I know Fritz and CLD covered this already, but just to throw in my "moral support", 4.5-14x isn't bad, especially if you consider a 50mm scope. I'm a big fan of 4.5-14x or 4-16x scopes, but I actually tend to use higher magnification scopes, 5-22x, 6-18x, 6-24x, 6.5-20x... (One of my favorite scopes is a Bushnell Elite 6500 4.5-30x50mm. It's dang hard to beat a scope that will cover you from 20yrds clear out to 1000yrds!)

In Kansas, on any given day I might start the morning hunting in timber where visibility is limited (not just shots, but total line of sight) to under 50yrds, and then in the same afternoon be sitting over pasture or row crops with a 3 mile flat line of sight (obviously not shooting quite THAT far). Having a diverse scope and rifle rig is critical.

Having midrange magnification scopes like 4-16x or 4.5-14x scopes gives you a lot more at the top end, but still has a low enough bottom. Relatively speaking, a 3-9x40mm (the standard by which all hunting scopes are measured) usually has a FOV at 100yrds of about 30-35ft on 3x, whereas a 4.5-14x50 will usually have a FOV at 100 of 20-25ft. At 20yrds then, we're talking about a FOV of 6-7ft for the 3-9x40, and 4-5ft for the 4.5-14x50mm... Either way, both are pretty dang small FOV, and a 4ft long by 3ft tall (at the head) deer will basically fill the FOV for either. Finding the deer in the scope will be hard for either one.

But on the flip side, what's the difference at 300yrds? A 3-9x40mm will have a 10ft FOV at 9x at 100yrds, so then at 250yrds, it has a FOV of 30ft on 9x. A 4.5-14x will have an FOV at 100yrds of about 6.5ft at 14x, which turns into 19.5ft at 300yrds. If a deer is 3ft long, he'll make up 1/10th of the FOV in the 3-9x40, whereas he'll make up 1/6 of the FOV in the 4.5-14x50mm.

I know it seems like just a bunch of numbers, but when you consider your shot placement, for example how large a 6" vital zone will appear in the scope, things really change. 6" out of a 30ft FOV only allows a 0.8% margin for error (6" out of 30ft is 1.67%, so +/- 0.83%)! With the 4.5-14x50mm, you're looking at 1.3% margin for error (6" out of 19.5ft is 2.6%, or +/- 1.3%). So my allowable error is 57% greater for the 4.5-14x50.

Just for kicks, 300yrds on a 6" vitals is about 1.8% margin for error with a 5-22x56mm or 2.7% for 8-32x56mm. FOV at 30yrds is 4ft for an 8-32x56, and 5ft for a 5-22x56mm (vs 6ft 30yrd FOV and 0.83% margin for error for a 3-9x40mm). Ultimately, the close range challenge is about the same, but the long range margin for error gets improved 2-3 fold!

Guys get way too caught up on "anything above 3-9x is too much scope", but the numbers don't lie, 3x vs 4.5x doesn't really make much difference in the short range game, but the margin for error at long range makes a HUGE difference. For me, the moral of the story is that I'm hard pressed to find a negative aspect of a high mag scope, even for short range shooting, but the benefits at long range (or even mid range for precise shot placement) are HUGE.