D&D General One thing I hate about the Sorcerer

[FrogReaver]

And if this discussion was occurring primarily between folks with no previous edition experience (WotC's prime marketing targets) I'm sure it would be smoother. But of course, it isn't.

I’m skeptical on whether even that would help it go smoother.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's kinda impossible, though, unless you're new to the game and 5e was your introductory edition.

What this discussion shows is that people don't really do their mental world-building based right off the books. They already know how a D&D setting should work, and then it becomes a question of how closely do the books actually match their preferred mental model.

No one in this thread has actually changed their mind about the cosmology of their own settings based on something somebody found in the PHB.

Right, but I’m pretty certain the books tell us we can make our own worlds, etc etc.

 

[Gammadoodler]

The explanation was my next paragraph…

So you think the rules are silent on whether wizards make 1 extra attack per level? Whether bards get eldritch invocations? Whether sorcerers get ki and patient defense?

Really?

PC Fighters are far more extradionary than most warriors around them. Doesn’t make them magical. They are still mundane as we mean it. Mundane can mean different things in different context… not really a surprise.

I think that if I tell you I am going to the store, and I don't tell you how I plan to get there, then you don't know how I traveled, and any assumption you make is just that.

An assumption.

So we get to infer that they are nonmagical despite no positive statement to that effect, and we get to infer that they are mundane despite positive statements to the contrary..

Cool.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m skeptical on whether even that would help it go smoother.

Hard to say. In my experience, newer gamers tend not to care about these questions, because to them OC play is most important, by which I mean having the reality of their PC match their vision of it. Whether or not your PCs abilities are considered "supernatural" only matters if the question is important to that particular PCs concept, and then of course it's entirely up to the player. A very popular and perfectly valid playstyle

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that if I tell you I am going to the store, and I don't tell you how I plan to get there, then you don't know how I traveled, and any assumption you make is just that.

An assumption.

So we get to infer that they are nonmagical despite no positive statement to that effect, and we get to infer that they are mundane despite positive statements to the contrary..

Cool.

Again, the quote you are hanging this on, the "positive statement" does not use the word mundane in the same context. They don't specifically mean, "not-magical". They mean, "in some way a cut above others". It's just as vague most everything else on the subject.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think that if I tell you I am going to the store, and I don't tell you how I plan to get there, then you don't know how I traveled, and any assumption you make is just that.

An assumption.

Sure, but this is not like you saying you are going to the store and not saying how.

We have a book, specifically a rule book for a game, that’s supposed to be exhaustive of the abilities each class gets, including the fluff that explains those abilities.

The simple fact is that if you took the time to answer my question about fighters getting wish at level 1 or wizards making 20 attacks at level 20, it would immediately show how untenable your position is for silence in a game rulebook.

Edit: removed comment that might come across rudely.

So we get to infer that they are nonmagical despite no positive statement to that effect, and we get to infer that they are mundane despite positive statements to the contrary..

Cool.

We’ve often had the discussion about what mundane means, and we’ve even touched on it in this thread. The best explanation for those variations is it can mean different things depending on context.

Is an Olympic athlete mundane? Compared to reality bending wizard magic, yes. Compared to average couch potato Joe, he’s extraordinary, but not magical, not mundane.

 

[TwoSix]

Right, but I’m pretty certain the books tell us we can make our own worlds, etc etc.

Right, which is why I've asserted in this thread that everyone's own conception is perfectly viable, and no one really has the "right answer".

This thread really just became a long digression on the meaning of the word "supernatural".

 

[Remathilis]

Right, which is why I've asserted in this thread that everyone's own conception is perfectly viable, and no one really has the "right answer".

This thread really just became a long digression on the meaning of the word "supernatural".

It all goes back to how much suspension of disbelief someone is willing to give. My stance is since we can't agree what that line looks like, the safe play is to make it all magic rather than try to sort out what is talent, luck, ambient magic from the planet, etc.

 

[FrogReaver]

Perhaps this will help discussion along.

I accept the D&D fighter (at least by some level) isn’t mundane by average real life earth human comparisons.

I also accept action heroes/olympic athletes/earths most intelligent scientists/etc aren’t mundane in this comparison either.

Those are statements I anticipate we can all get behind.

 

[James Gasik]

So wait, are we saying that if a new edition comes out, all the old lore from previous editions is no longer relevant and should be considered thrown out? I spent a lot of time reading those books and learning about the history of the game's settings. It's all a part of D&D in my opinion.