CorrectYou don't allow... what? Official Barbarian Subclasses?
CorrectYou don't allow... what? Official Barbarian Subclasses?
That is what those terms are for.That is a fair point, but I think it ends up becoming a matter of perspective. I use the terms mundane and supernatural from the perspective of comparing this world tho the magical and fantastical worlds of DnD. That isn't meant to lessen the achievements of people in our world, but to put into perspective that the fantasy world is more than our world.
Beowulf is Extraordinary, a much higher level than all of the other warriors who Grendel defeated.ok, look, i get claiming he's not supernatural, but claiming he's not extraordinary is just silly (especially since being extraordinary should be perfectly acceptable for high level characters regardless of whether they're magic or not).
The context of the post is @Micah Sweet claiming that D&D fighters and rogues must be mundane because their PHB write-up doesn’t explicitly state that they are extraordinary or supernatural.ok, look, i get claiming he's not supernatural, but claiming he's not extraordinary is just silly (especially since being extraordinary should be perfectly acceptable for high level characters regardless of whether they're magic or not).
But they can't emulate a high mundane fantasy in D&D, because the metacurrency you would need to play them that way doesn't exist in D&D.You wrote:
I responded with several examples, including Batman and Green Arrow.
You responded by shifting the goalposts.
All non-tabletop characters benefit from plot armor and metacurrency. That is the difference between written fiction and a tabletop game. Your distinction doesn’t hold up.
You claimed that a mundane character can’t be a class fantasy because there are no fictional mundane characters that can challenge a CR 10 creature.
Except there are. Batman fights multiple parademons. Jack the Giant-killer kills multiple giants. Sinbad the sailor defeats rocs and other monsters. Ulysses defeats the sirens and the cyclops.
Players definitely seek to emulate the fantasy of playing those characters.
I read Beowulf. Nowhere in the saga does it explicitly claim that Beowulf is extraordinary or supernatural. Therefore he is mundane.
Fair enough. 5e has changed the game in yet another way I don't care for, destroying the concept of a mundane PC and ruining the ability to reasonably play any number of inspirations from fantasy.So, again, you already don't play 5e. You play Level Up. So if 5e admitted to being a game you wouldn't want to play... you'd continue using Level Up. So why should we care if the game you aren't playing becomes something you don't want to play?
Yes I did.
You would be wrong. In addition to being wrong about that, it also states that most humans have traces of the supernatural in them, making them non-mundane, as per our previous discussion. So, they are not mundane and they are not stated to be the most populous. So your point fails on both fields.
oh, so the statement being silly was the point, i see. that makes sense.The context of the post is @Micah Sweet claiming that D&D fighters and rogues must be mundane because their PHB write-up doesn’t explicitly state that they are extraordinary or supernatural.
Applying that reasoning to Beowulf, Beowulf is also mundane.
My personal opinion is that both Beowulf and fighters are heroes in a game/saga of heroic fantasy. I don’t particularly care why a fighter is able to perform great feats, so long as they can. I do feel that this is best decided on a table-by-table basis: to give a specific example, I love the idea that a halfling rogue’s Evasion is just an outgrowth of her supernatural luck, while a goliath rogue just powers through the pain.