I'm confused by this assertion. in 5e Ritual Caster is a feat - it expressly gives you access to ritual spells and allows you to cast them (and even starts you off with 2 spells in your ritual book).
A variant human can be a ritual caster at 1st level, everyone else can do it by 4th+.
You should stop relying on the playtest to judge 5e. The Magic Initiate feat gives two cantrips and a 1st level spell from any one classes spell list. Prerequisite: None whatsoever. The Ritual Caster Feat has a prerequisite of 13 Int or Wisdom, not spell casting. Either feat is easily available to a 1st level Human fighter. (Although only a human)
You should well be confused Mort. I had a weird conflation of 13th Age's Ritual Casting mechanics (which fall short unfortunately) and the 5e playtest so I was just assuming it expanded Ritual Casting to those who already had spells. I've only got that and the Basic Set and what I've learned online of the expanded PC build components (such as feats).
So. Mea culpa. RItual Caster feat allowing noncaster classes to have a Ritual Book with a few Ritual spells scribed to start is a good PC build component. It leaves me wondering if the means for getting further Rituals is similar to 4e (eg - gaining further Ritual Books as treasure).
That being said, I still don't agree that the entry level is cheaper than 4e. 5e feats are considerably more weighty build components than they are in 4e. A single feat in 4e for RItual Casting is a fairly paltry investment with very solid return. Further, there are plenty of other means to get spellcasting (Arcane keyworded powers) in 4e (themes, multiclass feats, skill powers, etc). The entry is exceedingly low.
However given that you and Pemerton take the stance that resolution mechanics are detachable from the fictional overlay, you are perfectly capable of refluffing any ability as anything else. You are fully aware that you could make your fighter an Eldritch Knight at the rules level, but refluff all his abilities as sheer Mythic martial might at the fiction level. Fireball is throwing a wagon, or barrel of flaming oil one handed. Passwall is punching through a castles Barbican in a single blow. Given the ability to refluff, what more do you need?
Refluffing must be handled with extreme care in systems that have various component parts that interface with one another. There is a "balance butterfly effect" that ripples throughout the system when lack of proper due diligence takes place when making what is tantamount to a design decision. Consider some of the rulings that (the lead designer) Mearls has put forth as sensible when handling the action economy concerns of drawing and stowing /manipulating objects. A GM giving out free actions or condoning/not vetoing ways around the action economy constraints are rulings that would have fallout to classes that have base features and/or PCs that have Feat investment that provide action economy bonuses when drawing/stowing weapons or manipulating objects.
In a bounded system like 4e (with a mathematically transparent, codified, exception and outcome-based design chassis that has a unification of PC build mechanics and resolution) refluffing is intuitive and trivial given the elegance of the power source and keyword systems. In a rulings not rules system like 5e (or AD&D), the GM cannot just consider the 1st order effects of refluffing, but he also has to consider several 2nd and 3rd order effects that may not be transparent or intuitive. Making a change could have all kinds of concerns for the action economy specifically or could be problematic for balance generally as a quality control mechanism may not apply to this refluffing (such as detaching the arcane keyword and the system's balance predicates that are expected to come with that power source).
Beyond that though, we're still not communicating. The fiction is what happens in the game as a result of players making action declarations and possibly rolling some dice. If that action declaration connotes magic to the purveyors in the shared imaginary space (eg it is a spell or has the Arcane, Divine, Primal keyword), then it is magic. Neither unification of resolution mechanics nor segmentation of resolution mechanics makes something "magic" or undoes its "magic."
For instance, Dungeon World has a singular resolution mechanic; roll 2d6 + relevant modifier (typically 0 - 3). Whether you are performing the mundane actions of Hack and Slash, Defend, Defy Danger, or the action of Cast a Spell, you're using the same resolution mechanic. You roll your 2d6 + mod and add them up. 10 + you succeed at what you're aiming at, 7-9 and you have success at a price or some kind of fitting complication (such as disturbing the fabric of reality, attracting unwanted attention, or losing the spell if you're casting), and on a 6- something bad happens and you gain 1 xp. Defy Danger doesn't suddenly become magical and Cast a Spell doesn't suddenly become mundane because Bob and Sally (the
players) use the same resolution mechanics to facilitate gameplay (and spit out the resultant fiction). To Bob's Rogue and to Sally's Wizard, Defy Danger is the mundane avoidance of some imminent peril (such as dodging dragon's breath) and the spell that Sally's Wizard has cast is finger-waggling, wand-waving, arcane-tongue invoking magic. Same for NPCs in the fiction.
