| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 02 Jan 2016 : 03:28:19
I've noticed that there are mention of hundreds of 18+ level mages in the Realms, but very few mentions of high-level characters of other classes. Sure there are some, particularly clerics, but what about fighters, rogues, etc...?
Is there a reason why there's only a handful of 20+ level fighters? By the old XP tables, becoming a high level wizard required a lot more XP.
Could it be that mages tend to extend their lives and therefore they don't die-off like other classes might? Is mastering magic easier in the Realms than it might be in other worlds?
And how can there be so many liches? Larloch apparently has at least 60, Elminster has killed at least 100 according to one book. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| bloodtide_the_red |
Posted - 14 Jan 2016 : 06:23:11
More so then any published world, the Realms does have a high number of high level characters, |
| Owesstaer |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 19:56:59
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
... and Demogorgon fetches his newspaper.
Why would an epic mage have need for a sheet of paper that tells of events in the past!
 |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 08:15:17
The epic fighter can deal a ton of damage. That's about it, and even then it depends on the enemy. Flying creatures make trip fighters cry.
The epic wizard can shut down battlefields.
Or, the epic fighter can cut through a balor army; the epic wizard has Malcanthet, Lynkhab and Shami-Amourae doing a striptease while Orcus refilles his glass and Demogorgon fetches his newspaper. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 00:49:39
From the perspective of a player, sure, that is more fair. But then, in D&D-worlds, spellcasters can heal anything (even resurrect people, or themselves, with the right spell: see Manshoon), create whole planes from nothing, see glimpses of the future, protect themselves incredibly well from threats, and so on. They can shape the world to a degree that no weapon-user could, because they can bend the laws of nature almost as they please.
In a fight, a warrior and a mage would be able to contribute equally, and I could even picture a legendary warrior be more epic and awesome than an equivalent caster. However, fights are only a lesser part of the whole life, and if we consider the utility of the different skillsets for the general purposes of life (and therefore, as you put it, how they can inflict themselves on reality), the reason why casters have more influence becomes clear. |
| Roseweave |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 00:36:38
Part of the problem too is that it relies too much on powered tiers - in Marvel comics people who are just really trained with weapons can potentially make a difference. I like that better. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 00:15:15
A good number of them may as well be, though, since they have superpowers or some equivalent abilities, which can be basically considered magic.
The thing is, even if someone is the best swordsman or archer ever seen, that won't help him/her shape the world. Even a lousy fighter, who is also a formidable tactician or leader, has more chances than them of doing something big. |
| Roseweave |
Posted - 12 Jan 2016 : 00:01:44
This is why I kinda prefer 4E's philosophy - anyone can be epic.
Sure Magic will tend to be the most obvious path to great power, but a lot of people are just going to become More Real, inflicting themselves on reality in a more direct fashion.
Think about all the Legendary heroes, or comic book & anime characters that are basically massive badasses without being spellcasters. |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 06 Jan 2016 : 05:52:20
Uh...actually, I was responding to Ayrik. I was just too lazy to quote him/her. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 06 Jan 2016 : 04:38:01
Welp. I got dragged back in.
Lord of Bones, what you say is true for a 3.5 game with players who like to optimize. But, it doesn't apply nearly as much to a 1e/2e game or a 5e game, or the system I am using (Castles and Crusades). There's no WBL, and far less opportunity to optimize. Also, my players don't like to optimize, so it's even less of a worry for me. This is one reason why I mentioned that game balance is not a factor for me. I don't think you'd ever catch me DMing 3.5e in this day and age.
Similarly, I am not making Wish a 10th level spell because of game balance reasons. I'm doing it because it is the epitome of high-level magic, and I feel like only a few people in all the Realms should have access to such magic -- for "fluff" reasons. In C&C at least, Wish can replicate any spell the caster has used that is 9th level or less, and any spell he/she has seen of 6th level or less. It truly is the most powerful spell, even though it has major drawbacks. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 06 Jan 2016 : 03:22:57
As far as your concern with the wish spell and the thought to make it a "10th level" spell.
There is simply no need. Why? Because the wish spell is not the "cast this spell and get anything you want" that some people treat it as. It is the most difficult and dangerous spell to cast and it has specific limitations. Properly wording a wish spell is not easy, and it is the DMs job to make sure that it stays that way.
Instead think of the wish spell like this. It is basically a genie in a bottle just waiting to screw with the next wizard foolish enough to tempt fate and hazard a wish. If you can interpret the words in any way to mean something other than what is desired, good. Do it. Was the caster unspecific about anything at all? Did he misplace a modifier?
In short, DMs should abuse their power here. {insert Ed's pseudo-diabolical laugh here} |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 06 Jan 2016 : 02:44:06
Nerfing spellcasters is a double-edged sword in many ways. The DMG assumes that you're decked out in magic bling enough to buy a small nation by pre-epic, and due to the scaling of monster stats you actually do need the magical bling you get per WBL rules to be successful. Arbitrarily nerfing a caster's rate of experience nerfs the entire party, and does nothing to underscore the fact that the common PHB spells are the ones that actually break the game. If your player can't contribute in any way because you've nerfed his rate of experience and made him lag behind the rest of the party, what impetus does he have to not simply scrap his character and then building an optimized fighter or whatever and start doing 5000 damage per round?
I see mostly old-school DMs assuming wizards and sorcerers prepare things like fireball and lightning bolt, but in practice most caster characters seldom go for evocation spells. It's sort of like how people assume that arcane necromancy is all about animating undead; any player worth his salt will tell you that animate dead is a downtime spell and that necromancy is mainly about debuffing and SoD. Hell, just look at wish; it just seems powerful until you realize that a wizard can gate in solars. Hell, it's the most common utility spells that tend to be used, like grease, sleep, color spray and so on. That's not even getting into things like the druid; enjoy having the druid wildshape into a hydra with his pet fighter that's better than the fighter.
If you really want to make spellcasting balanced, just ban CoDzilla, druids, psions, archivists, erudites and wizards and let the players choose from the specialized spellcasting classes like dread necromancer, warmages, beguilers and so on, and/or refluff them, like dread necromancers scaling off Int, and warmages getting some duskblade class features.
Or just run an E6 game. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 18:56:51
The most obvious way to limit high-level magic in the game is to impose an experience penalty on spellcasters. Although the overwhelming majority of players will complain about such heavy-handed and arbitrary manipulations, they will argue relentlessly that D&D is already "balanced". An argument for another scroll.
A more subtle way to limit high-level magic (yet still allow some saturation of low-level magics) is to make spells and spellbooks incredibly rare finds. The 2E FRA offered some tables which treated spells something like treasure and grouped them into Common, Uncommon, and Rare categories - all the real "game-breaking" stuff (like wish) was quite difficult to obtain - just because it's listed in the PHB doesn't automatically mean it's easily available to any character. Some of my best campaigns used modified versions of these tables which severely limited access to any truly powerful spells, along with some house rules which made deciphering another wizard's spellbooks a very lengthy and expensive undertaking ... and the PC spellcasters ended up researching tons and tons of unique "signature" spells. Every magical battle was special because every magical adversary was equally unique. Every magical monster was a serious threat. Every magical item was greatly treasured. And every high-level fighter or thief armed with magical items was greatly feared. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 04:00:24
quote:
Originally posted by valarmorgulis
Game balance isn't something I'm speaking to at all. I'm really only talking about the flavor of a campaign. Anyhow, seems like we are just talking past each other at this point and aren't going to agree on this.
Thanks for contributing your viewpoints though!
I like your idea of lower level characters. It allows, at some point, for your party (if it gets high level) to be THE people to go to for help!
It makes it easy for you to make adventures for them with the explanation that there is nobody else to do it. 
From a time when a 6th level Fighter was one of the MAJOR commanders of the Zhentilar, to a time when Gods are walking in the streets...I'll take ye "Ol' Grey Box" levels. The "mighty" then were not 20th plus level...and it was nice for mid-level characters to feel like they were really important and not just the crumbs at the bottom of the adventurer social system. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 03:00:26
Game balance isn't something I'm speaking to at all. I'm really only talking about the flavor of a campaign. Anyhow, seems like we are just talking past each other at this point and aren't going to agree on this.
Thanks for contributing your viewpoints though! |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 05 Jan 2016 : 01:26:18
That's pretty low fantasy.
I mean, sure, that screws over casters who don't get their entire spell list with a new spell level, but that's not stopping the cleric, or druid, or dread necromancer; all of which get access to every spell on their spell list. That's not going into the fact that the most broken spell options are all bog-standard PHB spells.
Let's be fair, wish isn't exactly needed to break the game. Yes, it's powerful, but you can get more consistent results with chain-gating solars. See, the issue is less that there are many high level mages and more that PC wizards - and NPC wizards played competently - effortlessly break the game long before wish comes into the picture. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 21:31:10
That's not just magic in the Realms, that's magic in D&D. I agree with what a lot of people are saying as to why mages might on the whole be higher level. But, I want high-level magic to be rare and special, and so I'll be making some changes in my home campaign. To me, high magic does not mean high-level magic. It just means that there's a lot of magic around. A world populated entirely by 1st-level mages would be high magic in my opinion. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 18:27:43
Fighters fight things for a living. Combat is dangerous, fights to the death involve a death.
Rogues survive by opportunism and theft and grift and exploitation. They ignore laws, they are criminals or undesirables or annoyances, they anger people, they have slippery ethics and hide behind deceptions, fat and lazy rogues don't tend to get far, quick and lean rogues are forced to constantly live on the edge.
Accumulating enough XP to reach highest levels requires constant risk. As mentioned above, any idiot with a sword can put an end to your adventuring career.
Wizards can sit around in labs and libraries, researching and dabbling away. Killing dragons might be worth more XP, but hardly necessary unless dragon parts are needed for spell components. Besides, some burly fighter can always be convinced to tank the dragon for you. Most priests have it even easier, they have the protection of a deity, an organized clergy, and the resources of all their faithful to draw upon.
As Wooly says, mages are sexier so they get all the attention. But I think that's only the surface of a deeper problem:
Magic in the Realms is not dangerous, it is not mysterious, it carries no real risk. Sure, there's plenty of stories about how magic can be abused or twisted or a corrupting influence. But in the game rules magic is entirely tame and predictable and reproducible. Any competent spellcaster can expect consistent results from spellcasting. Things would be different if there were a real price to paid for magic. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 15:40:24
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
I've noticed a lack of epic level (20+ by 2ED terms) rogues in the Realms. You'd think among the long-lived races like elves there'd be a few. The rogues must live dangerous lives because I don't think I can name 3 rogues listed at 20+ in the 2nd edition realms books. The Cult of the Dragon leaders were all 20+ fighter, cleric, mage (dead now) except the rogue who was in his mid-teens I believe, for 1 example. The leader of the rogue guild in Amn was very high level, but drawing a blank on others...
That's because the high level ones are good enough to keep a low profile. |
| Seravin |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 15:34:47
I've noticed a lack of epic level (20+ by 2ED terms) rogues in the Realms. You'd think among the long-lived races like elves there'd be a few. The rogues must live dangerous lives because I don't think I can name 3 rogues listed at 20+ in the 2nd edition realms books. The Cult of the Dragon leaders were all 20+ fighter, cleric, mage (dead now) except the rogue who was in his mid-teens I believe, for 1 example. The leader of the rogue guild in Amn was very high level, but drawing a blank on others... |
| Barastir |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 09:43:53
Consider this:
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Just because these guys have some high-level spells doesn't mean they are always packing nothing but combat spells, it doesn't mean that they personally see to every issue that they decide to act in, and it doesn't mean they're going to do anything other than follow their own interests, which may not involve anyone else at all.
And this:
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
High level mages generally have other piles of work than dealing with adventurers. Advising kings, making private demiplanes, crafting magical items to make cash, hunting down rare scrolls and rumors of artifacts and so on.
Wizards not necessarily are putting their lives at risk to achieve higher levels, unlike warriors, rogues and most priests - who put themselves at risk to promote or defend their power's ideals. So, a wizard can spend years, decades, and even centuries (if they use the above mentioned longevity extenders, as cited by Owesstaer) in research, while fighters have to be constantly fighting to improve their fight ability, and eventually will fall or be crippled (as mentioned by Lilianviaten). So, the answer would be the very nature of the classes and abilities sought, IMHO.
Besides, I'm just not sure about every high level mage having "wish" in his or her repertoire, my solution maybe would be the rarity of some spells. |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 05:14:30
quote:
Originally posted by valarmorgulis
Partially just because I like the highest level spells to be rare. I don't mind that there's an abundance of magic in the Realms, that's part of it's charm. But I'd prefer to have it be an abundance of low-level magic. Also, my players aren't really going to buy the excuse that every high-level magic in every town is off traveling the Planes.
Also, that way NPCs don't have as much access to the really powerful stuff.
Overall, these high-level mages don't add anything to the game (especially if they are all off traveling the Planes), so why include them other than because some writer added them in at one point? I'm not referring to the likes of Khelben, Szass Tam, and the other major players. More so the random 19th level mages that seem to be all over the place according to Volo's Guides.
High level mages generally have other piles of work than dealing with adventurers. Advising kings, making private demiplanes, crafting magical items to make cash, hunting down rare scrolls and rumors of artifacts and so on.
The issue is less that there are high level mages and more that the designers didn't really realize how hilariously overpowered spellcasting is. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Jan 2016 : 04:58:42
quote:
Originally posted by valarmorgulis
Partially just because I like the highest level spells to be rare. I don't mind that there's an abundance of magic in the Realms, that's part of it's charm. But I'd prefer to have it be an abundance of low-level magic. Also, my players aren't really going to buy the excuse that every high-level magic in every town is off traveling the Planes.
Also, that way NPCs don't have as much access to the really powerful stuff.
Overall, these high-level mages don't add anything to the game (especially if they are all off traveling the Planes), so why include them other than because some writer added them in at one point? I'm not referring to the likes of Khelben, Szass Tam, and the other major players. More so the random 19th level mages that seem to be all over the place according to Volo's Guides.
If they're in the Volo's Guides, that "some writer" was Ed himself.
I personally like have high-level mages scattered around. It's a high magic setting -- of course there are going to be high-level mages around. And even if there is one in every city, that's what, less than a hundred total out of a continent that is home to millions? I'm kinda surprised there aren't more, actually.
But all that aside, if you're not going to be using these NPCs, then why waste the time and effort of changing them?
Another thing to keep in mind: characters are what makes a setting come alive. Just because these guys have some high-level spells doesn't mean they are always packing nothing but combat spells, it doesn't mean that they personally see to every issue that they decide to act in, and it doesn't mean they're going to do anything other than follow their own interests, which may not involve anyone else at all.
A lot of the more powerful NPCs Ed creates are following their own particular agendas, and they usually don't have much to do with PCs other than to aim them in particular directions. If you have to do anything at all with these guys, that's the right approach -- otherwise, they're more than likely simply not in the picture for the PCs to have to worry about. Let them stay in the background and only shine a light on them if you need to. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 23:35:57
Partially just because I like the highest level spells to be rare. I don't mind that there's an abundance of magic in the Realms, that's part of it's charm. But I'd prefer to have it be an abundance of low-level magic. Also, my players aren't really going to buy the excuse that every high-level magic in every town is off traveling the Planes.
Also, that way NPCs don't have as much access to the really powerful stuff.
Overall, these high-level mages don't add anything to the game (especially if they are all off traveling the Planes), so why include them other than because some writer added them in at one point? I'm not referring to the likes of Khelben, Szass Tam, and the other major players. More so the random 19th level mages that seem to be all over the place according to Volo's Guides. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 22:19:23
quote:
Originally posted by valarmorgulis
Great points, all. In my home campaign, I think I will lower the levels of most of these mages to around 10-15. And I'll probably make Wish a 10th level spell.
To what end? It's not really a factor unless your PCs are interacting with them, and even then, unless the PCs actively need high-level magic cast, it's still not a factor.
And that's assuming that these high-level folks are around and willing to talk to the PCs, anyway. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 20:30:41
Great points, all. In my home campaign, I think I will lower the levels of most of these mages to around 10-15. And I'll probably make Wish a 10th level spell. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 15:07:45
quote:
Originally posted by valarmorgulis
Even 1-2 out of 10,000 seems like a lot when you consider the amount of power a mage of that level wields, and the obscene amount of XP required to actually get to that level. But perhaps a bunch of mages of that level sort of keep each other in check.
I wonder if Ed intended for there to be so many high level mages or if it just happened as others starting writing guidebooks.
Bear in mind that once they get to the upper levels, a lot of these mages are doing their "day to day" hunting on other planes. So, they may not be seen in the realms as much destroying because they're being forced to take the fight elsewhere.
That is one thing that is shown, but not portrayed as much as it should be possibly. This is of course why Elminster and the Chosen would rather have local people on site for keeping tabs on what's happening back home while they are out and about fighting extraplanar threats. |
| Lilianviaten |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 14:35:54
quote:
Originally posted by Owesstaer
I think another reason for more high level mages than other classes is pure and simple: old age
Not only do mages have the possibility to exceed natural live-expectancy, but they actually even get better (Int increase during age categories) whereas warriors and rogues weaken even upon reaching middle age already.
This is EXACTLY it. Mages have a lot of ways to extend their lifespan, even without resorting to lichdom. Unless you're an elf like Drizzt or Starbrow, you don't have centuries to continuously improve your craft before age erases all your gains. On top of that, injuries can maim fighters and make it very difficult for them to retain their former dexterity, quickness, strength, etc. Plus, even the most powerful fighters can't wrap a ton of contingencies around themlseves so that even if they are near death, they get carried away to safety and healed. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 11:04:34
Over the years, I have noticed level inflation taking place. If you look at the Old Grey Box, for instance, Manshoon was a 16th-level mage. By the time of the FRA hardback, he was 19th level (I know about the lore-based explanations, i.e. that the 16-th level Manshoon was from an earlier Stasis Clone). The OGB did not contain that many 20+ level characters. Elminster was one. Khleben was one (interestingly, he was recommended to be at least 10 levels above the party's level). Another example are the Zulkirs in Dreams of the Red Wizards - Lauzoril was not sufficiently high in level to cast 9th level spells, for unstance (a "flaw" remedied by the time of The Unapproachable East).
Owesstaer has a point, I think: Wizards have the most to gain from living longer (the marginal increase from gaining a level as a mage are far better that those for fighters or rogues). It's also a safer way to gain XP. The only threat to a high-level wizard is another high-level wizard (or a similarly endowed big monster). A 50th level fighter can be brought down by a sufficient high number of ducks wielding knuckle-dusters :-) .
FR is also a magic-heavy setting, where wizards wield poltical power in a lot of places. I always got the impression that in Ed's Concept of the Realms, wizards (especially the high-level ones) care less about worldly power than those in the published realms do (see Larloch, for instance - there's enough threads on the web that focus on the question why Larloch just does not rule the Realms - he's evil, so he must want to!). A lot of the design seems to assume that evil powers want swag. A lot of evil powers are led by wizards. But evil cannot win easily. Therefore, it must be counterbalanced. Therefore there must be sufficient wizards fighting the evil wizards. I think that might be a bit simplistic.
Again, have a look at the Red Wizards. In Dreams, I got the impression that the Zulkirs were, on the whole, not necessarily the most powerful wizards in Thay, just the ones who could be bothered, or who just did not know any better than that Zulkirhoid was the pinnacle of the Thayan dungheap. The feeling I got was that most of the Red Wizards just wanted to pursue their own goals (involving a lot of "Art for Art's sake"), a d let the tedious business of dealing with the world to ambitious louts who did not know any better. By the Time of the Unapproachable East, I think that there was only a single Zulkir who was not 20+ level. |
| valarmorgulis |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 09:58:27
Even 1-2 out of 10,000 seems like a lot when you consider the amount of power a mage of that level wields, and the obscene amount of XP required to actually get to that level. But perhaps a bunch of mages of that level sort of keep each other in check.
I wonder if Ed intended for there to be so many high level mages or if it just happened as others starting writing guidebooks. |
| Owesstaer |
Posted - 03 Jan 2016 : 08:26:31
I think another reason for more high level mages than other classes is pure and simple: old age
Not only do mages have the possibility to exceed natural live-expectancy, but they actually even get better (Int increase during age categories) whereas warriors and rogues weaken even upon reaching middle age already.
|
|
|
