Re: The Importance of Caste (or Why Wizards Don't Rule)

From: donald_at_pe0MhdVVKtr0MJX25Hv7wlkdMMbYQvosVuVBRBx9lMyGm2nn9ht_hOvRoMoOfT4mQIDWj
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 13:16:41 -0000

> I've been thinking for quite a while on a gap between Malkionism and the
> rules portrayal of it. Namely why if Wizards are so fantastic, don't
> they try and take over the government? Or why a Bardan Wizard waste
> time blessing other people's weapons when he could, for example, kick
> ass with his own ballista? (I suppose the classic kick ass weapon would
> be the Onager but that's kind of hard to carry around...)
>
> The classic explanation is caste.

[snip]
> So what stops a wizard from inventing a spell that doesn't use caste?
> Nothing. It is my suggestion that casted spells are more effective than
> casteless spells (+6 if you're fanatical about observing caste like a
> Rokari or Brithini, +3 if you take a more relaxed approach like the
> Loskalmi or Safelstrans).

Doesn't this tie into community support?

A wizard's spell is tied to caste and draws on the prayers of the wizard's order and the wider congregation. The orders police the spells that get that support and if a wizard tries to break caste they are likely to get caught and expelled or executed for sorcery. My impression is that not many wizards invent spells, most learn from the approved grimoire of their order.

So it's pretty rare for a wizard to have learnt to invent their own spells, being prepared to break the religious taboos about caste and defy their training of what is wizardry rather than sorcery. Factor in the risk of getting caught by the order or the inquisition and it becomes rarer still.

The other thing community support can give you is the ability to bless an entire congregation. You may give yourself +5 for your magic sword but that isn't going to help much when the opposing wizard has given each of his 20 knights +2.

-- 
Donald Oddy