Re: New Blog Post: Are Magic-Users Too Weak, Part II
Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:40 am
Good question. For fairness, I reset the simulation back to the original specifications (double roll hit points, no missile weapons), then created a party with a second fighter rolled the same as the first and no magic user. Thus, the progression was fighter-fighter-cleric-thief. The result was an 87% win rate. The original simulation had an 88% win rate; the difference is too small to prove anything (don't make me do standard deviation) but we can safely say that yes, the magic-user is roughly equivalent to the fighter.
Certainly, the magic-user might start with a better or worse spell choice. The fighter might have good or bad ability scores too. But on the average, the magic-user is treated fairly at first level.
In fact, it could be argued that, in a global sense, the magic-user is too powerful by the book. Gary thought that in the early days; it's why 1E nerfed them comparatively. Magic-users have a quadratic progression, fighters have a linear progression, and thus the "weak" magic-user at first level will be truly awesome when (or if) he lives to 9th level or higher.
Certainly, the magic-user might start with a better or worse spell choice. The fighter might have good or bad ability scores too. But on the average, the magic-user is treated fairly at first level.
In fact, it could be argued that, in a global sense, the magic-user is too powerful by the book. Gary thought that in the early days; it's why 1E nerfed them comparatively. Magic-users have a quadratic progression, fighters have a linear progression, and thus the "weak" magic-user at first level will be truly awesome when (or if) he lives to 9th level or higher.