked theories of magic, the supernatural, and the many ways life, the universe, and everything were conceived by people who didn't know the ways things actually worked.

But youre too stupid to understand worlds and realities that operate on these debunked ideas, unable to deal with ambiguity and "counterfactuals", much like a deeply autistic person who lacks the ability to step out of their own head.

>>96254559
>Why does the superiority of casters to martials make you seethe?
It doesn't. But these threads are just full of trolls desperate for dopamine hits, much like your question is. But the actual caster martial imbalance in some games is simply a sign of bad game design and poor ideas on how to make games. It is often a sacred cow left over from early shitty game design ideas that must be kept for brand identity and so cannot be fixed until the system is designed outside of the constraints of brand identity.

>>96254728
>It doesn't. But
Kek

>>96254728
>Well, in most games you only get to see the modern techniques and spells. You are not privy to the headcanon I made up.
Outstanding work, martialfag.

>>96254728
>It doesn't. But these threads are just full of trolls desperate for dopamine hits, much like your question is
...So you're stupid enough to give a troll his dopamine hit by your own admission? That's a weird thing to admit to, anon.

>But the actual caster martial imbalance in some games is simply a sign of bad game design
The "badly designed games" are the most beloved ones on the planet. Contrarian appeals to there being some nebulous objectively superior game design aside, the only thing that matters in a game is whether people enjoy it.
In fact, it's much easier to say that games aiming for "balance" between martial and caster options are poorly designed. Tabletop games are not PVP experiences where the goal is to have everyone be perfectly matched. They are attempted simulations of fictional worlds, and it makes zero sense for a guy who calls upon magic and a guy who has nothing magical to be equals.

>It is often a sacred cow left over from early shitty game design
The caster/martial disparity wasn't prevalent so much in older games and has actually grown with more modern games. The prior edition of D&D even attempted to modernize the problem by simply accepting that making everyone magic is the only way to try and create a more level playing field. And the current edition accepts that a level playing field is dumb and people don't want one anyways.

The few times you see anyone try to go in the opposite direction, where casters are useless or don't exist in favor of a simplified martial experience, those games are remembered by few, and played by none. Objective failures.

>>96254743
Do you have anything actually interesting to say or is it just that time of the month when you need dopamine hits from saying idiotic things?

>>96254770
>So you're stupid enough
Why not just boredom? Its as if you're some kinda newfag who hasn't been on 4chan long enough to not care about whether you feeds the trolls or not.

>the most beloved ones on the planet
Youll notice I didn't say anything about popularity or whether they are loved or not. But the facts of it being poor game design are still true.

>attempted simulations
Lots of people seem to think this despite the many ways mechanics very blatantly don't align with simulation. Not to mention the ways various editions have blatantly said they arent simulations. I mean, for gods sake, 5e is not a simulationist edition in the least.

>zero sense for a guy who calls upon magic and a guy who has nothing magical to be equals.
Why not? Magic is something that doesn't exist in our world and therefore we have no idea whether actual magic and spell craft would be weaker than physical activity, equal, or stronger. Its all down to preferences and expectations set by previous fictions.

>not PVP experiences
Who the fuck said anything about PVP? This is about contribution to play. The caster who ends a new encounter with a single spell while the martial does nothing is not fun. The caster who stops the big bad with a single overpowered spell while the martial was getting ready to run up and stab him is not fun. I know, I've been on both sides of these situations.

>making everyone magic
Its funny you say this when martials were quite explicitly said not to be magical or even supernatural in 4e. They were certainly not limited by expectations of warriors from our own world, but the system quite explicitly says they arent magic in any way, even when doing things that would be considered supernatural here.

>>96254770
>making everyone magic
That 5e devolved into just giving martial spells and supernatural powers to not even become equal but to not fall behind completely is a testament to shitty design and limited imaginations.

>opposite direction
Thats just blatantly untrue. 4e is long remembered and still played, even getting multiple spinoffs and remakes. Pathfinder 2e is the second most popular "D&D" fantasy system out there, its just isn't talked about on 4chan.

>The caster/martial disparity wasn't prevalent so much in older games
Untrue. While low level play, the most common lay for most people for decades, had the wizard being mostly useless with few scant spells and relyign on his crossbow most of the time, at higher levels when the martial started to drop off the game was designed to give the martial more characters to play with, a clear sign that a martial by himself was becoming useless and so needed more bodies to become "equivalent" to the now starting to become a godlike wizard with his many spells and various magical items.

>>96254847
>>96254872
>Why not just boredom?
We both know of a dozen better things you could waste your time with, newbie.
>Youll notice I didn't say anything about popularity
Here comes the cope about how success and popularity have no correlation with quality.
>Lots of people seem to think this despite the many ways mechanics very blatantly don't align with simulation
Anon, I get you have autism, but I expect even the autists to understand that simulations are not always 1-1 recreations of reality.
>Why not?
Why would they be? Your arguments simply don't hold weight and imply you have no imagination. This hobby is for people with imagination, anon, that might be a cause for your many frustrations.
>Who the fuck said anything about PVP?
The implication that balance matters inherently rests on the idea of PVP. We do not all need to equally "contribute to play", let alone have perfect parity between all characters.
If you truly feel this insecure about the idea of being less capable than others, you need therapy.
>Its funny you say this when martials were quite explicitly said not to be magical
It walks like a duck, flies like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck. You're also wrong, but 4rries aren't known to care for facts.
>That 5e devolved into just giving martial spells
It didn't devolve in this way, that was 4e. Quite the opposite, 5e has been happy to let the disparity exist, to great success and acclaim.
>Thats just blatantly untrue
Lol.
>4e is long remembered
Pffft
>Still played
Lmaoooo
Sorry, anon, show me how many people play 4e. If it's in a 6 digit range I'll take your arguments seriously. 4th Edition is basically the Battleborn of TTRPGs.
>Untrue, [includes zero examples and refers to how 3.5e was designed]
I accept your concession.

>>96254923
Are you retarded? Martials have always been supernatural. It's fantasy. What, do you seriously expect an ordinary guy to dodge lightning and get surprised when he can't?
Dozens of threads and it's just one retard who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction...

>>96254559
Martial appreciators don't seethe because they recognize that being an underdog is fun.
But faggots like >>96254540 aren't that, they're people who are too stupid to play a caster and got filtered out of an easy power fantasy and are bitter about it.

>>96254943
Are you retarded?
>Martials have always been supernatural
You think a guy who can't swing a sword more than once every six seconds is "supernatural"?
>What, do you seriously expect an ordinary guy to dodge lightning
In the game, lightning is nerfed from how it would actually function such that it's survivable for ordinary martials and people with no supernatural qualities. He cannot "dodge lightning".
>Dozens of threads and it's just one retard who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction...
And yet you still won't stop posting or being a retard.

>>96254957
There are multiple people who think you're retarded, because you are.

>>96254964
If needing to feel less singled out and in a minority helps your mental health, feel free to believe that.

>>96254964
There are multiple people who think you're retarded and that I'm a 200 IQ gigachad. What now?

>>96246830 (OP)
>How are wizards not the most OP fantasy class by a landslide?
Casting effective spells requires time, is obvious, and is easily interrupted.
non-player characters aren't retarded and are aware of the threats wizards represent if un-harassed.
D&D changed the rules to make wizard player characters more fun to play, purely for player's enjoyment of the game.
The game rules were a lot more equitable, 'fair' ( insofar as a game where the DM can just sling an arbitrary number of opponents at the player party can be ) and neutral in older editions.

Hot take: players and npcs should follow the same rules, at least insofar as it doesn't break fantasy archetypes. If the cockatrice couldn't petrify it wouldn't be a cockatrice. But player fighters shouldn't be able to "action surge" just so they can be more powerful than an equivalent level fighter npcs.

>>96251967
4e let martials do cool shit and people whined about it.

>>96251519
The next batch of assassins have been hypnotised to unconsciously attack everything in sight once a criteria has been met. Once they approach the wizard, they are on autopilot. wryyy

>>96248192
>No, he literally only has to flick his wrist and pull the trigger to hit me wherever I move to (unless I move behind cover).
Anon, bullets aren't magical self-aiming death beams. The police have probably the closest armed engagements of any profession and they still miss 7/10 shots. Armies waste tens of thousands of rounds per every kill. Guns are very precise fast lethal weapons, but that precision also means that the slightest barrel misalignment, visual impairment, or unexpected movement from the target can make a shot miss. "Dodging bullets" is just a matter of staying consistently on the move and not being perfectly in line with the shooter's sights.

Of course if the shooter is good/lucky/stocked up enough then a bullet will hit you sooner or later and one hit might be enough, but that's beside the point.

>>96246830 (OP)
depends on the setting

>>96246830 (OP)
/tg/ Wizard players don't want to actually emulate historical or mythological theurgists that took hours to weeks of ritual and obscure components to cast any kind of spell. They want to be the GM without any of the responsibility or accountability in being one.

Magic in D&D is overpowered because it's raw power and utility with no real limitations aside from spell slots. Wizards in D&D are arbitrarily held to different standards than martials simply because actually making them accurate to their equivalent inspirations would be a lot more fucking annoying and actively push powerfantasyfags from wanting to be Wizards.

You want an explanation for why Wizards aren't the most OP by a landslide in most other systems? They make the choice to sacrifice some player fun in order to actually balance out magic. Maybe there's a catastrophic risk of failure, maybe there's a casting time of several turns, maybe there's material resource cost that puts a major dent in the wizard's adventuring proceeds and prevents them from investing into magic gear like other classes, maybe there's a meta resource cost that takes in-game days or weeks to recover, maybe reality abhors magic and each subsequent spell in the same region is diminished in power, etc. etc. Or it's a high-flying magic system where every class is some flavor of wizard or supernatural hero that can hold their own against wizards head-on.

Have you tried playing 4e?

>>96255568

Have you tried playing Pathfinder 2e?

>>96255513
>/tg/ Wizard players don't want to actually emulate historical or mythological theurgists that took hours to weeks of ritual and obscure components to cast any kind of spell.
There’s Thaumaturgy and then there’s Theurgia/Goeteia. The former is lesser, the latter is greater. Greater magic should take time.

Wizards are archmages, lectors and advisers. They aren't that powerful but the most wise and well educated person people form mayor to king listen

>>96255569
Different oldfag here. I tried PF2. Dind't like it.
I'd like to know what's in there to find it better than PF1, what makes you prefer the system, I couldn't find it and would like some pointers.
What I like about PF! is that it's about gettign powerful to killing monsters to get more XP to get more powerful to kill even bigger mosnters. It's a progression of XP, gold, abilities and options (As most of d20 games), and once you know the system and learn its inconsistencies, it's fun to play.

>>96253448
Say when.

>>96247988
>DM to demand the players explain how they're handling the verbal components of spell casting
DESU, in my table the caster gets to chose the somatic components and we do it when announcing the spell. "Message" is like calling from a (landline) phone. So when in need to act stealthily, the figther would do the somatic of Mesasage, and I'd know that he wants to chat without loud sounds.
I'ts kind of nice, funny and completely unnecessary.

>>96246830 (OP)
Everyone always clowns and assumes that it's a max level wizard vs. a fighter with completely mundane gear and stats. When in reality a max level fighter is completely decked out in magical items with various abilities while also dealing a fuckton of damage per round from normal attacks.

>>96246830 (OP)
Wizardry may vary

>>96256668
A fireball? No. Wizards do rituals to cause your heart to shrivel up like a prune a thousand miles away.

>>96246830 (OP)
>OP fantasy class
Different works of fantasy have different classes.
Some don't have wizards.
Some don't have any classes whatsoever.
Also, different works of fantasy establish different functions for their magic.

What if the evil wizard knows the ‘cause a kidney stone to form’ spell? How do you stop him then?

in what hypothetical game are we talking about
Wizards are really really good in D&D 3.5 and really really lame in Exalted

>>96255513
>simply because actually making them accurate to their equivalent inspirations would be a lot more fucking annoying and actively push powerfantasyfags from wanting to be Wizards.
Yeah, that's why they lost almost all the restrictions like Int/skill checks to get spells in their books, having to plan individual castings, taking multiple days to refresh a full spell suite, needing to track down spells to learn any after chargen, and completely losing the spell if somebody hit them during casting which was easy due to taking up measurable time so there didn't need to be any special reaction rule for it to happen.

In other words, it's not "magic in D&D", it's "magic in D&D 5e". Even in 3.5 there were still plenty of native constraints left a skilled DM could wrangle them with, for all it's also the home of their highest peaks due to design-by-landfill meeting the first and most significant of quality-of-life revisions.

>>96251984
This. In 5e DnD, most martial classes are incentivized to dump a stat like wis, int, or cha in favor of con, str, or dex. This leaves them at a potential disadvantage when it comes to a spell like Enemies Abound (3rd lvl), Charm Person (1st lvl), Command (1st level), or Hold Person (2nd level). Any one of these spells, if successful, can body a martial if used correctly. And these are just low level spells.

>>96248505
I tend to see Sorcerers limited to what type of magic they can use. Often limited to a type or two and often due to their ease in use rarely bother learning past that type of magic due to how hard it is if even possible for other magic. Wizard is the basic can do it all but has to do it alone and by hand where everyone else gets help from a greater being but is limited due to it.

>>96258268
i cast 'kick to the stones'
it's a cantrip that requires a melee spell attack, and if successful, causes 1d6 physical damage and causes the target to be stunned til the end of its next turn

>>96254770
>They are attempted simulations of fictional worlds, and it makes zero sense for a guy who calls upon magic and a guy who has nothing magical to be equals.
Perhaps. But then the correct way to represent that with good game design would be to not have Level 20 Wizards and Level 20 Fighters being presented as equal in the context of how much XP they need to reach that point, or what CR encounter they can handle.

It's still poor game design to lie to the players.

>>96246830 (OP)
Heh, funny image.

>>96260983
>Perhaps. But then the correct way to represent that with good game design would be to not have Level 20 Wizards and Level 20 Fighters being presented as equal in the context of how much XP they need to reach that point
Why?

>or what CR encounter they can handle.
Why?
CRs tell you the party level that four characters should have to be able to defeat a given monster with zero character deaths. They are not a guarantee of victory, they do not tell you a fight is sure to be difficult or sure to be easy or is impossible, and they are not tailored to any specific class but are meant to account for the bare minimum. Four fifth level fighters should be able to defeat a CR5 monster without anyone dying. Four fifth level casters could do the same.

>It's still poor game design to lie to the players.
You haven't been "lied to", you just presumed that all classes should be made perfectly equal as an ideal. Sorry, but most people find it boring and superior if they aren't. If you don't like it, go play a different system instead of complaining that the tastes of millions won't change for the sake of your insecurities.

>>96258290
Exalted Wizards can make whole ass new landmasses and cast spells that can decimate entire armies and civilizations.

>>96246830 (OP)
Magic is literally arbitrary, it's usefulness completely depends on the writer.

>>96246965
>Hurr wizard and sorcerers are different things!!11
Retard take only valid in retarded games.

>>96246830 (OP)
Because, and I realize that this is an incredibly low bar, the people who make games are smarter than you.

>>96246830 (OP)
Poor worldbuilding/class structure.

That’s it.

Either magic exists, it is rare and powerful, and isn’t easily accessible to players.

Or magic exists, it is cheap and commonplace, and is available to everyone and is easily replaced with mundane skills and tools.

Anything between the two results in overpowered PCs and the latter results in a boring and nonsensical world that fatigues players on a subconscious level as the game proceeds to force unnecessary “magic” into the narrative despite it’s irrelevance.

>>96247702
>putting someone to sleep on command
>not powerful

>>96263109
The average white woman can do the same thing talking about their day, anon

>>96263123
Haha wow that's HILARIOUS dude! I almost fell out of my chair from laffin so hard at that funny joke XD like lols, women, am I right?

>>96263131
Glad to hear you are having a nice day, anon

>>96263151
Yeah man I love nothing more than seeing misogynistic humor! It always tickles my fancy because, I mean, women right? Heh, wew...

>>96263186
You're very welcome

>>96263131
>>96263186
First week on 4chan, huh?

>>96246840
Forcefields?

>>96251584
>by making Martials able to do more shit.
Not at all. 4e made everyone do less and gave bespoke names to the things they did.

>>96263279
Haha yeah my dude if someone doesn't show sufficient appreciation for "heh, women amirite?" jokes they've clearly never been in the secret club of all the cool kids right? They would never have been here since 2005, otherwise they would totally share all your opinions and beliefs.

>>96263322
You seem upset, friend :(

>>96263409
>>96263151
So which is it?

>>96263415
Good question, hope anon clarifies for us

>>96263322
>Haha yeah my dude if thomeone doethn't thow thuffithient apprethiathion for "heh, women amirite?" joketh they've clearly never been in the thecret club of all the cool kidth right? They would never have been here thince two-thouthand five, otherwithe they would totally thare all your opinionth and beliefth.
Nah, they'd just remember their place as the minority and shut the fuck up, because they're not changing anyone's mind.
Get bent, faggot and lurk moar.

>>96263457
I guess the real mad one is you :(

>>96258290
What are you talking about? Exalted wizards have some of the most varied and flavorful spells in the industry without going full soft magic ala WoD Mage, along with a ritual system that lets you create grand region-spanning effects.

>>96264737
The issue is Exalted is incredibly gay and childish. “And so he deflected a literal fucking universe”. Fuck off.

How much power can a wizard even put into magic? Shouldn’t they be capable of building things, even machines, that can put do more magic than themselves?

What if multiple wizards work together?

Shouldn’t the most powerful magic be external to the wizard? Doing rituals to contact literal fucking gods? What about making some godly arcane contraption?

I’m always bothered by this. What if there is an actual biological limit to how much a mage can do? Surrounding nature is a lot more than the mere self.

>>96265646
Well, a good chunk of those questions is the basis of logic behind things such a magic artifacts/items, artificers and magic circles

>>96262967
>you just presumed that all classes should be made perfectly equal
Except that's the exact opposite of what I said. The classes aren't equal, so it's poor design for them to have equal levels and be presented as equal in terms of CR.
>CRs tell you the party level that four characters should have to be able to defeat a given monster with zero character deaths
And it's often incorrect about that. Four 5th level Fighters are going to really struggle if they have to fight a Flesh Golem, so why act like they're just as capable of not dying as Four 5th level casters?

The answer is that they shouldn't be. The game is presenting them as equal when the intent is that they aren't equal. You agree that they shouldn't be equal, therefore the answer is to simply change the presentation.
Why are you opposed to this? Why are you arguing that it's good design to present them as perfectly equal?

>the largest discrepancy in power scaling depending on the media.
Surely this invites unbiased discussion.

>>96268361
>Except that's the exact opposite of what I said.
No, it isn't.
>The classes aren't equal, so it's poor design for them to have equal levels
...Because you believe to be equal, the wizard should need a billion more XP to reach the zenith of his power than the fighter.
But nothing about levels suggests they imply equality in class output. A level 10 wizard is simply a level 10 wizard, being level 10 does not mean he is meant to be the equal of a level 10 of anything else.
>and be presented as equal in terms of CR.
This also isn't meant to cover equals, it's meant to cover the barest minimum.
>And it's often incorrect about that.
Not really.

>Four 5th level Fighters are going to really struggle if they have to fight a Flesh Golem
This is false.
At Level 5 a Battlemaster Fighter has an expected DPR in the 20s. A Flesh Golem, with 39 HP per fighter and assuming they have an AC of 18, does 13.9 DPR per round. On average the Fleshgolem dies in Round 2, before it can shave even a single fighter down to half health.
>so why act like they're just as capable of not dying as Four 5th level casters?
Nothing about CR implies equality or parity, and nothing is pretending them as equal. That's just your assumption. Gosh, you really are bad at reading.

>>96246840
You dare insinuate that a Supreme Being such as Lord Ainz cannot withstand your puny blade?

>>96268763
Pretty sure that even in his own book bone boy admits that if he has to fight his old guild master, who was basically a Fighter on steroids, he would get his ass kicked hard since the dude was properly built for pvp while bone boy was built for pve. Even the dude’s nickname “Touch Me” was a brag to anyone trying and failing to get through his defenses.

>>96269312
>who was basically a Fighter on steroids
Overlord doesn't have fighters. Everybody is a mage who uses magic, there are just pure spell mages and mages who also use weapons.

>>96269336
I take it you haven’t actually read the series then, considering that’s pretty damn untrue for the mmorpg Ainz was playing and in the world he got shat out into.

>>96255465
This entire line is extremely interesting. Loving the idea of an incredibly rich baron or king bent on murdering a wizard he doesn't like; only to be thwarted by basic yet effective concepts of spells. I'd watch that for years without getting bored. May even make a campaign around the idea. Love it! Make the wizard a retardchad for maximum funny
Magic is inherently so OP that it's all plausible in any magic setting really.

>>96269394
Anon, the book directly portrays a fight between Ainz and a Level 100 "Warrior" who uses magic for most of their fight, and several other high level NPC "warriors" use spells and magic. Even Touch Me just uses an augmented version of a spell as his ultimate attack.

>>96269465
Well yes, I suppose if you just go by your own personal definition of what a fighter is rather than a commonly agreed upon one where someone fights primarily with the use of melee weaponry, you could argue that anyone is a mage, yes. Might as well say every single mmorpg has you play a mage cause you have abilities with cooldowns then.

>>96269478
>where someone fights primarily with the use of melee weaponry
So you're saying a level 20 fighter that uses a bow isn't a fighter. This is why we use actual definitions instead of your make believe lmao

>>96269480
>a level 20 fighter that uses a bow isn't a
…So, an archer?
Though I see your point. Would it be more appropriate to say martial weaponry, or are you going to make the argument that anyone with a supernatural power is a mage now?

>>96269496
Anon, "Archer" isn't a class. You haven't actually played the game, have you?

>>96269496
>Would it be more appropriate to say martial weaponry
My level 2 wizard in AD&D primarily uses a sling since he doesn't get to cast many spells and saves them for emergencies.
According to you, he is actually a fighter.

>>96269502
It is in Overlord. Which I thought was the point of the discussion, but I guess not anymore.

>>96269510
Are we now pretending Overlord takes place in Ad&d? Or are you trying to turn this into a general concepts discussion?

>>96269478
>>96269496
Hardly "commonly agreed upon" when you need to shift the definition immediately when it runs into a wall.

The agreed upon terms are Martial and Caster. A Martial is someone who does not use spells or magical abilities. A Caster is someone using magical abilities and spells.
A Fighter is a Martial.
A Wizard is a Caster.
A Cleric is a Caster.
An Eldritch Knight is a Caster.
In Overlord, all high level characters use magical abilities/skills with limited uses per day, or Spells that draw from a mana pool. How abilities and skills work is closer to how Vancian magic works for sorcerers and the like where you only get X spells per day.

>>96269525
>>>/a/ is where you want to discuss Overlord. This is the Traditional Games board.

>>96269465
Nta, but which fight are you referring to? I don't remember any fight Ainz has had against a level 100 pure warrior that used spells.
And World Break isn't an upgraded version of Reality Slash, it's the other way around if anything. The spell is used in imitation of the warrior ability.

>>96269525
>Are we now pretending Overlord takes place in Ad&d?
It is based on sword world...
Regardless though you were making comparisons between D&D concepts and Overlord. Try paying attention to the discussion, goldfish brain.

>>96269540
Blame the guy who brought bone boy up then, not me.

>>96269534
So by your definition, every single mmorpg character in existence is a mage. That is stupid.

>>96269542
>level 100 pure warrior
"Pure warriors" don't exist in Overlord due to how job classing works.
>And World Break isn't an upgraded version of Reality Slash
Wrong, World Break was added after Reality Slash.

>>96269550
>So by your definition, every single mmorpg character in existence is a mage.
Almost all MMOs do have you play as casters (not mages, lrn2read anon). It's much more interesting and engaging for players, it turns out. And when tabletop games started to copy MMOs people started crying that they were turning every class into casters.
So there you have it.

>>96269550
>Blame the guy who brought bone boy up
You're the only one who got confused and thinks this is a discussion about overlord, spergboi

>>96269559
If you have to contort the definition of “caster” to be something that stupidly expansive, then frankly I don’t think it’s the smoking gun you think it is, but go off queen

>>96269562
I’m not the one pretending to be a janitor on the internet

>>96269568
>If you have to contort the definition of “caster”
Good thing we aren't. Argument over then.

>>96269568
>I’m not the one pretending to be a janitor
Nobody said you were, you were just confused as to what this board is meant for and needed some help. It looks like you still need some help, but not the kind I can provide.

>>96269571
Glad to see dndrones are still as smug as ever

>>96269577
The projection from you is getting sad

>>96269585
I thought you agreed that the argument was over? Why are you still mad?

>He's holding a stick! He's a martial!
>He's in a fantasy story! He's a mage!
>Nuh uh, retard!
>Nuh uh, retard!
Maybe, just maybe, you're both retarded.

>>96269589
It is, I’m just insulting you for the hell of it since this is the internet

>>96269589
He's a local sperg who gets mad whenever somebody disagrees with his specific definitions of words. Just ignore him, he'll seethe about it forever.

>>96269596
Oh so you're mad that you lost. Gotcha, well good luck getting over it anon.

>>96269602
More that you preemptively declared victory and took your ball home with you, so I didn’t bother to contest it. Though considering that this argument was stalled on what defines a martial or caster at all to the point you had to go “anyone with a power is a caster” like we’re talking 4e of D&D, it didn’t make any sense to just keep continuing screaming about it either.

>>96247964
>Imagine a world where people stick to this
It's a world where no one complained full casters are OP because being a full caster is the most inconvenient thing possible. Intentionally. It's intentionally supposed to be cumbersome. Along with dozens of other small mechanics people leave forgotten for 'brevity'. Supplies and how long spells take to learn, write, prepare, get stuff for, and then spending those on basic challenges like procuring food and water? All that stuff cut for brevity is what balances those classes and makes people who can do their thing for FREE have a purpose at all. Hell, even the 3.5 monk. Yes. Even him build for strength/con or so HELP ME. Makes half casters cool too cause you are mostly independent with the right to brush away a few mundane challenges with spells. Rangers can keep you stocked on food and navigate you around safely. That's SUPPOSED to be a big deal. If it's not, you played ignoring the rules.

Magic is supposed to be cumbersome. Particularly in older DND. That's the point. It's not just free phenomenoninal cosmic power. DM's allowing it to be is what created people like OP.

>>96269621
>“anyone with a power is a caster”
Searching this up brings up only this post (and now my reply to it). Why do people lie in such a low IQ manner as this?

>>96255477
An anon who knows what's going on. The most fun example to help with this is the Old West. Certain gunment were known by name by everyone for a reason. The simple act of being able to hit your target in a life-or-death situation makes you incredible. Feared. Someone like Wild Bill was a real man, and his secret was simply his ability to remain perfectly calm and line up his shots even in a hail of gunfire. After one gunfight where he got ambushed, he commented afterward his long coat was full of holes. What did he do? Just calmly take his rifle off his horse even while under fire. Then line up shots to shoot back. He's the one that survived that. Unscathed.

The sheer nerve to be this way is a legendary attribute in itself.

That said, this works against the magical side of the argument as well. The kind of man who can cast a spell to completion, while being swung at by numerous swords and a hail of arrows, would be a legend already. Nevermind actually hitting his target. Anyone who could do it would be feared for that alone and not the magic. It's the kind of man you steer away from.

Or shoot in the back of the head while he's playing poker, I guess.

>>96269534
Monks and (as of 5.5e) barbarians are both inherently magical but are still generally considered martials. Or at least I've never seen someone call monks and barbarians casters. As the name implies, casters are just classes with the spellcasting feature, some other classes have magic but not spellcasting.

Worth noting that 4e defined the martial "power source" as non-magical, but also gave them explicitly superhuman abilities on par with casters, so go figure.

>>96268620
>>96262967
>CRs tell you the party level that four characters should have to be able to defeat a given monster with zero character deaths.
>Nothing about CR implies equality or parity, and nothing is pretending them as equal.

CR is actually defined in the book like this:

>Challenge Rating (CR) summarizes the threat a monster poses to a group of four player characters. Compare a monster's CR to the characters' level. If the CR is higher, the monster is likely a danger. If the CR is lower, the monster likely poses little threat.

So the general assumption is that at the same level, parties will probably find a higher CR monster threatening and a lower CR monster unthreatening, which implies roughly the same level of power. There's no suggestion that CR applies differently to martials and casters.

>But nothing about levels suggests they imply equality in class output.

This is implied by the "Tiers of Play" in 5e, which say that parties at the same level bracket (1-5, 5-10, etc) were dealing with the same kind of challenges. There's no suggestion that a party of casters is at a different tier to a party of martials, for example (eg. that wizards are in Tier 4 when fighters are in Tier 2).

It's also worth noting that the design goals for the fighter in 5e included explicitly that they were equal to wizards at high levels. Of course they failed to hit this goal, but no one would say the system is perfect.

>>96269811
>Monks and (as of 5.5e) barbarians are both inherently magical
Not really. Monks just have Ki and are still spending every turn going "I attack and spend ki to make it do X."
While Barbarians just have Rage and get a damage dealt/damage resisted bonus until X turns have passed.

>4e
4e is the edition that failed because everyone complained about martials feeling like casters and the distinction barely existing.

>>96269811
>So the general assumption is that at the same level, parties will probably find a higher CR monster threatening and a lower CR monster unthreatening, which implies roughly the same level of power.
No, it doesn't.

>There's no suggestion that CR applies differently to martials and casters.
There is absolutely none whatsoever that it applies the same either.

>This is implied by the "Tiers of Play" in 5e
It isn't though. Tiers of play is a guide for GMs on structuring campaigns. It does not at any point say that casters and martials are equivalent in power, nor imply it, nor imply they are meant to be.
Contrary to your argument, it actually specifically points out the scaling of Casters and some of the new tools they will commonly have access to, which goes against all arguments that the game intends for there to be parity between classes.

>There's no suggestion that a party of casters is at a different tier to a party of martials, for example (eg. that wizards are in Tier 4 when fighters are in Tier 2).
Why should there be? Again, you have made assumptions that the Wizard's power must be balanced exactly to the fighter's and that the game intends that every single character in a party be perfectly equal. Yet it nowhere says this, nor implies it.

>It's also worth noting that the design goals for the fighter in 5e included explicitly that they were equal to wizards at high levels.
Design goals set forth by one guy at a point in development are not the same as the final intention of the system or what it actually tells the players.
Mearls wished he could have made the fighter and wizard equal. But it doesn't work, so instead he purposefully stopped trying to equalize them and actively made sure the book does not tell the player high level fighters and high level wizards are equal.

>>96255513
>/tg/ Wizard players don't want to actually emulate historical or mythological theurgists that took hours to weeks of ritual and obscure components to cast any kind of spell. They want to be the GM without any of the responsibility or accountability in being one.
I think a big part of things is Combat Brain taking people over.

There's a lot to be said for being a guy who literally can't defeat a single enemy but is the MVP of your team regardless. You've got 99 problems, and only 1 of them is defeating twoheaded trolls. Which you don't even need magic to do. What if, instead, you wanted magic for the things that make adventuring truly horrific? We're all kind of attached to the hip to our local supermarket. Making the reality of surviving disconnected from things pretty far away from us. Have you ever stepped off a road or a walkway further than a couple yards in your life? Well, even within the city, you can imagine a lot of your problems would be much easier if you could just.. wiggle your fingers. Poof it's gone. Well that but blow it up to adventuring status. I'm sure we could imagine more esoteric problems problems for casters to deal with too.

Really, something like the Storyteller system was always better for this. I'm not entirely sure what about DND makes people like this despite it having the tools for it. Maybe secondary skills are simply made too valuable by the system. It's discouraging.

Or maybe people really do just want to use the equivalent of magical assault rifles and bazookas instead of thinking about what they are doing.

>>96269860
>No, it doesn't.
Unless you are really autistically insistent on the Standard Party Layout, there is in fact an implication from the CR rules not caring about class that classes aren't supposed to differ for CR matters.

>But it doesn't work, so instead he purposefully stopped trying to equalize them
Substantiate that the co-lead changed his mind with a direct quotation rather than inferring from failure.

>and actively made sure the book does not tell the player high level fighters and high level wizards are equal.
The book also doesn't tell the player they're supposed to be unequal, so most of your arguments can be (re-)reversed with no difference to their validity. Given the commonality of character balance as a design goal in TTRPGs, even if asymmetrical, and explicit statements of it as one in 5e, it seems much more reasonable that the designers simply failed than that they intended to have giant power-gaps.

>>96271646
>Unless you are really autistically insistent on the Standard Party Layout, there is in fact an implication from the CR rules not caring about class that classes aren't supposed to differ for CR matters.
No, there isn't.

>Substantiate that the co-lead changed his mind
Already did by proving the rulebook does not reflect his claimed initial attempts. It's up to you to prove it attempts what it clearly makes no attempt to.

>The book also doesn't tell the player they're supposed to be unequal
And?
>so most of your arguments can be (re-)reversed with no difference to their validity.
Evidently not.
>Given the commonality of character balance as a design goal in TTRPGs
There is no such commonality, feel free to prove otherwise.
>and explicit statements of it as one in 5e
There is not a single such statement anywhere in the rulebook. Feel free to quote one otherwise. Oh wait, you can't.
>it seems much more reasonable that the designers simply failed than that they intended to have giant power-gaps.
Nah, it's pretty obvious that the power gaps are intended as they actively point them out and did nothing to fix them. If they wanted balance, it would be as easy as nerfing the hell out of all the spells and giving casters 2-5 of them a day in total.
But they didn't, because that wasn't their goal, and the game makes no attempt at creating parity or equality nor does it imply it anywhere. You assert it does simply because you project your biases onto the book instead of reading it for what it is.

Like as not your biases themselves stem from a place of deeply held insecurity, which is why you can't admit to them.

>>96271696
>No, there isn't.
"Thing used to balance the game doesn't make any statement" does in fact imply "the game doesn't expect difference in this matter".

>Already did by proving the rulebook does not reflect his claimed initial attempts.
What makes you so confident this is from a change in goals rather than merely failing to achieve them?

>There is not a single such statement anywhere in the rulebook.
There is, however, such a statement from the co-lead given by >>96269811.

>Feel free to quote one otherwise.
How about you quote that outright power disparity, as opposed to the premise of utility differences, is intentional instead of continuing to perform the exact same inferences you reject from at least two others?

>Nah, it's pretty obvious that the power gaps are intended as they actively point them out and did nothing to fix them. If they wanted balance, it would be as easy as nerfing the hell out of all the spells and giving casters 2-5 of them a day in total.
They did in fact apply numerous nerfs to spells from the 3.5 prior versions and did in fact drastically reduce slots for high-level spells. That this did not fully rectify the power imbalance does not imply there was no intention to do so.

>You assert it does simply because you project your biases onto the book instead of reading it for what it is.
No, I assert that it does because the fucking co-lead of the project said it did and quite a few of the design choices differentiating it from the previous version using the framework reflect attempting to do so.

>>96271782
>"Thing used to balance the game
It isn't. It's used to estimate whether a party of any composition at a level should be expected to defeat something or not. It directly says it is not 100% reliable. It does not say it means two parties should always perform the same.

>What makes you so confident this is from a change in goals rather than merely failing to achieve them?
Well anon, if you didn't sperg out so easily you'd have seen this is explained elsewhere in the post. It would be easy to fix. It would also make the game suck. Would you try to make your game suck for the sake of balance, or be fun despite not having any?

>There is, however, such a statement
Nope, there's a reason you refuse to quote the rulebook: It never supports you, not even once, but actively disagrees with you.

>How about you quote that outright power disparity
Are you claiming that Wizards and Fighters are perfectly balanced instead now?

>They did in fact apply numerous nerfs to spells from the 3.5 prior versions and did in fact drastically reduce slots for high-level spells
No they didn't, and no they didn't. Multiple Wizard spells were made more powerful and broken. Multiple were also reduced in power. This had nothing to do with balance, evidently, as they left in many broken and overpowered spells, and casters now have more ways to access and spam spells than ever.

>No, I assert that it does because
Because you're a whiny little baby who has no actual argument and just want to believe it's true.
What's hilarious is that nobody cares. The game is imbalanced as fuck and also the most beloved RPG of all time and remains the most played RPG of all time. Your complaints are not only based on nothing but personal failings, but are also implicitly rejected by the community.

>>96271826
>It's used to estimate whether a party of any composition at a level should be expected to defeat something or not.
In other words, to balance the encounters.

>It directly says it is not 100% reliable.
Can you quote where it says this is due to class disparity?

>It does not say it means two parties should always perform the same.
Can you quote where it says they should perform differently according to class composition?

>Well anon, if you didn't sperg out so easily you'd have seen this is explained elsewhere in the post. It would be easy to fix.
You THINKING it would be easy to fix does not make it so, nor for the committees handling design to fail it anyways.

>Are you claiming that Wizards and Fighters are perfectly balanced instead now?
No, if you'd finish reading the sentence you'd grasp that it requests demonstrating the power disparity is intentional.

>No they didn't, and no they didn't.
Compare:
>https://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#wizard
>https://5e.d20srd.org/srd/classes/wizard.htm
While there are more spell slots at low levels, slots of 2nd-5th level cap at 3/day instead of 4, 6th and 7th cap at 2/day instead of 4, and 9th is stuck at 1/day instead of 4. Arcane Recovery pales in comparison to getting (Rary's) Mnemonic Enhancer in a wand, while upcasting instead of CL scaling makes the daily output even more slanted in the 3.5 Wizard's favor.

>This had nothing to do with balance, evidently, as they left in many broken and overpowered spells
Again, you are inferring that there was no effort because it wasn't achieved. As you reject such from the opposed opinion, quote where this is intended.

>and casters now have more ways to access and spam spells than ever.
Do tell where the 20th-level 5e Wizard gets +1 spell of 2nd-5th level, +2 of 6th and 7th, and +3 of 9th just to break even with the 3.5 Wizard. Then where they get a pale shadow of stacking up Eternal Wands of Mnemonic Enhancer, let alone the actually good slot economy

>>96271965
>In other words, to balance
Nope, try reading again.
>Can you quote where it says this is due to
Nowhere did I say it does. Try reading again.
>Can you quote where it says they should perform differently
Can you quote where it says it shouldn't? Why do we assume the positive? You don't need to provide evidence for negatives in logical arguments, anon.
>You THINKING it would be easy to fix does not make it so
Ok, if you think conjecture is no longer allowed then feel free to provide evidence from the rulebook that they attempted to fix it. If you can't, we have no reason to use your assumption.
>No, if you'd finish reading the sentence you'd grasp that it requests demonstrating the power disparity is intentional.
What suggests it isn't? You haven't provided a single scrap of evidence from the rules or any published D&D material to support your assertion that it wouldn't be, even though there is zero reason to assume that guy who controls magic and a guy who can't even swing a stick properly are equals.
>Compare:
Comparison: At 10th level, a Wizard gets 1 5th level spell in 3.5e. In 5e, he gets 2. 5e wizards get more spells.
I accept your concession.
>Again, you are inferring that there was no effort because it wasn't achieved.
Again, you are claiming they had an intention to create balance despite making zero efforts to do so and nothing in the rulebooks implying or stating classes are equals. You have no evidence for your claims.
>Do tell where the 20th-level 5e Wizard gets +1 spell of 2nd-5th level
Never heard of arcane recovery, huh nogames?
Now tell me where the infinite simulacrum spell slots are in 3.5e. Oh right you can't hah.

>>96271965
Wait, you think Sorcerers were nerfed in 5e? They literally get metamagic for free you fucking retard.

>>96271782
>They did in fact apply numerous nerfs to spells from the 3.5 prior versions and did in fact drastically reduce slots for high-level spells.
They also made it so the fighter went from being able to kill a tarrasque in 1 turn to being able to kill almost nothing in 1 turn. 5e has a lower power range in general than 3.5e.

For a direct comparison, a Wizard will always trounce a fighter in 5e. The only possible scenario he can win is winning initiative and gettng a lucky crit at lower levels.

In 3.5e, the fighter at least stood a chance if he could get the drop on the Wizard at higher levels.

>>96272032
>Nope, try reading again.
I don't care about you weaseling away.

>Nowhere did I say it does.
The context is whether it does or not, intermediate positions are excluded.

>Why do we assume the positive?
Because negatives are vastly harder to prove. Now get to quoting your positions.

>Ok, if you think conjecture is no longer allowed then feel free to provide evidence from the rulebook that they attempted to fix it.
The co-lead said they were trying to. Once again, provide a quote that the design goals changed instead of merely being unfulfilled.

>You haven't provided a single scrap of evidence from the rules or any published D&D material to support your assertion that it wouldn't be
Again, the co-lead's stated design goals.

>Comparison: At 10th level, a Wizard gets 1 5th level spell in 3.5e. In 5e, he gets 2. 5e wizards get more spells.
Ignoring the bottom rows, I see. It does not take long.

>despite making zero efforts to do so
I'd say gutting slots for high-level spells is in fact an effort to do so.

>Never heard of arcane recovery, huh nogames?
Of EACH, and then even more of higher levels. Where the 5e Wizard needs an hour for one, the 3.5 Wizard can get six out of a wand. Sure, the cap of 5th vs. 3rd level "matters", but with CL scaling it's six level-appropriate Fireballs instead of one.

>Oh right you can't hah.
Conversely, there are quite the number of rather more drastic than Arcane Recovery slot efficiency gains, including wholly intentional ones.

>>96272066
Firstly, the Sorcerer just happens to share an SRD page with the Wizard, secondly, they get to have utility spells worth a damn in 3.5.

>>96272133
>I don't care
I accept your concession.
>The context is whether it does or not
No it ain't. Try to strawman less.
>Because negatives are vastly harder to prove.
>Now prove them because I sure as shit can't prove my positive claims!
I guess you can't find anything to support you, ggz.
>The co-lead said they were trying to
He said HE was trying to. A co-lead is specifically not the leader, but your appeals to authority aside, nowhere in the books does it indicate they followed through or were able to follow through as nothing in the books indicates, implies, or outright states balance exists. Many passages instead point out the imbalances.
>Again, the co-lead
Point debunked, see above.
>Ignoring the bottom rows
You're the one who wanted to make a comparison, you got it and you lost it.
>I'd say gutting slots for high-level spells
They don't, try again.
>Of EACH, and [Coping]
Arcane Recovery btfos your entire argument kek. Giving the Wizard spells-recovery-on-demand, yeah that sure sounds like a nerf to me lmao. Meanwhile the Fighter lost everything and the sole buff he has is becoming a caster. B-but according to you they definitely wanted to nerf casters guise!!!
>Conversely, [doesn't do so]
Yeah so you can't like I said. Try to argue better, this is getting boring.

>>96272133
>secondly, they get to have utility spells worth a damn in 3.5.
5e utility spells are way better though. Just compare 3.X goodberry to 5e goodberry. The former can only be used if you have food already, the latter ensures rations are just never a thing.
And what kind of idiot builds a utility sorcerer? Have you even played the game?!

>>96269860
>No, it doesn't.

That's what the definition in the book says:

>Compare a monster's CR to the characters' level. If the CR is higher, the monster is likely a danger. If the CR is lower, the monster likely poses little threat.

Note "Compare a monster's CR to the characters' level." That means the character's level is supposed to match CR. It wouldn't make sense if different levels represented wildly different levels of power.

>It does not at any point say that casters and martials are equivalent in power, nor imply it, nor imply they are meant to be.

It does, because they exist at the same tier of play at the same time.

>Contrary to your argument, it actually specifically points out the scaling of Casters and some of the new tools they will commonly have access to, which goes against all arguments that the game intends for there to be parity between classes.

It points out that classes gain different tools, there's no suggestion that these are supposed to be more powerful or less powerful than each other. Or else it wouldn't make sense to have them in the same tier.

>Why should there be? Again, you have made assumptions that the Wizard's power must be balanced exactly to the fighter's and that the game intends that every single character in a party be perfectly equal. Yet it nowhere says this, nor implies it.

Not perfectly equal, but it's implied by CR and tiers of play that classes will be facing similar challenges that pose a similar threat.

>>96247777
Clerics don't have powers, they just pray and their god decides to gift them with some of his divine power.

Wizards get more powerful by researching magic like a philosopher from antiquity would research theorems.

Sorcerers get more powerful by practicing and exploring their inner powers.

>>96273175
Please refer to >>96248580

The whole wizard vs cleric dichotomy is sourced to ignorance of history.

>>96273175
Also see >>96248548

>>96273421
I will not refer to anything, my post is factual and the matter is closed, no further discussion in needed.

>>96273175
Clerics and warlocks are permanently invested with power, they got tired of DMs being dicks and taking away players powers so its spelled out in the DMG now.

>>96273454
And I'm sure that pairs very well with your lesbian tiefling in a wheelchair character but I have zero interest in the gay edition of DnD.

>>96272102
I think Treantmonk recently ran a coliseum combat with 5 gladiators vs several parties of players, the specced out martials crushed the player characters literally 9/10 times.

>>96246830 (OP)
What, in a vacuum? Maybe. Memes aside, a wizard is only as dangerous as they are prepared to deal with any particular threat at that moment.

>>96246830 (OP)
>How are wizards not the most OP fantasy class by a landslide?
Bitch, please.

>>96273484
>Hm, a Paladin
>How do I make them fall this time?
>The page in the DMG I made up told me to force them to fall every time I see one
>Ahah!
>I'll railroad them!
>In the next city, they'll have to roast and eat this baby
>Or else the BBEG burns down the whole town!
>If they somehow get around that, the baby was actually a demon!
>They shouldn't have let it live!
>THEY FALL EITHER WAY!
>I am SO smart!

>>96246840
Your heavy crossbow does 1d4+1 damage. I have at least 6hp. Therefore your weapon is nonlethal and I am always guaranteed to have a chance to cast my spell and automatically win the fight. Wizards win again.

Brains over brawn, fucking jock bitches. Being smart has always been better than big muscles.

>>96247780
>Because characters of the same "level" are meant to be of approximately the same "power."
That is not true. In legitimate editions of D&D, character of the same *XP* were meant to be approximately the same power. However, less powerful classes gained levels more quickly, so your 60,000 XP party might have a 4th level wizard and paladin, a 5th level fighter, and a 7th level thief.

If was the whiny faggots who ruined things by creating the d20 system who spoiled a perfectly serviceable game mechanic in favor of """streamlining""" without actually comprehending the reasons why the game made the decisions it made.

>>96275248
Keep your make believe stories for when you're actually playing the game.

>>96275326
Winge all you like.

Such oaths in prior editions were for the player to keep to. Not for DMs to shit test players over. That door got closed for a reason. The other anon is right. We can't have nice things because people are like this.

>>96269731
Nobody cares about tracking and making sure you're stocked on enough bat poop because there's no point.
>Oh the Wizard is low on some random thing he needs to cast an important spell, we need to stop to make sure he buys it.
>There's no reason not to because we don't want him to not be able to cast spells because the party benefits from him being able to do so.

>>96275613
>There's no reason not to
Time limits. Deadlines. Your game shouldn't be one long Skyrim quest where someone is about to die any moment for months on end till the exact moment you get there.

>>96272615
>That's what the definition in the book says:
No, it doesn't. It gives you a minimum difficulty and explicitly says it is not reliable.
>Note "Compare a monster's CR to the characters' level." That means the character's level is supposed to match CR
No, it means you can use them as a baseline comparison. And it's accurate in most cases.
>It wouldn't make sense if different levels represented wildly different levels of power.
Yes it does.
>It does, because they exist at the same tier of play
Tiers of play also say nothing about being equal.
>It points out that classes gain different tools
And specifically how Caster spells can be used in many powerful ways. Pointing out that they are different and casters will have more capabilities is directly stating that they are not equal.
>Not perfectly equal, but it's implied by CR
Nope, the opposite.
>And tiers of play
Nope, the opposite.
>Will be facing similar challenges
Nope, nothing says this should be the case anywhere and only a shit GM would think different parties should face the exact same problems.

>>96273647
Who? Nobody cares about your e-celebs, show your work or fuck off.

>>96246873
>You can't fireball what you can't see
I'm fairly certain invisibility doesn't stop 3rd degree burns.
>Woman
Testicular Torsion is actually a double spell like Enlarge/Reduce. It's doubled with Titty Twister

>>96275640
>It gives you a minimum difficulty and explicitly says it is not reliable.

Its explicitly not just minimum difficulty.

>Compare a monster's CR to the characters' level. If the CR is higher, the monster is likely a danger. If the CR is lower, the monster likely poses little threat.

This part describes minimum difficulty: "If the CR is lower, the monster likely poses little threat."

But then you have this part: "If the CR is higher, the monster is likely a danger."

That pinpoints a specific level of difficulty, not a minimum.

>Pointing out that they are different and casters will have more capabilities is directly stating that they are not equal.

You seem to like things being spelled out explicitly, so can you quote where it's directly stated that the caster abilities are supposed to be more powerful than the martial ones, and not just different abilities.

>>96269550
>So by your definition, every single mmorpg character in existence is a mage. That is stupid.
>>96269559
>Almost all MMOs do have you play as casters (not mages, lrn2read anon). It's much more interesting and engaging for players, it turns out. And when tabletop games started to copy MMOs people started crying that they were turning every class into casters.
You didn't ask my opinion but, yeah games typically have the player use every features, including magic, in classes because it's much easier than coming up with a game design where a melee guy can approach all mage to slice him up without needing speed boost or to lock the mage into position

>>96269568
>nooo a caster isn’t a caster isn’t a caster
You are retarded. A magic-user is a magic-user. A magician is someone who uses magic. This all extends to clerics no matter how much they cry about it (them crying about it is even in flavor).

>>96278702
Pretty sure you're the retarded one. That's like insisting everyone with a doctorate degree must be a medical expert because they're all called "doctor".

>>96276861
Good thing nobody asked your opinion then

>>96276569
>Its explicitly not just minimum difficulty.
Yes it is.
>This part describes minimum difficulty
Contradicting yourself immediately lol.
>That pinpoints a specific level of difficulty
No it doesn't.
>You seem to like things being spelled out explicitly, so can you quote where it's directly stated that the caster abilities are supposed to be more powerful than the martial ones
The onus is on you to prove your positive claim that the book intends equality, not for me to prove a negative.
Now explain to me how you would come to the conclusion that anything a fighter can do is equal to being able to cast Wish.

>>96280235
still better than yours

>>96283152
Nope

>>96275276
You can't wiggle your fingers if they are broken, cut, or being eaten
*spit* hmm there was a ring on that one.

>>96247916
Thing is, you need countermeasures built in your worldbuilding because simple magic can be very, very deadly.

>Neural Twitch:
A minute magical impulse interrupts electrical signals inside the body.
Effect: Can cause a single or some nerves to misfire, triggering fatal heart arrhythmia or muscle failure.

>Microscopic Embolus
Creates a tiny magical “bubble” or blockage inside a blood vessel, causing a stroke or embolism.
Effect: Can cut off blood flow to critical organs.
Sudden heart attack or paralysis causing death.

Just a pinpoint magical blockage.