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

[Minigiant]

So it only has utility for those who believe that "non-magical" dwarves, elves, halflings, orcs, dragon people, cat people, half-devils, half-angels, lizard people...

..that live in a setting often cosmologically described as planes of existence

..with active and various deities, fey, and creatures from beyond the stars that meddle and plot

..where places can be cursed or hallowed, and items enchanted or animated

..should all have the same basic limitations they do in the real world, because no one has applied the word "magical" to any abilities they may possess?

I'm probably just going to have to take your word for it.

Everything is infused with magic but Jimmy the human baker's son.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'd be happy with that if the line between one and the other was more clearly drawn by the game itself.

Clear label is something D&D has decided not to do.

 

[Maxperson]

I'd be happy with that if the line between one and the other was more clearly drawn by the game itself.

They clarify it in the Sage Advice, but it really should be explained in the DMG somewhere.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Everything is infused with magic but Jimmy the human baker's son.

Have you tasted his scones?

He is not just magic, but touched by the divine.

 

[Minigiant]

4e and 5e actually do something of a disservice by having anyone who isn't a PC be written up as a monster, with whatever abilities are relevant to a PC encountering them- we're given no guidance if "generic gladiator" is actually that, or a legendary figure, renowned throughout the land.

It's supposed to be CR but 5e messed that up.

And they didn't event sidekick classes until recently. Holy Cow is 5e designed backwards.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Everything is infused with magic but Jimmy the human baker's son.

Whether it's all magic or not, it sure as heck doesn't exist in the real world..

(That, or I really gotta get out of the house more..)

 

[FrozenNorth]

Have you tasted his scones?

He is not just magic, but touched by the divine.

What? Did he take the Chef Feat? (Poking the bear, as I know some people don’t like the feat as it is too “magical”).

 

[Lanefan]

As I said before: impeding the use of the powerful thing, making it more annoying and/or difficult to use. A technique a lot of players today don't find particularly satisfying, which is the major reason why it isn't used.

For those players who "don't find [this] particularly satisfying" I have no sympathy whatsoever.

If it's a powerful thing then there should be impediments to its use.

 

[Lanefan]

More importantly, with such an obvious and (more importantly) total solution off the table, it might force the designers to get more creative.

Perhaps you get a suppress spellcasting spell. Spell level 1, universal (present in all traditions.)

Heh - I already put that one into my game about 20 years ago.

It's called Arcane Denial (yes, it's named after the old Magic card), it's a 3rd-level spell with a half-decent range (100' indoors, 250' outdoors), and if the target fails a save it can't cast arcane spells for one round per level of the AD's caster. Devices etc.* work as normal even if they are arcane-based, and any existing spells keep running as expected. Spells cast by others work as normal even if the Arcane Denial's victim is their target; except Dispel Magic will have no effect on the Denial.

It doesn't get cast often but it's had a few moments in the sun.

* - including scrolls even if they are arcane; the magic is bound up in the scroll rather than being drawn down by the caster and thus Arcane Denial cannot affect it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And if they are special, how special are they? It's a question without answer, since there's ample evidence to support that they are and are not either way.

Part of the problem is that, for a very long time, it was assumed that members of character classes were quite common. Published settings often have important individuals be high level, probably to prevent player characters from just running amok.

The introduction of NPC classes in 3e helped somewhat, though it still left quiet as to why someone with 5 levels of Expert couldn't acquire a real character class.

4e and 5e actually do something of a disservice by having anyone who isn't a PC be written up as a monster, with whatever abilities are relevant to a PC encountering them- we're given no guidance if "generic gladiator" is actually that, or a legendary figure, renowned throughout the land.

(No, thank you for sharing it!)

Strongly agree. Back in 1e and 2e, practically every NPC that had a name and a half-way plausible reason had a few levels of a character class (often fighter or thief). I miss seeing that, as now PCs are weird aliens with no real ties to the world they ostensibly grew up in.