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

[Cadence]

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.

So, how has your game where magic is easy to learn, has been for millenia, and everyone does it instead of science been going?

But seriously, I wish every DM spent a little time sketching out why their campaign has the limits it does.

----

In the real world why isn't everyone a doctor or engineer or trained artist or world renowned craftsperson or skilled scientist (or all five)?

----

RE: default 5e

 

[Gammadoodler]

Do the physics, biology, and chemistry work the same in both places, even if the engineers, doctors, and scientists are doing different things? <Insert tangent on the placebo effect and how too many people don't think about the weather until it is too late>

Yeah, there is a limit to the analogy, since Dubai and Cleveland are both actual places on real world Earth.

The point is, using a personal frame of reference to judge how places "should" behave is often a mistake even on actual real world Earth. Why make that mistake for fictional fantasy worlds?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not creating new classes is one of the main things I am baffled by 5e.

I could think of 2 classes desperately needed for 5e, 1 more that would help fit a request fantasy, and 2 more it could really use to expand settings.

WotC is terrified of confusing the new players they're courting by introducing any new complexity into the game.

 

[James Gasik]

So, how has your game where magic is easy to learn, has been for millenia, and everyone does it instead of science been going?

But seriously, I wish every DM spent a little time sketching out why their campaign has the limits it does.

----

In the real world why isn't everyone a doctor or engineer or trained artist or world renowned craftsperson or skilled scientist (or all five)?

----

RE: default 5e

View attachment 261981

I'm well aware that the game books claim that magic practitioners are rare, but even if that's true, which, at the very least, published settings indicate that it is not, the fact is, there's nothing informing that fact in the rules.

Even ignoring the fact that player characters run on different rules, allowing any Variant Human to start with a feat that gives them magic, regardless of class, there are several NPC's in the monster manual alone that stand in for generic individuals, like cultists, gladiators, town guards, and the like, many of whom have lots of Hit Dice, special abilities, and even spellcasting.

With regards to why isn't everyone a doctor or engineer, there is no correlation- we have no evidence stating that it's as hard to be a Cleric as it is to be a doctor, or that learning to cast first level spells requires an Engineering degree. In fact, I would argue we have quite the opposite-

If a 4HD player character can opt to learn 1st level magic simply by taking a feat, regardless of ability scores, class, or background, then it seems this is more akin to a 16 week course to get your CNA, nothing like being a doctor.

As for how my magical campaign goes, well it's on hiatus, but I did write one and run it for a few months. I get sometimes people want a less fantastical setting, but my point is that "ye olde typical D&D setting" is a lot less plausible than one might suppose at first glance.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Ship of Theseus his lifting capacity up or down and most people still say he is Spiderman.

"The proportional strength of a spider' is usually one of the first things listed in his power set.

 

[James Gasik]

As an aside, Cadence, it's actually one of your posts that I refer to often in these sorts of discussions, which has been an invaluable resource to me when people are like "plate armor makes sense, but gunpowder is too fantastic for D&D".

Invaluable Resource

 

[Maxperson]

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.

20 is the cap. 24 is super human, which is why it takes a level 20 capstone ability or a divine blessing to go past 20.

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

It's not encumbrance, though. He can punch that hard, too. Real Spiderman would have +328 to hit and damage from his strength. Weak knock-off spiderman would cap out at +7 if we gave him that superhuman 24.

 

[Cadence]

Yeah, there is a limit to the analogy, since Dubai and Cleveland are both actual places on real world Earth.

The point is, using a personal frame of reference to judge how places "should" behave is often a mistake even on actual real world Earth. Why make that mistake for fictional fantasy worlds?

Does almost everyone usually take the real world science as default unless it seems to break perceived real world time lines?

I assume players don't ask if metal armor floats or sinks before pushing a guard into the water, if salting a field ruins them if they want to suggest a particularly vicious threat to a farmer, if diamond can cut glass, if green wood smokes compared to dry wood, if various creepy crawlies eat dead bodies, etc...


Do they usually not assume if it seems to go against the genre?

Would they ask about gun powder? Aqua regia? Petroleum? Helium?


Do players and DMs avoid asking about things that might be cool if they were true in the world?

Spontaneous generation, Lamarckism, Emission theory of vision?


Are a lot of us really bad at knowing which things in the real world were used between the 1200s and 1800s?

(Ninja'd on this last one by @James Gasik - two posts up).

 

[James Gasik]

"The proportional strength of a spider' is usually one of the first things listed in his power set.

So about 250 times that of an average human.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I mean, why isn't the plate armor wearing fighter who is a millionaire packing a firearm and bags of ammo if firearms were invented before full European style plate armor?

Oh, I know this one!

It's because 'realism' and 'versimilitude' are not objective and actually constructed from what urban legends and common misconceptions we've bought into!