D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[Cadence]

That 20 cap is for a relatively ordinary human. Technically even a non-magical Barbarian can achieve a 24 (at level 20), so that's arguably the real strength limit for a non-super-human. But Spiderman has explicitly super-human strength, which means his strength could be as high as 30.

If he has a unique feature that allows him to exceed normal encumbrance limits for purposes of lifting, even your 20k+ criteria is achievable.

Having to allow for anything because of a "unique feature" is certainly one way to take care of a lot of edge cases. <Almost avoid snarkily wanting my cleric to be the Spectre when it's helpful or good for story.>

You're welcome to your opinion, but I think there's a lot more that makes Spiderman Spiderman than what he can bench press.

But seriously, I agree. The actual character of the characters gets too little influence. It's the time when things aren't going Spideys way - when his powers aren't enough, or aren't working, or are countered - that he fights through and shows why he is truly great! (The Thing used to be that way too I think - one anchored Marvel Team-Up and the other anchored Marvel Two-in-One).

Does an anti-magic field sometimes give a mage the chance to show their character beyond being a collection of spells? Should a well designed mage class give them enough other skills that they still can (akin to the problem with a fighter needing more when out of combat)?

 

[Bill Zebub]

How is "historically accurate" not realistic or plausible?

Huh?

I said they have different meanings. Not that they are mutually exclusive.

 

[Cadence]

That goes back to what I said on Magic Replacing Tech.

If you start with an Earth base and rewrite history so that the only advancement are Spellcasting, Heavy Armor, and Martial Weapons.

Is it realistic for a nonmagical fighter class to exist? Plausible? Historically Accurate?

As always, that feels like it's how much magic can do and at what cost.

I'm a big fan of Randall Garrett's "Lord Darcy" series in how it shows one of many ways it could have gone.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If the only science is Casting then the world itself is hindering the deveelopment of other sciences and every humaniod above the peasent or serf caste would be a caster or infused with magic.

Who says it’s the only “science”?

I mean, they still bake bread, ferment beer, and heat treat steel, right?

 

[Fanaelialae]

Having to allow for anything because of a "unique feature" is certainly one way to take care of a lot of edge cases. <Almost avoid snarkily wanting my cleric to be the Spectre when it's helpful or good for story.>

If you want to have Superman make an appearance in your 5e campaign, do you simply throw up your hands in frustration because the Kryptonian race doesn't exist?

5e doesn't have any support for a kid who gained superhuman powers by being bit by a radioactive spider. How would you model his Spidey sense except as a unique feature (possibly permanent Foresight, possibly some different implementation)?

 

[Bill Zebub]

But I don't think "realistic in the actual world" has much objective utility either in the context of D&D. D&D doesn't take place in the actual world.

It does for people who believe “non-magical” should mean “realistic, as in real world.” It’s fair to reject that as a desirable game feature, but for those who value it, the term has utility.

 

[Minigiant]

Who says it’s the only “science”?

I mean, they still bake bread, ferment beer, and heat treat steel, right?

I did say that science is still in the BCE times except for armor and weapons and the things needed to create them.

I mean most editions have a Medicine or Heal skill but you can't actually do much doctoring. Not even quack medicine exists officially.

D&D has a bunch of skills and NWPs that don't do anything unless you take a special optional class that may or may not be banned.

 

[James Gasik]

Huh?

I said they have different meanings. Not that they are mutually exclusive.

But do they have different meanings? Like, if we say a realistic or plausible D&D setting is one that isn't historically accurate, when our history is the only thing we have to base our understanding of the past upon, then we run into a problem.

If you look at the typical D&D setting, with it's arbitrary decisions on what advancements did or did not occur, and what things are impossible without magic, we end up with a world that is implausible.

Many innovations are reliant on other innovations that preceded them. Remove a link in the chain, to remove something that you don't feel "fits the D&D fantasy", and some other things that you feel do, have no logical reason to exist either.

Throwing magic into the mix just makes things even stranger.

Just one example- armor requires special training to wear, can be expensive, and has disadvantages (some real, some imagined) in D&D.

But Mage Armor, a first level spell that lasts for 8 hours does not- it's better than any light armor that exists, in fact.

Why don't we have armies of fighting men trained to be able to cast Mage Armor 1/day instead of light armor? Why aren't there better versions of Mage Armor, that can replicate heavier armors?

If magic can more effectively replace real world innovations, why do we have those innovations?

The reason of course, is usually handwaved as magic is hard to learn and requires special talent (despite the fact the rules don't reflect this in the slightest), that magicians are some kind of mafia or secret society hell bent on keeping non magicians down, etc..

Or that the resulting world wouldn't feel like the fantasy people want to play in, lol. So we get these debates about what is plausible, when our basic premise is completely flawed and falls apart if you examine it with any rigor.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think I’ll bow out. It seems that people want to define terms in a way that denies legitimacy to an aesthetic preference, rather than just acknowledge that different people have different preferences.

Happy gaming.

 

[Voadam]

Regardless, put him in D&D and his strength drops to 20. He goes from 20000(or around there depending on the Marvel writer) pounds to 600. 5e caps him at 20 strength as a human PC.

5e PCs can have magical effects that change their carrying capacity and such while leaving combat numbers still in bound accuracy ranges. 2nd level enhance ability bull's strength doubles it for PCs for example. Some superpower type things seem amenable to the blessings, charms, or epic boons type of things in the DMG that PCs can get.

As someone who had multiple subscriptions to Marvel Spiderman titles for some years (Amazing Spiderman, The Spectacular Spiderman) his strength lifting capacity was rarely a thing that came up in the ones I read. He would jump and dodge, throw punches, and web sling all the time. He would occasionally lift heavy things up or tear them away to get to someone who was hurt, but I don't remember him throwing cars, though I think I recall him lifting one in a cover.

A quick image search for Spiderman throwing a car brings up a couple images but not a lot.

It is a Spiderman thing but I wouldn't say a core thing for him. Probably not top five things I would call to mind in describing him.