What are your thoughts on wizards and sorcerers as local feudal rulers?

Martials are pure cringe

It's more due to how they don't even think about what they're doing.

Why would that be a necessary trait of magic users, though?

>what are stewards
>warriors can interact with other people, wizards can't

>What are your thoughts on wizards and sorcerers as local feudal rulers?
>Personally I like the idea of spellcasters carving out lands on the fringes of civilization.
Yeah, they make great antagonists for the heroes.

It just is.

Says the wizard who failed to conquer a single kingdom before he lost his army and his base of operations was demolished.

>all these people implying magic wouldn't destroy knights irl/even in game

Are you retarded? A metaphor: it's the difference between an atomic bomb at its best and a shotgun at its worst. Do you really think that a sword can best a pistol? No. It's the same with magic and projectile after effects (explosions, damage, etc).

Factor in the idea that there is healing magic and persons would revere these people as leaders anyways and you have a potent force. I'll give you that a knight could swipe down such a foe easily, but they'd have a bit more trouble with an army willing to defend their king/queen/dog person thing leader.

Ranged weapons are very powerful, and most magic is ranged. You can make a case that there's the bloodsuckers who have to be in real close, but otherwise the spell is being cast from a distance. Magic is at times unpredictable, chaotic, and extremely deadly. It can have devastating effects beyond anything a single man should be capable of by nature alone.

There's a reason why the gun killed the crossbow.

In fairness he "conquers" the Shire, albeit mainly because it doesn't have an army. And then he's overthrown by some hobbits and killed by Wormtongue of all people.

In my game, fighters get to give their attack bonus to massed combat units fighting under their banner.

That's it. Therefore, Fighters tend to be kings.

Its not that wizards can't. Its that wizards don't.

What do the most knowledgeable and powerful wizards look like again? Oh that's right, old fucks that have spent decades in libraries studying magical lore and who are so mired in academia that they have neglected their social skills to the point that they dress in their pajamas and never shave.

The best wizards are unfit to lead armies and kingdoms, and the ones that diversify and dedicate their time to building up a personal following don't have enough time left over to become the best wizards.

Again, ONE IN A MILLION manages to be great at both. You might recognize them as the sort of guy that becomes such a threat that a small team of racially diverse murderhobos of different professions end up stabbing to death in his own keep after he raises to much of a fuss.

I know right?
>what is breeding an army
>what are loyal retainers
>what is wizards acting like people and not martial safe-space enablers

That's not a very satisfying answer. I'd personally rather it not generally be that way in my games and for my characters.

Yeah, but they have more knights than you have fireballs, and if you are ever once caught on a battlefield not of your own choosing you are dead before you can cast anyway.

The gun killed the crossbow because it was not just stronger, but anyone could use it. Go fight 20 unarmed men with a single revolver, and see how well your superior firepower does.

>>local feudal rulers
>Diverting time away from studying to watch over some dirt farmers who get you things you actually need once in a blue moon
>not just supporting your local favorite for free shit so you get 100% of your time to study and find components

N...NO CASTERS ARE SUPPOSED TO SERVE MARTIALS

ITS NOT FAIR I'M SUPPOSED TO BE THE LEADER

And yet, for all of their armchair whining about 'muh spells' and 'muh intelligence'... the world is run by dudes with swords, or the kids of dudes with swords.

Conquering kings employ court wizards, not the other way around.

Reality has a martial-bias.

>fat ass
>fat chest
>fat arms
>fat thighs
>SKINNY FUCKING EARS

Does it help keep warriors relevant if magic takes long-ass rituals to do, to the point where nobody learns Fireball because it sucks with a one-hour wind-up?

>feudal
ehh, why not?
It is not like feudal lord had that much to do if he didn't want to.
Serfs will govern themselves just fine, so do the towns and cities.
Only thing you have to worry about are problems before your direct vassals and keeping the peace.
For both you can hire judge and captain of the guard can make work of bandits.

Your only obligation is to go to war with party of men. So not that much, and if you were a court wizard you'd go as well and have to deal with random shit that king needs help with.
You may also be forced to pay the tax but who cares. King don't know how to count tax and you don't know as well, it is matter between your and royal treasurer.

But if you really want to govern instead of gaining profits, then wizarding isn't for you as both are highly time intense things that are hard to do at the same time.

The ruling wizard doesn't have to be the best individual wizard just as the king doesn't have to be the best individual swordsman.

>What are your thoughts on wizards and sorcerers as local feudal rulers?

They make up about 30-40% of the noble and or ruling caste in many kingdoms.. Where it's still 'legal' to be a wizard, that is.

They only reason they're less popular than martial rulers or even just -normal people rulers- is that while powerful; wizards are typically more interested in pursuing their own studies, research, and other various pet projects as opposed to concerning themselves with CROPS, LIVESTOCK, TAX RETURNS, TITHES, IMMIGRATION, MONSTER CENSUSES, GUILD LICENSING, MARRIAGE AGREEMENTS, etc.. etc..
There are more wizards interested and pursuing careers in dungeon design and construction than ruling castes; only because making dungeons is cool.

Martials fall into the life of a noble much easier if only because their hobbies usually tie in better with the noble life: going on hunts, having feasts, hosting tournaments(and fighting in them), taming griffons, marrying and having unprotected sex with centaur noble women are all good fun for any true warrior.... Most successful wizards in government, though, naturally find ways to incorporate their hobbies and interests into their work, but this is usually a little more disastrous than keeping a few griffons around as living symbols of your prestige.

If knights ride down a row of wizards those wizards are fuck.

>Does it help keep warriors relevant if magic takes long-ass rituals to do, to the point where nobody learns Fireball because it sucks with a one-hour wind-up?
Only because it makes mages fucking suck to play. What helps keep warriors relevant is making them Odysseus or Beowulf by level 3 and wukong or thor or Hercules by 20.

What if we made it so it takes 4 hours to cast a single spell, and there is a 50% chance of it killing the caster, and every time you use it you lose 5 years of your life?

I think that goes a long way to making casting fair to us martials

>it's a "Veeky Forums argues about a vague, non-specific setting that is different in the heads of every participant and as a result everyone in right in their own mind and will never stop arguing" episode

>CROPS, LIVESTOCK, TAX RETURNS, TITHES, IMMIGRATION, MONSTER CENSUSES, GUILD LICENSING, MARRIAGE AGREEMENTS

I can see a wizard nerding out about all kinds of statistics.

>implying that's not just people and civilization in general.

not even "best wizard", just a good wizard

Does making magic more of a strict noncombat thing that unfun of an idea? I thought that was supposed to be where all of the real power was anyway. And ritualists could still contribute to military matters by buffing soldiers, summoning and binding elementals, or learning to personally handle a spear. But yeah, warriors who kick a lot of ass are cool too.

Magic doesn't even need to have long casting times. Casterfags always assume their hypotheticals where the caster is 100% in complete control of the situation, and simultaneously counters every enemy move before it happens.

That's generally not what happens. In reality, the caster gets off a couple fireballs, which announce his position to the enemy army, and then he dies under massed arrow fire.

The only time a wizard totally dominates a battlefield is with high level spells that no one on the enemy side has the ability to counter. Which is to say "muh level 20 archmage can tots butcher level 1s and 2s, you guys".

Stunning observation, I can see your 30 Int is really paying off. So can any other person with an equivalent level difference. Even the Fighter can chew up 18 people a round with that kind of advantage, and he doesn't run out of gas after 5 rounds.

Doesn't he? The king doesn't rule through being a swordsman, he rules through commanding the loyalty of the people who are, and being smart enough to lead them to victory.

If your magic is the only thing holding your kingdom together, you better be the best fucking mage. Because if not, the guy who IS the best mage is going to gank you and take your spot.

Its all of the instability of a dictatorship, but with power even more centralized.

>Reality has a martial-bias
No.
Reality have high INT and CHA skill monkeys bias.
Most rulers that are remembered as good rulers were great statesman, politicians, commanders and strategists. In none of this you need DEX, STR or CON.

On related note, my country once had a king that was famous for his strength and virility (STR and CON) and he is considered as one of worse in our history.

I'm okay with it. I just don't think ALL the rulers would be wizards. They fit in more with Da Vinci than with Machiavelli, you know?

Besides, I consider them to be important in local politics and society formal title or not, sorta like countries dealing with corporations nowadays.

Nothing. I stop thinking.

Ghostwalk did this pretty well imo. Bazareene is ruled by what are basically genetically engineered Sorceresses with genetically engineered Monk bodyguards.

Then how come every single fantasy world is shaped by wizards?

The answer is of course, some kind of magical knight with a strong sense of right and wrong

I'd argue Mages are best as artillery/buff dispensers/counters to whatever magical bullshit the enemy has going on/logistics rather than replacements for normal soldiers. Another tool in the general's toolbox.

ruling a populace takes a lot of fucking time that could be spent studying magic.

Confirmation bias. You define anyone who uses magic as a wizard. Fantasy settings are settings with magic in them. So every fantasy setting is 'shaped' by wizards, because if the wizards weren't there it wouldn't be a fantasy setting.

The settings were magic users get BTFO and never matter generally are not considered fantasy settings, because all of the magical people are fucking dead.

>magic irl

Looks stupid as fuck.

Sorcerers are literally perfect for this, and everyone suggesting that mundanes would be better as rulers are being dumb.

The magic is passed through bloodlines, doesn't require that much study or training, and naturally favors charisma and is perfect for the sorts of things nobles want to be doing. It also wouldn't really conflict with their normal studies.

It also gives the king sorcerer and his sorcerer family some pretty good defense about that one lone wizard who thinks it'll be easy to make himself the king with just a few charm spells.

If you're going to have kings claiming divine right to rule or noble blood, then why not actually back that up with magic? Even if they're only casting basic spells it's still a lot more merit than most.

The wizard can't fuck you up with a fireball if you're wearing armor that's been warded against magic.

Club feet and hair lips aren't very charismatic traits

Charisma isn't determined solely by physical appearance. And the angel-blooded noble who can afford to bathe regularly is still going to be much better looking than any peasant.

>There's a reason why the gun killed the crossbow.
Yep. Except they didn't have to spend 50 years studying, digging through rare forgotton tomes in archaic and unknown languages, prodding at the boundaries at the edge of reality and toying with dangerous forces in order to learn how to point a stick and pull a fucking trigger.

>the "peasants didn't bathe" meme

>the nobles are all hideous from inbreeding meme

(you) too. Good luck on serving a king whose noble blood isn't actually magic.

Is this a thing now? Asking kind of boring questions about wizards combined with thicc?

T-t-thi..

THICC~

Are thicc elves a variant race? What are their stats? What is their culture like?

Just because he ain't Merlin doesn't mean he can't be Arthur.

-2 DX
+1 HT
+1 appearance level
Charisma 1
Overweight
Social Stigma (they're real good fucks [one severity step below 'personal property'])

Always shy in a cute way about their weight -1
"Thicc" 1

What system is this?

As characters level up, they all become rulers and controllers of various things.

Fighters become the lords of forts, inspiring many men and having small armies and lands to protect.

Rogues build cities, inserting themselves easily at the top of huge money making operations. Some of them become the 'mayor' of the town, but it's not a requirement. Some instead build entire shipping fleets or huge trade caravans instead.

Magicians build magical universities and temples to the magic gods, since priests/wizards are mostly the same shit in my setting.

If you're going for a class based game then anyone should be able to rule, just different stuff that fits.

GURPS

>Merlin

You're vastly misunderstanding what I mean by sorcerer nobility.

Long ago, you have Gregor the Dragonhearted, great grandson of a noble Gold dragon, who managed to carve out a kingdom with his own two hands, using sword and spell. Then he passed this down to his many children, and their children's children, until now you have a whole mess of nobles with this noble dragon blood in their veins. Not very strong, but it gives them powers and endurance above the normal man.

And certainly, there might be another kingdom elsewhere, founded by someone who was blessed into being a Paladin by the gods themselves with a magic sword, passing it down to someone else worthy each generation, but in both of these cases they're going to be better off than the nation across the river who had a skilled fighter who united his people, giving birth to a lineage of normal children who have no remarkable skills or better qualifications to lead.

This is why I say sorcerers as nobility makes the most sense, because it would historically be a very consistent and demonstrably useful trait of a bloodline across regions, acts of the gods not withstanding.

>someone who was blessed into being a Paladin by the gods themselves with a magic sword, passing it down to someone else worthy each generation
What do you mean by "worthy", because if the Paladin passes it down to his non-Paladin children then they're just going to be a fighter with a nice sword. I mean heck, if being a Paladin can earn the gods favor and grant you magic weapons then why do you need magic blood at all?

I was giving an example of a more 'divine right to rule' setup in line with king Arthur. Presumably, one of his sons would need to quest and prove himself worthy to the deity, or the deity would just end up picking someone else and they would eventually claim the sword.

Even that's less a monarchy and more of a theocracy though. Maybe a bit of meritocracy since it's whoever is most worthy, but it all depends a lot on how active and explicit the gods are.

And of course, not every paladin gets to become king and rule a nation, and not every nation gets a champion paladin with an artifact sword that proves they've been blessed for leadership. Thus, someone descended from a dragon or an angel or a fae lord is probably going to be the more common option.

> What are your thoughts on wizards and sorcerers as local feudal rulers?

It's a classic concept integral to the Sword and Sorcery genre. Personally its always been a favorite of mine

>european fantasy
>bathing

>implying muscular = thicc
Stop.

One problem is that magic kind of deserves the bad reputation it has in many settings. A barbarian king can have you and your family killed, but you probably have a pretty good idea of what he can do and what you can get away with.
But if the king can read your thoughts? Charm people into informing on their peers? Ask the flagstones in his bedroom if his wife's been faithful? All really useful for a ruler, but all also tighten the screws on his subjects.A wizard king doesn't even need to DO these things either, just the knowledge that he CAN is a giant issue compared to Ragnar Bloodfuck who is merely violently insane.

tl;dr, people quite rationally don't trust wizards, and nations are built on trust.

Muscles and fat are aesthetically the same.

Elves are only obese if their ears get fat, she's practically anorexic, unlike the whale you posted.

Weird headcanon this thread gave me:
The true difference between being a martial and a caster is the amount of dedication one needs to their arts to be sufficiently skilled and for them to be sufficiently maintained.

A martial can get pretty damn good if they have about four hours of training every day (minus the 'recovery' days) for about a year to get decent. Give or take a bit depending on if there are other martials to train with (in the case of town militias and such, there's going to be plenty, and plenty of experienced folk to work with, so it can be shorter)

Afterwards, a martial can often get by on two to even one hour of training, five days a week to keep skilled.

But wizards, sorcs, clerics, etc? You're as lot less likely to meet other skilled casters to help you along, and usually it's only a VERY small number (like, one or three, and that's individually. Nevermind jealous guarding of secrets and even sabotage), and even so, to be a decent caster, you basically spend ten to fifteen years studying/meditating/praying/etc. to start to learn to manipulate or channel magical oir divine energies.

Even after all that, you still would be spending up to six hours each day keeping your skills from fading. So being a caster in of itself is often a demanding, full time job, and also why most mages become adventurers and/or join guilds, otherwise, they'd often lack the financial security to continue to pursue their arts.

Or to sum the issue with magic as a vocation: you miss a day of practice, you and other mages will notice the difference. You miss a week, and even the common peasant will notice the difference.

Wizards ain't got time for that petty shit, they have books to read and experiments to perform. Sorcerers would do it though, the egotistical bastards.

No, they aren't
>t. someone who is a fatty lover and a muscle lover.
musculature follows the tone, angles and lines of the body.
fat sits in oblique parabolas haphazardly thrown in together.

I think that headcanon does fall a bit flat with Sorcerers, who are often randomly born with magic and it simply becomes a matter of controlling it. I can't really see someone who has the same method of casting as a dragon getting 'rusty' after not casting for a day, when dragons are known to hibernate for years on end.

Of course, the downside with sorcerers would arguably be not being as in control of what powers you get, and it would still be difficult to exercise the power enough to the degree that you could unlock higher levels of magic.

But in regards to the basics? Being a sorcerer is probably one of the least skill-intensive classes. You have an instinctual understanding of how to spew fire from your hands to various degrees, and while you may need to practice things like aim or making sure you don't catch yourself on fire, you'd be alright.

The more interesting downside there is that sorcerers wouldn't be able to simply study or pray to learn something else. If you have the magic of a red dragon, trying to learn how to turn invisible or shoot ice would probably be beyond you.

>as elves get older their ears sag, both due to accumulations of fat making the tips heavier, but bending of the cartilage and weakening of the supportive tissues
>to combat this, many elves wear special "ear bras" when they sleep to combat sagging ears

Paladins aren't magical. Divine power isn't magic. Its divine power.

I'm not sure you know how ears work. How many anythings have you ever known to have fat deposits in THEIR FUCKING EARS? (save the lobe, of courze)

I think he's more complaining about the proportions and shape than a lack of fat. Perhaps he felt that huge fuckoff Jak and Daxter ears would be much more pleasing

Elves

I liked how one setting did it, with wizards settling down on ley lines, saying they are in charge of the ley lines and the various kingdoms just sighed and redrew the borders to account for this sudden weird splodgy mess of lines in the middle of their territories.
Because one, you can't mess with a wizard on magical ground, and you doubly can't mess with a wizard on magical forums they've attuned to. You'd need like, four armies to crack it. And two, they don't give a fuck about you, and will probably sell you cool shit if their lands border yours and don't start shit.

So the setting map clearly had kingdoms that grew around the Magician kingdoms were overlapped by later magician kingdoms.

>continuing to make increasingly more retarded and wrong posts and digging yourself a deeper hole
Stop.

In CK2 childhood is believing Brilliant Strategist is the best. It is great for starting up a good sized domain sure, but once you have it you are going to wish you had a Midas Touched or Grey Eminence character.

Revenue is what wins wars, not good generals. To get the needed level of revenue you need to be able to directly administer a large domain or be likable to get subject to pay taxes with out revolting.

Dat Ass follows the tone of my bone, if you get what I mean.

wait a minute, something's not right here

I... I'm stealing this.

I hate you, but I need to put it in my setting.

FYI, from what is left from the 9th century correspondence between Boris I of Bulgaria and the Pope, regarding Cristian and pagan rituals:
Boris: The Greeks say that we cannot bathe on Wednesdays and Fridays, is this true?
Pope: It is not. You can.

Not sure what game this is , but wizards can easily rule over a piece of land, provided that magic users are rare.

Could make it like the kender, where the "ear bras" are basically the strings of their bows.

Keeping it under your hat firmly secured to your ears would be a suitable way to keep the string dry in wet weather.

Can someone post the muscular elf again?

I need it for a character portrait.

Because Wizards end up creating their own pocket dimensions to be gods in.

good catch.

Sorcerers are alright. Wizards shouldn't be tolerated.

It would certainly be much more of a sorcerer thing given the potential for "might is right" and "hereditary/gifted talents" being able to have sorcerous clans vying for power, or at least just having their own little royal family. Wizards are harder to place, mostly depending on the whims of the wizard. If they want to have their own kingdom, sure, but we don't know if we'll see the king, or if he's going to Lichify himself and turn the populous into undead thralls to invade the neighbors. Line of succession would also be way up to the wizard's own bias given their (usual) superiority over sorcerers.
>thicc
I hate to break it to you user, but that elf is fat. An oddly shapely fat with a hairstyle that more elves need to have, but still fat. Were there no dark clothing masking the contour shading you might have been able to convince me it's the heavy end of chubby, but from what my eyeballs are registering, I cannot agree with you.
I am however completely down for thicc elves, knife ears need breeding hips without cow tits.

>without cow tits
into the dungeons with you

You can't satisfy anyone you sleep with but they all try.