Pure magic users' superiority in RPG's

[AzraelCC]

Well, several posts have already mentioned that magic should have its own unique challenges in its implementation (casting) to balance power, rather than going the 4th ed. route of just renaming powers and making everyone in a party generic.

One magic system that I'd like to see is one where spells are tied to the geography of the battlefield. A lot of beliefs in magic, particularly pagan ones, subscribe to this idea. Where you are casting is often more important than components or words. Magic draws power from the universe, hence it makes sense that some places within that universe emanate more power than others. Rather than have components or knowledge of spells be the primary ingredients of spells, why not the area and items in the area where you are casting them?

For example, a wizard and his party ends up fighting in a forest. The spells available to the wizard should be nature related--manipulating trees, controlling animals, shaping the earth. The same spells won't be available to the wizard should he find himself, say in a desert or even within a city. This is not a system that just adds bonuses to spells in a certain area, but rather, the spells available to a wizard is actually determined by his surroundings.

Spirits might even be present in an area to grant very powerful spells should the wizard recognize their presence--however, they require difficult or debilitating bargains with the spellcaster in order to grant boons. They might require the sacrifice of a spellcaster's powerful item or even a fellow party member's life in exchange for truly powerful spells.

I think this could even promote better gameplay, as a wizard should always adapt to his surroundings, instead of spamming the same spells everytime.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Final Fantasy has something like that.
They are called Geomancers, and they are pretty powerful. They don't require any MP to cast spells, but they are random and related to your surroundings. If they are close to water, they can cast tidal waves and whirlpools, if they are in a desert they can cast blinding sandstorms, if they are in the woods they cast wood / nature related magic, in caves they can cast rock / earth based spells etc. it goes on. There are three or so different spells for every kind of enviroment.
It is an interesting concept to say the least.

 

[thesheeep]

Um, the number of spells you can have ready to use reflects the constant mental effort to keep track of complex thoughts simultaneously. That's why it's based on intelligence.

Memorizing a spell is like memorizing a phone number, but a 20-digit long one (that's for a lvl 1 spell). Most people would only be able to memorize one at most, maybe two with effort. Once you'd lost one, you'd need to go back and stare at the number for a while to get it back into memory.

I think you underestimate how easy it is to memorize anything. If you can train long enough. And Wizards did train long enough. A whole life, usually.
Also, if spells were that hard to memorize, it wouldn't take such a short time to cast them. Or such a short time to read a scroll.

And if the ability to cast spells was a "constant mental effort", it would be almost impossible to talk to a wizard. Or let the wizard run around in dungeons, solving riddles and puzzles. And if was a constant effort, it must be a pretty easy one so that wizards can do all of that (and fighting!) while being focused.

And how's shit working with sorcerers? They shouldn't need to memorize. Intelligence isn't even involved in all of their magecraft. Do they need to study performances? Talk about LARPing...

I've had this discussion dozens of times. And I know every argument. And I can prove every argument wrong. That system does not make sense.

If you were distracted momentarily, your spell might not work.

Which is what concentration is for. And it works quite well.

I think that the peculiarities of D&D's magic system don't stem so much from an attempt to achieve balance between casters and warriors (although that's certainly part of it) as from an attempt to accurately mimic fantasy literature, specifically Jack Vance's Tales of the Dying Earth.

Just like D&D had Thieves' Guilds in an attempt to emulate Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar tales, D&D has memorization of spells in an attempt to emulate Vance.

Which is why the removal of Vancian casting from 4th Edition is so offensive--not only does it throw out a mechanic that has been core to the system for thirty years, it also takes the system further away from its roots in fantasy literature.

Interesting as that may be... what do you want to tell me?
That the roots of a fantasy ruleset are more important than if they make sense (logically and gameplay-wise)?
I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I couldn't care less what the origins of a system are.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like the 4E ruleset that much. It's unfortunately a huge step down in flexibility and being rewarding and interesting. But the changes to the casting systems are actually an improvement.

 

[Gondolin]

Yes. Before blaming MMORPGs one should blame Diablo I, where wizards had to be just as able to survive as fighters right from Level 1.

Huh? Diablo I sorcerer fits OP's description perfectly. He's got very little hp, his initial spells don't deal more damage than weapons but also cost mana. If you have bad luck you can find yourself on a level with tough monsters resistance to your offensive spells - on my first playthrough (10 years and I still remember ) I had goatmen resistant to fire on fifth level. They were able to kill me in 3-4 blows and the only way I could fight them was using staff of lightning bolts.

Yeah, but you pulled through without hiding behind a wall of tanks, right? You just switched to a different attack, used tactics and pushed on alone, just like the tank or the rogue.

 

[Mrowak]

That the roots of a fantasy ruleset are more important than if they make sense (logically and gameplay-wise)?
I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I couldn't care less what the origins of a system are.

There. There is the place you make an error in your reasoning. In two ways.

First, Vencian system makes much better sense from the gamplay perspective than mana one, at least in PnP or computer games that are not hack & slash click-fests,

Why? Because it stresses the need for strategic preparation and resource management - something that contemporary MMORPGs and new cRPGs lack. The peak of resource management we have now is buying shitloads of mana potions and downing them like there was no tomorrow, or like you don't need that liver of yours for anything at all. In Vancian system you'd have to have necessary components with you, spellscrolls and wands for magic that you rarely use but which can save your sorry arse at any given moment (glitterdust, levitation, web, fly. dimension door etc), potions just in case, magic items that could offset you character's lack of offensive spellpower (e.g. bottles of holy water for undead, alchemical fire for AoE damage) etc. With mana system things like that seem redundant most of the time when you can invoke every possible spell at you whim.

Cooldowns are not real solution here since again you can 'buff up' (hate that term) at any given time, and then in combat use your best spells in set pattern waiting for the most powerful ones to recover. For obvious reasons you can't have anything like that in classic D&D.

Thus, it can be said that if anything, Vencian system adds to gameplay by introducing variety and shoving the responsibility of choosing appropriate spells and items on the player. Whether Vencian system has been utilised well enough in gaming history is a different question altogether.

Second, the Vencian system does make logical sense. It is simply that I think you should cease to see spells as just utilities (which they doubtlessly are! After all you cast a spell, you get a concrete effect which you can then utilise) for a moment. It is easy to justify so called 'spell slots' (which is a metagaming term) by simply approaching magic from the perspective of lore (after all, that's what it is for - to support game-design). You can say that all spells are 'semi-living' entities. The moment you memorise a spell you invite this 'entity' to your mind. You do so while sleeping/meditating. However, for the process to be successful you must have all necessary rituals prepared in your brain - that would be a psychic eqivalent of drawing a summoning circle. As arcane energies enter your (sub-)consciousness to fit themselves into a fixed spell-pattern you know well (having learned it years ago) they render that pattern a semi-living being who is just waiting for a moment of laxity to fry your brain. Only the most talented can master techniques which can prevent the spells from doing so without needing to concentrate. Hence, even first level wizard is a truly experienced magic practicioner as he can cast up to 3 1st level spells (sleep, charm and shield are indeed very powerful) per day without sacrificing his sanity or blowing his head off.

Seems quite logical to me. Yes you can say it's LARPing but again - this is what lore is for - to justify the systems that is immensely fun, rich and has infinite potential.

 

[King Crispy]

Solid reasoning there, in my view.

 

[Shannow]

Yes. Before blaming MMORPGs one should blame Diablo I, where wizards had to be just as able to survive as fighters right from Level 1.

Huh? Diablo I sorcerer fits OP's description perfectly. He's got very little hp, his initial spells don't deal more damage than weapons but also cost mana. If you have bad luck you can find yourself on a level with tough monsters resistance to your offensive spells - on my first playthrough (10 years and I still remember ) I had goatmen resistant to fire on fifth level. They were able to kill me in 3-4 blows and the only way I could fight them was using staff of lightning bolts.

Yeah, but you pulled through without hiding behind a wall of tanks, right? You just switched to a different attack, used tactics and pushed on alone, just like the tank or the rogue.

Exactly, the mage plays completely differently, uses different skills, different tactics, has different strengths and weaknesses but is just like the warrior or rogue...

 

[SacredPath]

Agreed, no pure magic user should be able to travel alone at level 1.

 

[Pelvis Knot]

I have an idea of a magic system: mages should be able to cast spells which are "concentrated" actions they could do anyway. For example jumping 10 meters high, of lifting something heavy.
The catch is they have to pay the same physical penalty as if they jumped for example ten times 1 meter. Basically mages stamina is his mana(like being dealt subdual damage in d&d 3rd ed). If he casts too many spells he falls unconcious.
If they want to cast an aggressive spell the damage is no longer subdual but normal. Perhaps better mages could sacrifice some other living creature to get their life force. Healing potions are forbidden of course.

 

[hoverdog]

I have an idea of a magic system: mages should be able to cast spells which are "concentrated" actions they could do anyway. For example jumping 10 meters high, of lifting something heavy.
The catch is they have to pay the same physical penalty as if they jumped for example ten times 1 meter. Basically mages stamina is his mana(like being dealt subdual damage in d&d 3rd ed). If he casts too many spells he falls unconcious.

arcanum

If they want to cast an aggressive spell the damage is no longer subdual but normal. Perhaps better mages could sacrifice some other living creature to get their life force. Healing potions are forbidden of course.

betreyal at krondor

 

[Pelvis Knot]

@hoverdog

arcanum: partially yes, but harm for example didn't hurt you directly - I believe the emphasis in this system would be on more creative ways to achieve the desired effect

didn't play betrayal at krondor, but what you're saying it's been done. I wonder why it isn't used more

 

[J1M]

Yes. Before blaming MMORPGs one should blame Diablo I, where wizards had to be just as able to survive as fighters right from Level 1.

Huh? Diablo I sorcerer fits OP's description perfectly. He's got very little hp, his initial spells don't deal more damage than weapons but also cost mana. If you have bad luck you can find yourself on a level with tough monsters resistance to your offensive spells - on my first playthrough (10 years and I still remember ) I had goatmen resistant to fire on fifth level. They were able to kill me in 3-4 blows and the only way I could fight them was using staff of lightning bolts. Not only replenishing charges costed me all the money I was gaining but also I had to come close to hit enemies because lightning bolts fly randomly and they usually don't hit from distance and lightning spells' damage gets lower with distance.

Only later sorcerer becomes the most powerful class, in PvP almost impossible to kill by rogues and significantly more dangerous than any warrior. Although hell/hell levels can still be problematic when soloing because of monsters who can't be killed with magic.

Those magic immune enemies can be killed with holy bolt.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Yeah holy bolt was really overpowered.

The problem with vancian magic from a gameplay perspective is that not all spells are of equal value within a level. For example, something like Explosive Runes is never going to be memorized in a situation where the slot matters. It has a permanent duration and narrow field of use. You'll only memorize that when you don't need to cast Fireball. They're both acquired at level 5 because of their usefulness once cast, but explosive runes shouldn't require a 3rd level slot to memorize. If it used a 2nd or even 1st level slot it wouldn't be overpowered.

Because of this, lots of spells that would be fun and interesting to see used in an improvised way never get memorized at all. In their ideal situations, Stone Shape and Greater Invisibility might be equally valuable, but fucking nobody is going to memorize stoneshape over greater invis when going into the unknown. So nobody ever uses it in stressful (exciting) situations.

Aside from that, it smacks of absurdity that a mage capable of summoning an 8000 lb celestial bird to shatter a castle can't light a candle on a whim if he didn't memorize the proper spell that morning. If spell slots were to be used, they should scale in such a way that by level 11 you'd have 15+ level 1 slots, which would be too much of a pain in the ass to bother with. You should also be able to convert say, a level 3 slot for multiple level 1 slots, or maybe even level 2 slots. No matter how powerful a wizard is, he can't cast magic missile more than 4 times at it's default level of power? Wtf? The opposite is true as well. Forgoing all your lesser magics should let you cast the stronger stuff a bit more.

 

[Gondolin]

Exactly, the mage plays completely differently, uses different skills, different tactics, has different strengths and weaknesses but is just like the warrior or rogue...

You're missing the point. The level 1 AD&D wizard starts the game with 1 spell (2 for specialists), which means that he can cast once and is out of combat (or whatever). The level 1 sorcerer from Diablo enters the dungeon and starts casting Firebolt (or whatever) just like the fighter swings his sword. Sure, he needs to replenish his mana now and again, but the fighter needs to go to town or drink a potion now and again too. The sorcerer's tactics are the same as the rogue's: keep your distance, avoid being surrounded, shoot anything that moves. No need to hide, no need to rely on others until you get your "Awesome Powers TM".

 

[Luigi]

Aside from that, it smacks of absurdity that a mage capable of summoning an 8000 lb celestial bird to shatter a castle can't light a candle on a whim if he didn't memorize the proper spell that morning. If spell slots were to be used, they should scale in such a way that by level 11 you'd have 15+ level 1 slots, which would be too much of a pain in the ass to bother with. You should also be able to convert say, a level 3 slot for multiple level 1 slots, or maybe even level 2 slots. No matter how powerful a wizard is, he can't cast magic missile more than 4 times at it's default level of power? Wtf? The opposite is true as well. Forgoing all your lesser magics should let you cast the stronger stuff a bit more.

Great idea. You know, you could even introduce a fleeting scale and be able to transform basically any slot in other slots of different level and for the 4 magic missles problem, you could introduce a scale too, where you can transform a high level spell into a few low level ones! Genius.

 

[Mrowak]

Yeah holy bolt was really overpowered.

The problem with vancian magic from a gameplay perspective is that not all spells are of equal value within a level. For example, something like Explosive Runes is never going to be memorized in a situation where the slot matters. It has a permanent duration and narrow field of use. You'll only memorize that when you don't need to cast Fireball. They're both acquired at level 5 because of their usefulness once cast, but explosive runes shouldn't require a 3rd level slot to memorize. If it used a 2nd or even 1st level slot it wouldn't be overpowered.

Because of this, lots of spells that would be fun and interesting to see used in an improvised way never get memorized at all. In their ideal situations, Stone Shape and Greater Invisibility might be equally valuable, but fucking nobody is going to memorize stoneshape over greater invis when going into the unknown. So nobody ever uses it in stressful (exciting) situations.

Aside from that, it smacks of absurdity that a mage capable of summoning an 8000 lb celestial bird to shatter a castle can't light a candle on a whim if he didn't memorize the proper spell that morning. If spell slots were to be used, they should scale in such a way that by level 11 you'd have 15+ level 1 slots, which would be too much of a pain in the ass to bother with. You should also be able to convert say, a level 3 slot for multiple level 1 slots, or maybe even level 2 slots. No matter how powerful a wizard is, he can't cast magic missile more than 4 times at it's default level of power? Wtf? The opposite is true as well. Forgoing all your lesser magics should let you cast the stronger stuff a bit more.

I see your point and yes, I think you are right about converting spell slots of higher level to multiple lower level. However, I can see that being I pain in the arse in PnP games, especially for GM to keep track off. CRPGs on the other hand...

Regarding those 15+ level 1 spell slots - that would be game breaking. We already almost universally agree that magic-users in D&D are extremely overpowered. So many spells at lvl 11 would make them unstoppable. I must say that I see that working in high fantasy settings when 'epic' stuff dwells around every corner but in low-magic worlds (I happen to prefer) that would be meh.

Aside from that, it smacks of absurdity that a mage capable of summoning an 8000 lb celestial bird to shatter a castle can't light a candle on a whim if he didn't memorize the proper spell that morning.

You know, I used to hate that aspect of Vancian system. Mages should be flexible. Who heard of a wizard who could not ignite his smoking pipe because he hadn't memorise a fire spell?

But I must say I learned to appreciate the fact that at the end of the day despite being powerful and all you are always just a mortal and must pay a price for the decisions you'd made earlier. That's how the world works, like it or not mere human/elf/dwarf/gnome/halfling/whatever you'll be always bound by your own limitations. You may shatter mountains. dry seas, kill thousnads but there will always come a time when you'll become vulnerable, without the particular magic you need in your head. You'd better have a stash of scrolls or wands ready then or else...

 

[Damned Registrations]

Eh, all those first level slots wouldn't break anything. You can already cast 6th level spells. Anything that is a remote challenge for level 4-6 spells isn't going to be scratched by level 1 spells. At 11th level, even a frail wizard can beat the fuck out of a goblin in melee. Doing it in style with a sheet of fire isn't going to change much.

If you can throw a fireball that ignites all the air in a 20'x20'x20' space, it stands to reason you can just as easily light 1000 separate candles one by one. The two tasks should require similar amounts of effort. As it stands, the first task requires a level 5 wizard, and the second requires an army of wizards, or a single wizard with an intelligence score numbering in the hundreds of at least level 17 or so. (Since levels, for some retarded reason, stop granting additional slots beyond 4 in a level.)

There are plenty of ways to make spellcaster have limitations without causing some weird situation like the above. School specializations, more tangible costs to using magic, limiting the spells available all make much more sense than some arbitrary spell slot system Where a guy with a torch can light more candles by the end of the day than the mage who can burn down a village in an instant.

 

[Hobo Elf]

But I must say I learned to appreciate the fact that at the end of the day despite being powerful and all you are always just a mortal

D&D Spell caster [ ]
Mortal [ ]

Pick one.
C'mon, lets stop pretending here. Mortal? Maybe the first 10 levels, but after that it's a slow (but accelerating) ascent to being a demi-god / Lich / demi-lich, and then later on god / lich-god and whatever other absurd combinations you can come up with.

 

[Johannes]

The concept of having an option to take something that's weak early but gets absurd power later is a bad design in a conventional RPG, it's the opposite of how a games difficulty should evolve. Sure inevitably different party setups will have more or less difficult time in different phases of the game anyway, but that's not something you should actively pursue.

And mages' role in tactical combat can be just about anything depending on the system used, just implement it interestingly. So that mages and whatever other characters have more difference than attack gfx and that they complement each other well.

 

[Redeye]

Thus, it can be said that if anything, Vencian system adds to gameplay by introducing variety and shoving the responsibility of choosing appropriate spells and items on the player.

To me it is like the payload hardpoints on a fighter-bomber.
You have to select your mission loadout.

Second, the Vencian system does make logical sense. It is simply that I think you should cease to see spells as just utilities (which they doubtlessly are! After all you cast a spell, you get a concrete effect which you can then utilise) for a moment. It is easy to justify so called 'spell slots' (which is a metagaming term) by simply approaching magic from the perspective of lore (after all, that's what it is for - to support game-design). You can say that all spells are 'semi-living' entities. The moment you memorise a spell you invite this 'entity' to your mind. You do so while sleeping/meditating. However, for the process to be successful you must have all necessary rituals prepared in your brain - that would be a psychic eqivalent of drawing a summoning circle. As arcane energies enter your (sub-)consciousness to fit themselves into a fixed spell-pattern you know well (having learned it years ago) they render that pattern a semi-living being who is just waiting for a moment of laxity to fry your brain. Only the most talented can master techniques which can prevent the spells from doing so without needing to concentrate. Hence, even first level wizard is a truly experienced magic practicioner as he can cast up to 3 1st level spells (sleep, charm and shield are indeed very powerful) per day without sacrificing his sanity or blowing his head off.

Seems quite logical to me. Yes you can say it's LARPing but again - this is what lore is for - to justify the systems that is immensely fun, rich and has infinite potential.

This is similar to how it was described in the 1E DMG.

I don't remember the exact text, but what I derived from it was:

The spell is like a computer program that is woven into the brain as a cross between a spring and a capacitor (metaphysical "Leyden Jar"?). Casting the spell opens a microscopic portal to the positive/negative material planes, and the power flows into the pattern, inflating it like an origami balloon.

It works a bit differently for Divine casters, etc.
Clerics would have prayer sequences like catechisms that form the "program" that guides the behaviour of the power in the spell.
Also they get Divine Assistance instead of having to milk the multiverse for power all by themselves like a Wizard.
(This apparently is a scaled thing, with 1st and 2nd level Cleric spells being almost autonomous, and 3-4 th level spells being handled through intermediaries, dunno about 5th/6th level, but 7th level+ was supposed to be only granted directly by a Diety. I remember poorly, sorry.)

If it were up to me they would be able to force-cast stuff from their spheres, not just healing spells.

Sorcerors, Favored Souls, etc. have a more freestyle approach, having continously open circuits burned into them or something like that.
They should have lots more metamagic stunts, perhaps not as the regular feats, but starting out as mini-versions of Empower, Extend, Maximize, etc. and building up to full strength a few levels after learning the spell.
Plus they should be able to scale/trade power between different spell levels much more easily than Wizards/Clerics.

it smacks of absurdity that a mage capable of summoning an 8000 lb celestial bird to shatter a castle can't light a candle on a whim if he didn't memorize the proper spell that morning.

Different programs, launching Counterstrike doesn't let me do spreadsheets.
Still, cantrips could be available in profusion to do all sorts of little things.

As for splitting and combining spell slots: in 1E there was Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer.

Much more should have been made of this.

The different spell levels always seemed to me to be similar to Electron Shells.
This is why their energy is stuck within a narrow power range.

Some kind of "quantum bridging" or "Union Regs" would be needed to mix and match.

I would have that be implemented by a mixture of metamagic feats, spells like Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer (some might just think of that spell as being "Extra Fireball"), and focusing/etc. items.
(The Focusing Device was a suggested item from an ancient issue of Dragon that allows a force cast of a particular spell by draining another spell. I would have differing versions of them- weak ones may be one-shot disposable trinkets that can only translate 1 spell; awesome ones would be permanent and could convert multiple spells, perhaps of a related type.)

These spells, feats and devices could be combined to create complimentary, supplementary, and synergistic utility.

I would reform the "spell slot" system by mixing it with mana.

There would be Free Mana and Level Mana. Free mana can be freely applied, and level mana is stuck in it level unless diverted by various mechanisms.

Spells have a mana cost equal to their level. The available Level Mana is the number of spells the caster memorize for a level, times the level.

Spells would be broken in half- the amount necessary to "fix" the spell in memory is one half, and the energy to trigger the flow that actually powers the spell (like the primer on an ammunition cartridge- the actual power comes from an exterior source) is the other half.

So a 1st level spell costs .5 mana to memorize and .5 to cast.
If you can cast 4 1st level spells, then you have 4 points of Level Mana for Level 1. You could just memorize Magic Missile and have 3.5 points of Level Mana left to cast. Fire away!
Or you could memorize 7 spells and only be able to cast one of them once.

Cantrips would be .25 mana, plus 1 freely "fixed" per class level.

Free Mana would be what? 1 per level? Or 1 gained each time a new level of spell is gained?
I would go with the second- you get a point of Free Mana when you get 2nd level spells, 3rd lvl, etc.

Free mana can be spent any way you please.

Perhaps some of the mana shifting feats would be Favorite Spell (permanently fixed or fixed at half cost, etc.), Lingering Enhancer (which would give the caster more time to select spells to translate through different level versions of Rary's Enhancer/etc.), and so on.

Sorcerors would have all of their spells "fixed", so all of their power goes into casting. Still, this doesn't address their craptastic selection.
They would need to have more than just Extend/Maximize/Empower- they would need scaled versions of all spells they know to make them fit into any level. And they get those free.
Also, sorcs should be able to trade Level Mana into Free Mana at a 2:1 rate until Epic Level, at which point Sorcs have all mana in a single Free Mana pool.
Suck it Wizards.

Ah well, that's my rant.

Discuss!


p.s. Perhaps Specialists, ASoC, etc. may perhaps be able to have additional "Favorite Spells" that the can "fix" for free or at reduced cost, as long as they are from the specialty.

 

[Khor1255]

One thing that I always gave low level magic users was a usefulness in seeing things that others might not be able to. A fighter or adventurer might be able to sense a normal trap or find his way through a normal set of obstacles but most types of magic users have saving throws against being tricked up in really 'invisible' ways.
Even here you can't always have the magic user see through the trap or read the lay of the land (traps set by 5th level Necromancers could very easily fool a 1st level cleric for instance) but if you allow multiclassing your Druid might also be in on a lot of the sword play fun with perhaps no penalties compared to his Barbarian cohorts.

It's very easy to make low level magic users a fun class to play. I gm'ed for years not allowing anyone to start above 1st level and I think when I decided to change this a lot of the fun went out of the game for me. But that was the golden age for the players because too. I usually hear them talking about the early days of gaming instead of the last few years we did it.

As for video games, I think making low level magic users would require better attention to storyline detail but it could be really cool as well.

 

[King Crispy]

I usually hear them talking about the early days of gaming instead of the last few years we did it.

This is precisely why early versions of D&D had a maximum level allowable for most classes. Gygax, Arneson and company realized that there's nothing more exciting than the starting milieu, and they also knew very well how complacent the players could become and how boring the campaign could get once that initial sense of mortality started getting dulled.

Sure, they had their Tensers and their Mordenkainens and plenty of epic adventures with them, but they were all eventually retired because the magic (no pun intended) inevitably fades.

This, I think, is probably one of the strongest arguments for the premise of this thread: your warriors and knights share the early glory, but are eventually relegated to support roles for those who (should, IMO) wield the real power -- the mighty wizards. Save the world, cooperating with and depending on each other at various stages, then retire to your castles or travel to other dimensions. This is the way of things fantastic.

Then you just start all over!

 

[Khor1255]

This is precisely why early versions of D&D had a maximum level allowable for most classes.

Yeah, for me it was always the fact that there are only so many hours in a day and to have somne skill is one thing but to have an entire class implies you have spent years aiming toward this occupation so unless you are in your hundreds that number would be very limited. I think I used an Intelligence/Wisdom/age average with some divisor to come up with how many classes you were allowed. Exceptions could be made depending on race or geographical origin but the number was usually two or three allowable classes. But then you had to deal with experience being somewhat parceled out among the classes and I felt this clearly illustrated why 'loss of focus' could be detrimental to any class.

Gygax, Arneson and company realized that there's nothing more exciting than the starting milieu, and they also knew very well how complacent the players could become and how boring the campaign could get once that initial sense of mortality started getting dulled.

Yeah, starting and low level adventures were always more exciting to me than when someone got lucky enough to be part of the grand storyline of the mod. But players who worked their way from obscure crypt robbers to characters important to the general storyline were the most fun of all. It is easy to keep it interesting if your mod already has multilayering built into it.
I usually focused much more on things the typical player would encounter, leaving the grand storyline somewhat unfinished until someone actually made it that far. In this way it was possible both to even have an extremely detailed gameworld and to keep it interesting for me.

I remember early campaigns when I couldn't wait for a player to get to a certain city or venture towards a certain catacomb. When you make a variety and only flesh out what you are in the mood to at the time you leave a lot to be developed and believe it or not this adds excitement to being a GM. Of course you have to have an overall layout for where everything fits but details can come later.
Any other way and players would have had to wait years for me to hammer out the kind of mod I wanted to play.

Sure, they had their Tensers and their Mordenkainens and plenty of epic adventures with them, but they were all eventually retired because the magic (no pun intended) inevitably fades.

Yeah, I never had a problem maintaining excitement either for myself or most players. Again, it was having a layered type gameworld that made all the difference. Sure, you could go and try to fight the dragon of the north with a 2nd level party but your adventure would likely end quickly.
It didn't take long for d&d players to catch on to this either. They usually made the nasty mistake of fighting any creature that came along but that's what rolling up a new character is for.

This, I think, is probably one of the strongest arguments for the premise of this thread: your warriors and knights share the early glory, but are eventually relegated to support roles for those who (should, IMO) wield the real power -- the mighty wizards. Save the world, cooperating with and depending on each other at various stages, then retire to your castles or travel to other dimensions. This is the way of things fantastic.

Well, I think that depends on exactly where in your gameworld they find themselves. Often it might be the wizard who is supporting the Warrior soon to be king ala Camelot. A gameworld should be multifaceted enough to provide ultimate 'victory' for any class. And when you are at the 'top' that might be where things become most difficult.

But I know what you are getting at and I agree. Nothing beats standing alone on a wooded path with only your rusty sword to help you out of anything the game might throw at you. It is truly a 'magical' experience.

Then you just start all over!

Well again, with the right campaign the top might not be the end.

 

[waywardOne]

Also, if spells were that hard to memorize, it wouldn't take such a short time to cast them.

does not follow.

 

[Shannow]

The concept of having an option to take something that's weak early but gets absurd power later is a bad design in a conventional RPG, it's the opposite of how a games difficulty should evolve. Sure inevitably different party setups will have more or less difficult time in different phases of the game anyway, but that's not something you should actively pursue

We were comparing power between fighters and casters at varying levels. Making a mage more powerfull than a fighter at later levels != an easier game. Ideally a game would be easy for a party of fighters in the early levels and then become very, very hard later. A party of casters would have a very, very hard time early on and a rather easy time later. A balanced party would start with a nice challenge. That challenge would increase as time goes by but would never become painfully hard.

Vancian magic: make high level feats with high requirements in concentration and spellcraft. One line grants the use of any lvl 1 spell like a bard/sorc, can be taken repeatedly untill spell lvl 3 or 4. Another would be transformation from 1 high level spell to several low lvl ones.
As for lighting your pipe, I'm pretty sure any good DM would allow that through house-rules.