>The statement that it makes it more fun for non mages is that
>presumption.

Not really. Suppose mages with chronic a/s/b are "overpowered". Making it so that it's no longer feasible for mages to have chronic a/s/b and thus be "overpowered" doesn't imply that mages must have chronic a/s/b to be competitive.

I agree with you that a mage who never has a/s/b will not be competitive. What I'm saying is that this change (theoretically, at least) was supposed to create a scenario where mages use their wands "selectively".

>The problem with this is that mages are designed around the
>potential to have wands, which suggests they start out with a
>lower potential (by virtue of being a mage) than non mages
>(this is where the arguments stem, exactly how much weaker,
>etc.)

And this change wasn't intended to make it so mages never have wands.