D&D 5E Being strong and skilled is a magic of its own or, how I learned to stop worrying and love anime fightin' magic

[Maxperson]

Do the current things the stats give look a lot better in comparison with what the world records in the1200-1500s would have been?

I don't understand the question in relation to the coins post. Would you clarify what you are asking?

 

[Garthanos]

We used it. We were 5th or 6th level and were fighting goblins or kobolds or something with less than 1 hd and were attacking 5 or 6 times a round.

good to hear it got some mileage at least

 

[Willie the Duck]

Yes I knew the context. I first heard of "one man army" though in a sort of D&D context in Chain mail they referred to the level 8 analog "superhero" that way ...allowed him to inspire fear in entire enemy squad (enough for them to quit the battle I think? but I could be misremembering) and similar things and I think the 4 enemies he could attack may have been 4 groups of enemies? but it was kind of a hard read. Not sure AD&D followed through completely or well on the sense of awesome. I know 3e had a greater cleave that allowed one to attack all enemies in reach and 4e fighter had similar but in power form... including one that allowed one to harm any enemy who came in reach during the turn (if you were capable of performing opportunity attacks). Spending a whole minute... ie what would be 10 rounds now with one die roll and one decision point was not even something my players and I liked even then.

In oD&D and AD&D, a hero-level character (level 4) could take four times as much punishment as a level one character (so a level 1 enemy could successfully hit them four times to drop them). In Chainmail, they required 4 level 1 enemies to successfully hit them at once to get them to drop. High level warriors were a class unto themselves in Chainmail, in a way that D&D nevr really reflected.

Also worth noting -- the 'can attack 1/level low-level enemies' rule changed from 1HD in chainmail/oD&D to 1-1 HD in AD&D. Numerically it's the same-ish (HD in oD&D were 1d6, in AD&D they were 1D8), but it changed the implication for PCs -- in oD&D, all fighters (who had 1D+1 hd at level 1) were immune to the effect, but all other PCs were not. In AD&D all PCs have 1 HD at 1st level (just different size dice) and as such were immune. Chainmail and oD&D fighters had a leg or two up on later fighters (relative to those around them) even from character creation.

 

[Cadence]

I don't understand the question in relation to the coins post. Would you clarify what you are asking?

I hit reply to the wrong post!!!

 

[Garthanos]

In oD&D and AD&D, a hero-level character (level 4) could take four times as much punishment as a level one character (so a level 1 enemy could successfully hit them four times to drop them). In Chainmail, they required 4 level 1 enemies to successfully hit them at once to get them to drop. High level warriors were a class unto themselves in Chainmail, in a way that D&D nevr really reflected.

A turn in Chainmail might be seen as a skirmish (or encounter) too but maybe not I do not remember a time span for it?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Do the current things the stats give look a lot better in comparison with what the world records in the1200-1500s would have been?

Probably not in a particularly coherent way. Not a lot of accurate measuring or particularly conscientious recordkeeping going on back then.

 

[Willie the Duck]

A turn in Chainmail might be seen as a skirmish (or encounter) too but maybe not I do not remember a time span for it?

Oh goodness, I'd have to dig out the books. Probably.
What I remember (particularly pertinent to the thread topic) is that Heroes and Superheroes were bad to the bone. They had the best resistances to things like dragon fear, could inspire fear in enemy troops, rally their own side, sense hidden foes, cut swaths through normal enemy troops, and survive all but the most well-coordinated assaults (or regular ones if you were ridiculously reckless with them).
I believe they were point-valued at 20/50 and magic users were 50-100 (so, in effect, the game only included fighters levels 4 and 8 and MUs 8-16, so no they weren't usually going to be equal in value). However, where their point costs intersected, I honestly thing the fighter was a better pick. It would be situational, but, say, 50 points of regular infantry and a 50 point magic user or 50 points of infantry and a superhero unit was a tough choice that I think I'd rather have the superhero. The superhero-supported squad was easier to leverage, since the rest of the squad didn't spend most of its' time just setting up defensive position to protect to fragile artillery piece Magic User.

 

[Garthanos]

Have to agree. There's no specific issue with including this in the game. As to why it isn't/I suspect it won't* is simply that I don't know how many people have a problem with this role being filled with paladins and hexblades -- this 'but not using spells' part (plus it needing to be part of the fighter class) seems to be a requirement I see people having here, but not in gamerdom at large (here I'm using Reddit and in-person as my primary sources).
*and here make your voices known when we get to the class-portion of the playtest on the update edition.

I will say class names do not matter to me...

Not thinking this can be solved via reflavoring an existing class

Complexity, Versatility and Power at high levels are the underlying lacks which are being discussed not a lack of legendary flavor. Making the non-caster characters more mythic/legendary is largely about providing story handles for adjusting the CVP.

Level Up tries to address the first two but maintained power steady. It even has some mythic like elements that kick in for martial types at high levels (for instance a mostly useless Horizon Shot for archer fans) but its kind of not fully implemented in that regards.

 

[Cadence]

Probably not in a particularly coherent way. Not a lot of accurate measuring or particularly conscientious recordkeeping going on back then.

Aren't the records for a lot of things a lot lower even back in the 1960s? I guess I have a distraction of something to look up next time I need one

 

[Garthanos]

Oh goodness, I'd have to dig out the books. Probably.
What I remember (particularly pertinent to the thread topic) is that Heroes and Superheroes were bad to the bone. They had the best resistances to things like dragon fear, could inspire fear in enemy troops, rally their own side, sense hidden foes, cut swaths through normal enemy troops, and survive all but the most well-coordinated assaults (or regular ones if you were ridiculously reckless with them).
I believe they were point-valued at 20/50 and magic users were 50-100 (so, in effect, the game only included fighters levels 4 and 8 and MUs 8-16, so no they weren't usually going to be equal in value). However, where their point costs intersected, I honestly thing the fighter was a better pick. It would be situational, but, say, 50 points of regular infantry and a 50 point magic user or 50 points of infantry and a superhero unit was a tough choice that I think I'd rather have the superhero. The superhero-supported squad was easier to leverage, since the rest of the squad didn't spend most of its' time just setting up defensive position to protect to fragile artillery piece Magic User.

Magic User the bazooka who could become invisible between each turn till they attacked... create ares of Darkness that they could see through... they were badass too

That bazooka could be using either a lightning or fireball every turn. These were the first at-will spells