Were casters more balanced in previous editions in D&D?
Hardly. They leveled up slower, but there were a ton of spells that made you essentially invulnerable to non-casters.
Remember, just about every major designer's pet character was a wizard.
>>45720970
Significantly so.
They took longer to level up and spells had actual casting times, especially more powerful ones, and if you were hit while casting them the spell was GONE, full stop, no saves required.
All this on top of Wizards basically being a wet paper bag in terms of durability.
>>45720970
No, they just died easier, which mattered less since life was cheap and you just played your character with different stats and first letter to their name.
>>45721026
This actually didn't mean a damn thing when once you got your spell off, you ended a combat. Especially since blasting was a viable life choice (and you could still get classically good spells like Sleep, Color Spray and Hold X).
Caster balance was maintained in the same way all D&D balance was back in those days: DM fiat and heavy mind caulking.
>>45720970
balance wasn't such a big thing back then since you couldn't cherry pick class lvls. Also the classes were all shoe horned into their various play styles. rogues who jumped into combat die pretty quick in adnd for example. Wizards explode if they're not stoneskined. different meta back then.
and no, they're not "balanced" a high lvl wizard is practically a god in his own right. just stoneskin alone...
You're all wrong. I play adnd, currently, and PALADINS are by far the strongest class.
Fighters and Rangers are up there with wizards, as are druids and thieves. IN fact, the only weak classes are cleric and bard.
Reason: Hitpoints are very important. Sure, wizards can save-or-die you, but a 13th level paladin saves versus death on a 2 OR HIGHER. Good luck with your 5% chance to effect me.
Fireball? I have 86 hitpoints and can heal myself 26 with a touch, once per day.
Stone skin? Here's where I explain why fighter, ranger and paladin are the most powerful.
I have a magic item which shoots magic missiles. Nice stoneskin there, now watch me burn all the charges with my magic missile widget, WHILE STILL DOING DAMAGE.
(But warriors can't use magic missile, you say? Just listen)
There are magic items everywhere. EVERYWHERE. Items of protection, misdirection, invisibility, flight, haste, petrification staves, disintegration staves, and magic weapons.
What do all these items have in common? EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR WANDS IS UNIVERSAL.
Your wizard has a few spells per day to mess with reality. My fighter has 41 charges in all his magic items to do the same, backed by an ac of -3, better saves, and approaching triple digit hitpoints to back it up.
Sure, wizards can fuck with reality the best, but they die INSTANTLY if you attack them. Only fighters, rangers, and especially paladins can both twist the world and survive powerful magic reliably.
FOR JUST ICE
>>45721127
>>45721074
>>45721026
These three answers are both correct and wrong in different points.
Yeah, low level play was "balanced", as in wizards had powerful spells, but in turn needed fighters to protect them, and their repertoire was limited. In turn, Fighters needed spell-casters to support them, because brawn alone wasn't enough to avoid getting killed.
High level wizard levels weren't balanced, because they weren't supposed to be. A party hardly ever would reach levels past Expert. High level wizards were masters of reality. They were the people who created most of the dungeons the low-level parties are exploring, and most of the monsters in them.
They meddled with the planes and controlled the lives of men and beast alike.
Yes.
Far fewer buffs, saves, bonus spells and tests to defeat MR not scaling with int/wis, initiative was different so your spells almost always went off last in the round and no concentration checks made interrupting them stupid easy. Also far less HP and AC bloat means that, one, you're always going to be vulnerable (barring shit like contingency: TWE or stoneskin + contingency: stoneskin), and non-caster characters can actually kill things just fine using their class-restricted magic items.
You can still do some sick shit as a caster, but 3E just took all the power limiters off from the get-go.
Nobody's mentioned one of the most important meta reasons: Read Magic and the DM deciding what spells you got.
As soon as players were able to pick all their own spells, it was obvious which ones they would pick (all the most powerful ones that break the system in half). When the DM hands out 'Read Magic' and 'Tenser's Floating Disc', you have to actually be clever in how you use your spells, and even if you got some more useful spells for combat it was still strictly controlled. Nobody sits down at the table and announces that they leveled up last session and now they have Baleful Polymorph.
>>45721477
Hear hear.
The old way was best and wisest. Its also worth noting that you needed to scour the land for material components to the spells you wanted to use, and some spells - especially the really potent ones - had wild side effects like aging you several years on top of needing rare ingredients.
I would like to now raise an indictment against the thrice-cursed 'material component pouch' of later editions that 'assumes you have what you need all the time unless it costs money lol' that trivialized the experience of being a wizard. If out adventures take us to some caves, you bet I want to be deliberately poking around for cobwebs and bat fur. That's wizardy. Combing riverbanks for fine sand. Stealing the ostrich feather from a lady's hat. All wizardy stuff. If it would cause a hobbit to name you a 'queer fellow' its wizardy.
I also would like to rally against the absurd notion of wizards just knowing any spell and being able to cast it without preparation. Especially if they can do it repeatedly. Especially if its a 'damage spell'. I tell you this: cretins who complain that 'fighters don;t have a limit on how many times they swing a sword and yet I have to blurrr blurrr etc etc' are not real Wizard players in the first place. They have neither the imagination or the temperament to approach wizardry in the wise and gracious manner that is warranted. I have special hatred for people who see wizards as an avenue for damage in battle when that is the least and most vulgar use of magic and the idea that wizards of any stripe - even evokers - can be termed as 'damage dealers' is the province of the dullard who has no business within five miles of a spell book.
Many of these witless brutes design computer games, I believe.
>>45720970
No.
The Druid is level 12 when everyone else is level 9.
The mage has access to ridiculously overpowered spells like haste, color spray, acid fog, teleport, cloudkill etc etc.
The Cleric is shit because he is mainly a healbot, but in spells and magic you get the option to take Alteration spells as a sphere and you are basically an armored wizard with d8 hp.
>>45721477
That doesn't mean that the Wizard isn't a powerful class, it just means that it depends somewhat on DM fiat. A wizard with the right spells is still the best class in the game, and a DM who keeps a wizard from acquiring anything but spells like Read Magic and Tenser's Floating Disk is rather the same as a DM who lets the Fighter only ever find blacksmiths capable of making knives. And not even daggers, I mean like butter knives and steak knives. No sword for you.
>>45721026
Not to mention the myriad of reagents one would need to collect in order to get some of those spells cast.
>>45721728
You know the main reason why the spell component pouch was invented wasn't so much to make things easier for the wizard, so much as in AD&D a lot of the spell components didn't have costs associated with them and so there was no way of knowing how the Hell the wizard was supposed to acquire them, right?
I mean, it's all well and good to say that the wizard has to spend time collecting bat guano, but what about a tiny bell and a piece of very fine silver string? How much does that cost to buy, or how long does it take to make?
>>45721710
It means that, unlike 3.pf, the DM can directly influence outliers, rather than watching it happen.
>>45721801
Which does not change the fact that the casters remain fundamentally stronger than the non-casters. "DM fiat" is a horrible balancing point for the simple reason that different DMs have different ideas of what should and should not be allowed.
>>45721800
If those are seriously any kind of stumbling block for you, I don't think AD&D is for you. Look at the guidelines for making a potion for example.
>>45721828
>Which does not change the fact that the casters remain fundamentally stronger than the non-casters.
It literally does.
>>45721652
In the 2e game I GM, I don't force the use of reagents as spelled out in the rules, however, when a player DOES take the time to root around for the reagents, when they RP their shit well, and take the time and effort to experience the class for what it has to offer I reward them with the occasional automatic success.
My brother played a lawful crazy necromancer in the campaign, never played a tabletop game in his life, but I created that rule to accommodate that, but I'll be damned if he wasn't the first one to pipe up with exploratory questions whenever I described a new location or environment. He even took to picking up useless shit like rusted spades and jars of primitive pesticide just because it might be useful at some point.
>>45721828
>different DMs have different ideas of what should and should not be allowed.
Yeah, who do they think they are, Dungeon Masters or something?
>>45721867
My point is that saying "rare spell components" isn't actually a stumbling block for the wizard because a lot of the spell components aren't rare, they're just arbitrary and not priced. There's no reason why a wizard shouldn't be able to buy tiny bells and silver string in bulk, but AD&D doesn't provide prices, either as oversight or out of some belief that DM arbitration of those prices makes the Mage less powerful when it doesn't.
>>45721828
>Which does not change the fact that the casters remain fundamentally stronger than the non-casters
Honestly, on the whole? Not nearly as much as you think, and not nearly so soon.
Like >>45721169 said, at later game the problem comes up, but the gap is far smaller than 3.pf, getting the abusable spells is NOT guaranteed by writ of existing, and due to the system differences mentioned in >>45721274, if a thief got the drop on you, they would slit your throat before your first spell got off, with the sole exception of Contingency (that you may not have, or ever find).
This was also when the DM was an important function of the game, and it was understood that the DM should be enabled to run the game as they see fit, not have a long list of rules telling them what to do.
>>45721867
Aaaah, back when personal imagination and GM initiative was important to D&D.
>>45721893
The point is not everything is going to be available everywhere you go.
Tiny bells and silver string may not be available in the area you are in, period, for any amount of love or money.
Now, you could higher a smith to make you the bells, and a weaver to make the string, but that means you are taking the weeks from moving for the sake of 2 components to cast a single spell, and Gygax was a firm believer in not giving players time to lollygag.
That crypt you wanted to explore will have already been plundered by the time you get there if you decided to wait around, because you are not the only adeventurers, and not the only ones who listen to rumors.
>>45721169
>There are magic items everywhere. EVERYWHERE. Items of protection, misdirection, invisibility, flight, haste, petrification staves, disintegration staves, and magic weapons.
>What do all these items have in common? EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR WANDS IS UNIVERSAL.
The vast majority of staffs and rods are class-specific (though 2nd edition increases the number of general-use rods), not to mention scrolls. Also, what the fuck is a disintegration staff?
>Fighters and Rangers are up there with wizards, as are druids and thieves. IN fact, the only weak classes are cleric and bard.
It bothers me that you think a cleric is weak but a thief is strong.
>I have a magic item which shoots magic missiles. Nice stoneskin there, now watch me burn all the charges with my magic missile widget, WHILE STILL DOING DAMAGE.
A wand of magic missiles is going to let you do 7 damage per round. That's not insignificant, but it's less than a third of a high level caster's hit points. And, of course, it's much more important how PC casters fair against monsters than against you.
>PALADINS are by far the strongest class.
It's almost impossible to roll attributes high enough to qualify to be a paladin. If you use the 4d6 drop low method, you have just a 1 in 64 chance to make it (and if you're rolling flat 3d6, you can just forget about it).
>>45721893
All I can say brother is that if the mage of your group isn't ups for an adventurous trip to the border of the elfin realms where the Seamstresses of Lim weave with the most exquisite silver thread, then he's in the wrong game.
>>45721877
>It literally does.
If you take an M1A1 Abrams main battle tank, remove all but two rounds of ammunition for its main gun, remove its treads, remove its top hatch, and leave it with only a gallon of gasoline, it's not going to be able to fight very well. But that doesn't change that the M1A1 is fundamentally the best (or at the least in the running) main battle tank on the planet, it just means that you gimped it to all Hell.
>>45721884
>One DM is extremely stingy with spell components and spells, making the wizard actually harvest his own bat guano, if he's lucky enough to know fireball at all, which he might not.
>One DM works with the player to ensure that the player generally gets at least one or two spells per level that the player really wants, and doesn't concern himself with spell components that don't have specific costs listed as long as the wizard invests at least 50 gp into acquiring spell components whenever they're in town.
>One DM hands out new spells at the drop of a hat and doesn't care about spell components at all as long as they don't have an actual cost associated with them.
In only one of these scenarios is the Mage not arguably the best class in the game, and that's only because the DM is going out of his way to specifically gimp him. That is, again, not good class design.
>>45721800
That's half the fucking fun. You get to a new city and look around for shops or places to collect reagents and it'll take you to places that you'd never go otherwise. A city rightfully should be more than just weapon shop, armor shop, spell shop.
"I need a small silver bell? Time to hit up the local shops to see if someone has one, barring that we may just have to hope one of the farmers in the area has a sheep with one hanging from it's collar, and maybe the theif can do me a solid and grab that for me... Yeah, I can pay."
After that, hang in the local tavern, wait for a lady or even a fella to waltz in with a silver colored shirt or dress. One accidental bump at the bar and a little slight of hand will nab you your string.
I mean, shit, man. You're supposed to be thinking like your character..
>>45721169
ha ha ha, you show your hand as a novice. Only a brute goon would waste magic missile on stoneskin. It can be defeated with a handful of rocks.
No, really, it works, just throw a handful of rocks. If it doesn't work, then you DM is more cruel than any I know.
>>45721947
>That's not insignificant, but it's less than a third of a high level caster's hit points
It also immediately causes a caster to lose whatever spell they were trying to cast.
People these days truly do not understand how brutal that was.
>>45720970
>Balance
Shut the fuck up you whiney bitch tabletops are not e-sports
A game where all skills are equal is fucking boring, you need fluff skills that have shit effects like 'Hold breath' in order to make the less powerful ones more special and the more important ones more obvious.
Die in a fire
>>45721961
Few know that many spells such as telekinesis, charm animal, and wish were formulated specifically to catch cats for their bells.
>>45722013
My favorite dumb spell is "Instant Audience"
It just conjures 1d4 fake people every round to watch you perform something, and then they just leave and vanish; and that power can be yours if you just throw some change, pocket lint, and a snuff box or something into a bag with a live mouse.
>>45721828
There's also the fact that depending on what TSR-era product you look at, when Wizards start to get reality-warping personal power fighters start to get army-marshaling political power. as per the 1e PHB, page 22, a 9th level fighter (250kxp) can establish a freehold that automatically attracts decently loyal (if paid) Men-at-arms and provides an income of 7sp per citizen per month to pay said M@A with. A Magic-user can establish himself as a ruler too, but only at 11th level (375kxp), and attracts no M@A while earning only 5SP per citizen because seriously who wants to live there?
By default, the endgame for a wizard is as the creepy tower freak. If he's exceptionally social he might provide some safe territory for peasants in exchange for money. The endgame for a fighter is to be king by his own hand, a much more effective ruler with a military presence. (Clerics can establish a church that provides hellua money and thieves can establish a den of thieves that gets them a nice crew but no territorial command, except territorial conflict with other thieving crews that may be in the area)
>>45722093
But anon, power within the setting isn't the same as power via your class! Political power is clearly inferior to magic!
>>45722093
Heed this wisdom.
Players of new editions are unaware that 9th level for a fighter brings with it the title of 'lord' and a fleet of guys.
Rangers, too, don;t get this ham-fisted animal companion rubbish of recent editions. They get 2d6 followers. Its not unknown for a ranger to walk into town flanked by two bears, three halflings and a pixie.
>>45722093
Meanwhile in 2e, Fighters that hit 9 and the rank of "Lord" can establish a stronhold, control and tax the surroundings, and attract not only Men At Arms but an elite personal army with a leveled leader owning magic items, 60-120 troopers with good eqquipment (if you got fewer, they're probably better armed and.or cavalry), and a swuad of leveled elites, like your own personal platoon of knights.
Wizards can own property, but "get no special benefits from building a fortress or stronghold". after all "reputations of wizards tend to discourage people from flocking to their doors" so "at best, a wizard may acquire a few henchmen and apprentices to help in his work". That's the opportunity cost you pay for those spell levels.
>>45721182
And a high level anything-but-a-wizard would have a goddamn army/angry church militia/thieves guild under their command.
>>45722093
I would like to note that so-called 'crazy tower freak' is exactly the kind of thing a true wizard player is up for. Eccentric recluse, mulling over ancient texts in remote lairs... a perfectly quality fantasy.
>>45722508
Much as King Conan is the kind of thing the true fighter player is up for. In some ways, AD&D can be a kludge of math. In others, it knows perfectly what people probably want as the fantasy of their character.
>>45722508
The only way to play a wizard is as a lecherous but well meaning recluse. Like Master Roshi.
>>45720970
Sort of, but not really. Non-casters weren't BETTER, or even AS GOOD, but they were NECESSARY, sort of how mid tier players (wrongly) viewed clerics in 3e.
It depends on what your base edition that you're comparing to is. 3e is the least balanced edition. I think 5e is the most balanced, followed by OD&D and BD&D, the AD&D and 4e.
>>45721680
>The Druid is level 12 when everyone else is level 9.
That's a balancing feature. Classes that aren't as good on a per-level basis level faster. Thieves in particular level lightning-fast because it's their main redeeming feature.
>The mage has access to ridiculously overpowered spells like haste, color spray, acid fog, teleport, cloudkill etc etc.
Which he has to maintain concentration for a round or two to cast, and which require rar, sometimes expensive components that he has to actually go find.
>The Cleric is shit because he is mainly a healbot
Yeah kind of.
>>45722935
>The Cleric is shit because he is mainly a healbot
Not playing with specialty priests
>>45723380
Specialty priests are technically not cleric. "Cleric," refers to a specific priesthood and powerset, in 2e.
>>45721940
>Gygax was a firm believer in
Gygax's opinions were frequently dumb.
>if you see that a player has been reading the Monster Manual or DMG make sure to maim his character to teach him a lesson
>if players are being cautious and looking for traps that's boring and you should sic a balrog on them so that they hurry up
>here's a language for alignments that's equivalent to Latin in medieval times but if anyone ever uses it they get a negative reaction from everyone
