D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

[Nagol]

Like I said, better keywording would fix the opponent type issues.

As to your example of why the ogres break off from the elf maiden - that is up to the fiction, largely, but it seems plausible to me. They're about to have their way with her, when suddenly, a threat appears (or bekons), best deal with it first.

If you wish to model the defences based on motivations in a given situation - nothing prevents this at all. If you're the DM, you can assign ad hoc defence bonuses to the targets, and if you're the player, you can raise your objection to the DM and ask for same. Page 42 and Rule 0 pretty much cover this.

If you take issue with taking control of NPCs, solutions have been given upthread. And I would argue that something in the in-game fiction DID take control. Maybe not the degree of fine control allowed by RAW, but there is certainly a narrative construct in action here.

If you still don't like it, you don't have to use it, but there is no conceivable reason to deprive those who *do* like it of the ability to do so. Unfortunately, that's the way 5e seems to be heading so far. If so, I won't be buying it, especially since I already have something I'm pretty happy with.

There are hundreds if not thousands of games. I own tens of them. There is a subset I'll play and a different subset I'll run. I'll purchase material that fits either of those criteria or that supports a different game inside those subsets.

I have never deprived anyone from playing what they like -- except for that time I sent Runequest 2 ninjas after the Runequest 3 material -- or wait never to be spoken of, right. I just won't participate when something outside those subsets is offered without other motivation (I can be bought).

When a discussion springs up as to *why* I don't like a particular game or type of game, I'll share my opinion, potentially exhaustively if work is boring me.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yes because lord knows no one has ever taunted someone ever to moving in and doing something stupid from a psychological standpoint. At this point I'm trying to figure out what series of events led to you thinking that something which more or less has a Wikipedia article dedicated to it and is more or less something people my parents age is familiar with is immersion breaking.

because it doesnt give you actual control of someone. Especially in the middle of a fight. This is a power that pretty consistently gives you control of an opponents movement apparently by taunting them. If you buy it, that is fine. I am not saing it has to be immersion breaking. But it is very immersion breaking for me.

But the point of the text you quoted is there is a difference between magic powers and verbal taunts. I know a lot of people dont mind giving fighters abilities that are comparable to magical effects, but for me, that is a pretty big divide. And magic is always easier to justify because it is exceptoinal and bens reality. Mundane powers have to work within mundane, non magical, expectations.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

[MENTION=23935]Nagol[/MENTION] Yes, fine, you're sharing your opinion. Registered.

The problem is not that *you* are depriving others of options or choices. The problem is that this attitude of, among other things, Mundanes Can't Have Nice Things, is something that WotC is listening to as part of their lapsed-customer pandering, and thus, those of us who take no issue with these things *are* effectively being deprived of future options, despite all the noise about "dials" and "inclusivity".

That, and it has been said that these things "should not be allowed" - if not by you, then certainly by others, both on this forum and elsewhere.

 

[Ahnehnois]

[MENTION=23935]Mundanes Can't Have Nice Things

Pretty sure no one ever said that. Let's nip edition warr-y catchphrase #1000 in the bud.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Like it or not, there are those who feel this way. I've been in conversations like that. On these very boards.

 

[Imaro]

I'll share my opinion, potentially exhaustively if work is boring me.

And with this, you sir have won the thread...

 

[Bedrockgames]

@Nagol Yes, fine, you're sharing your opinion. Registered.

The problem is not that *you* are depriving others of options or choices. The problem is that this attitude of, among other things, Mundanes Can't Have Nice Things, is something that WotC is listening to as part of their lapsed-customer pandering, and thus, those of us who take no issue with these things *are* effectively being deprived of future options, despite all the noise about "dials" and "inclusivity".

That, and it has been said that these things "should not be allowed" - if not by you, then certainly by others, both on this forum and elsewhere.

I do not see what is wrong with advocating for the game you want to play.

 

[Nagol]

[MENTION=23935]Nagol[/MENTION] Yes, fine, you're sharing your opinion. Registered.

The problem is not that *you* are depriving others of options or choices. The problem is that this attitude of, among other things, Mundanes Can't Have Nice Things, is something that WotC is listening to as part of their lapsed-customer pandering, and thus, those of us who take no issue with these things *are* effectively being deprived of future options, despite all the noise about "dials" and "inclusivity".

That, and it has been said that these things "should not be allowed" - if not by you, then certainly by others, both on this forum and elsewhere.

The thing is the designers kept taking nice things away from fighter-types every edition change. It's hard to fight. I had a very rough time with the problem in 3.X -- morale was gone, hp dominance was gone, skewed treasure was gone, specialised resources at later levels was gone, spellcasters got to make magic items at low levels and the default world explicitly included magic item purchases. Wizards had many limits removed especially the known spells per level cap, roll to learn, and micro-managment of gear.

All that really remains for fighter-types is damage dominance. I think that was a major mistake. It doesn't forgive mistakes in the next edition made with efforts to change the style of game though. The two are unrelated.

And all along the playerbase keeps clamouring for more of those type of changes.

 

[technoextreme]

because it doesnt give you actual control of someone. Especially in the middle of a fight.

Try telling that to Muhammad Ali. I'm sure he'd be happy to hear that he broke your immersion. I completely forgot the rope a dope technique is in fact come and get it.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Like it or not, there are those who feel this way. I've been in conversations like that. On these very boards.

I think you are creating a caricature of the preference. Some of us like magic to be magic, and want our fighters to be fighters. By all means give fighters extra attacks, more damage or whatever. I just dont think they need to be supernatural or have reskinned spells. I liked fighters in previous editions. They were my favorite class. But couldnt stand them in 4E.