D&D 5E [Warlords] Should D&D be tied to D&D Worlds?

[urLordy]

Saruman's power in his tongue was still present after his power was broken. It was art and it was skill. It wasn't magic. Gandalf likewise had great art and skill in his tongue - and if Gandalf was part of the same class as Saruman it too was independent of his power as a Maiar.

Avoiding the larger debate, I wanted to jump in here and mention that the subtler powers of Gandalf, etc always felt or read to me like magic, whether or not that was literally true in the fiction. It's difficult to duplicate that feeling of subtle mysterious magic or art or whateveryoucallit in a roleplaying scenario when you have a blatant rule for it, but it depends how the mechanical expression is worked out. If something like the warlord had mechanical expressions (like the Bless effect mentioned recently) or the ability to use a Charisma-based Aid Another (in 3e) then, for me, it would go farther in emulating that magical art feeling.

 

[Mike Eagling]

Saruman's power in his tongue was still present after his power was broken. It was art and it was skill. It wasn't magic. Gandalf likewise had great art and skill in his tongue - and if Gandalf was part of the same class as Saruman it too was independent of his power as a Maiar.

We'll have to agree to differ on this

 

[billd91]

Avoiding the larger debate, I wanted to jump in here and mention that the subtler powers of Gandalf, etc always felt or read to me like magic, whether or not that was literally true in the fiction. It's difficult to duplicate that feeling of subtle mysterious magic or art or whateveryoucallit in a roleplaying scenario when you have a blatant rule for it, but it depends how the mechanical expression is worked out. If something like the warlord had mechanical expressions (like the Bless effect mentioned recently) or the ability to use a Charisma-based Aid Another (in 3e) then, for me, it would go farther in emulating that magical art feeling.

That's the thing about a lot of literature, Tolkien in particular. Many potentially magic effects are subtle and subject to interpretation in numerous game mechanical ways. Some people believe that Aragorn's healing arts can be modeled with relatively minor healing spells, others with laying on of hands, and still others with a good herbalism skill. Who's right? It could be mundane, it could be magic. And from the point of the elves in Middle Earth, it doesn't even make a difference because they don't see one!

That said, D&D is more inspired by Vance's Dying Earth with respect to magic where spells are pretty discrete things. I'm finally reading the collection now and I'm fascinated by just how much D&D magic is inspired by it and how evident that is after only a few chapters! Vancian spellcasting is a pretty apt label so far...

 

[Starfox]

It's not for you to decide, either. You can say that you feel that a statement was prejudiced, but that doesn't mean that it actually was. Saying that you think something is true does not make it true.

The point is, prejudice is subjective. It is a feeling, an impression people that others are trying to label them to put them down. There is no objective truth here. Only people feeling prejudiced against. That is what prejudice is.

 

[Mike Eagling]

Avoiding the larger debate, I wanted to jump in here and mention that the subtler powers of Gandalf, etc always felt or read to me like magic, whether or not that was literally true in the fiction. It's difficult to duplicate that feeling of subtle mysterious magic or art or whateveryoucallit in a roleplaying scenario when you have a blatant rule for it, but it depends how the mechanical expression is worked out.

This is very much the disappointment I had with MeRP, it's magic system bears no relation to the subtle, mythical magic of the source material.

 

[drothgery]

I don't necessarily disagree with that idea. I would hope, for example, that no one playing a bard expects their song-singing jack-of-all-trades to be particularly good at fighting. Someone playing a rogue expects to uses some skills and stab someone in the back every now and then, but is under no illusion that he can fly or control minds. In general, D&D is very good about setting expectations.

See, I think playing D&D PC (i.e. a character who almost certainly will be fighting a lot) carries the expectation that they will be good at fighting. Whether they will be good by being good in melee or at range or by improving allies or hindering enemies is the only question.

 

[Daztur]

Quick note about where I got the terms: it comes from an old discussion I had on a comment thread about the MMORPG game Eve in Tobold's MMORPG blog (http://tobolds.blogspot.com). He said he didn't like Eve because the fights weren't fun. His complaints were that the playing field was almost never level, a lot were surprise ganks against people who couldn't fight back, that sort of thing. He said he much preferred WoW battlegrounds which was PvP with a (in theory at least) strictly level playing field so that it was more like a good sports game rather than a war. Eve fans on the other hand said that the more war-like combat in Eve was exactly why they liked it.

Later I was looking through his blog and noticed some blog posts about his 4ed campaign and something clicked in my head. So Tobold thinks about RPGs in the same kind of way that a lot of these 4ed people do. Maybe there is more things in common between Tobold-think and 4ed-fan think... The sport/war thing was an attempt to explain why I didn't want to play 4ed in a way that 4ed fans could understand and agree with, something that I'd been having a real hard time with. And while a lot of 4ed fans think that the idea is BS a whole lot agree with it as well, which is better than any other attempt I've seen by anyone trying to explain why they didn't want to play 4ed in a way that 4ed fans could understand has done...

But still in retrospect I probably should have used "duel" rather than "sport." Some people read into my terminology the idea that I was saying "oh those silly 4ed fans just like playing a silly nerf sport while REAL MEN like old D&D which is REAL WAR!" which wasn't my intention at all. As I said, the whole idea of calling that kind of play "sport" came from Tobold describing what he liked about WoW battlegrounds was that they were like a sports match. Still, duel would've been better, more badass parity...

As far as bias, I'm obviously on the OSR side of the fence but I tried really really hard to to even-handed. Maybe I failed, but I tried my best.

 

[Alzrius]

The point is, prejudice is subjective. It is a feeling, an impression people that others are trying to label them to put them down. There is no objective truth here. Only people feeling prejudiced against. That is what prejudice is.

Everything is subjective; reducing the discussion to that doesn't help resolve anything.

That said, one can look at a given thing (such as a statement) and try to evaluate if it makes a preconceived, unfavorable judgment towards another group. That's what prejudice is.

Given that Daztur's labels weren't pre-conceived, nor were they unfavorably judging either play-style (nor, for that matter, were they about the people who play the game, as opposed to the style of play itself), it seems fair to write off that particular charge.

As far as bias, I'm obviously on the OSR side of the fence but I tried really really hard to to even-handed. Maybe I failed, but I tried my best.

For what it's worth, I don't think that you failed. People who read something pejorative into the terms you used are, indeed, reading into it. One could just as easily read into it the other way, that "combat as war means that it's a grim, awful engagement that nobody really likes, whereas people have fun playing sports, and the game is all about fun."

 

[Mike Eagling]

like a sports match. Still, duel would've been better, more badass parity...

Now fencing is one sport I know a little bit about, although this would probably make more sense in the other thread I've been posting in...

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted