D&D 5E Merlin and Arthur or Batman and zatana

Based on Frank Miller's other work (Daredevil, Punisher, 300, etc.) and his writing on this specific comic series, I would say the narrative design intent is probably that Batman is stronger because he is willing to be ruthless and dedicated and assert himself and do whatever it takes to crush his enemies.

Superman has more potential power, but is not as "strong" as Batman and so is actually weaker and loses to the dedicated hard core strong man when they come into actual conflict.
I wouldn't disagree with that analysis. The point is "powerful guy beats weak guy" doesn't make a very good story, so is rarely written about. It's one of the ways fiction differs fundamentally from real life (and tabletop RPGs).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Given the number of children I have taught with confidence and assertiveness issues, I would say that this is a good example of "90% of aphorisms are not true".
Alright. "It's really easy to say a lot of things and then wind up doing absolutely nothing. In fact, our language has many words for people like that. Making promises is as easy as breathing--literally. Keeping promises requires a lot of work, a lot of action. Just being the person to say the most things doesn't actually mean you DO the most things. And, in general, it is the doing of things which results in control over the story, not just the saying of things."
 




There is also the case where the Hero loose its power for a time.
It is a recurring theme in fantasy, we seen it in Stranger thing, The Witcher, Marvel use it widely.
The hero become almost mundane, except for his gut, determination, spirit, and most of the time, the plot show that it is the inner state of the character that make him a true hero.
Then the power are sent back, and the hero finish the show.
 

It doesn't matter if it's inside a fight or outside a fight, the players who do most of the talking dominate the game.

The main difference with Critical Role is ALL the participants are good at talking, so it is better balanced than a home game, where one or two more assertive players tend to dominate.

Sure. "I cast X" is three words to change an encounter. (Maybe four or more, some spells have two- or three-word names or longer.)

Does the Fighter have such economy?
I see two conflicting vision here.

The RPG, Ressource planning game, that focus on ressource, economy and result.
and
the RPG, Role playing game that focus on character, social and entertainment.

Both exist in DND at a varying level.
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
While not the perfect translation, superman is a paladin and batman is a rogue with a smattering of monk.

The issue arises when you look at things from a purely combat angle, supes is specced almost entirely for combat, he convinced the GM to let him trade out his spell list for an OP outer planes species that has flight, a few innate at will spells(scorching ray heat vision, cone of cold ice breath, haste superspeed, scrying Xray vision, disguise self clark kent, ect...) resistance to standard damage but is vulnerable to magic and cold iron kryptonite, 20 STR, 20 CON, decent CHA, and averageish DEX, INT and WIS, But now bats on the other hand, bats is basically built entirely the other way around, his stats are lower because of multiclassing and taking feats instead of ASI, they’re more equal across the board 12s-16s with more focus on DEX, INT and WIS, only he’s got reliable talent plus the skilled feat to get bonuses to stealth, acrobatics, investigation, history, perception, survival and intimidation, plus a ton of starting gold from his noble background that he uses to supplement his abilities even further by buying magic items tech.

So Supes and Bats are not balanced in a fight but they are balanced across the whole campaign which is what really is the important thing to achieve, they’re not meant to be put against each other head to head they’re meant to support each other as they fill different niches in the party dynamic and they both do their own role well

Edit: it’s also to note that Supes and Bats are originally both the protagonist of their own media separately before being brought together in the justice league whereas frodo and gandalf are part of the same story and play entirely different roles within it, frodo is not meant to be anywhere near the same level of narrative power as gandalf is.
 
Last edited:

Fanaelialae

Legend
I think D&D would be better if the wizard were designed more like Batman and the fighter more like Superman. That might arguably be the case at low levels, but it certainly is not at high levels.

The fighter is basically designed like a Batman who gets blindsided by every situation. And the wizard, particularly at high levels, is approaching Superman in power, with the added benefit of being able to plan and prepare.
 

Zubatcarteira

Now you're infected by the Musical Doodle
The issue of Batman and Superman as an example for games is that the former can only compete because the latter lets him and is too much of a good guy to win in any of the hundreds of ways he could. In a game with a murderhobo player controlling Superman, it'd go like this:
Batman Player: I have prepared extensively, I have a robot suit that can fight Superman, a bunch of kryptonite, red sun radiation bombs, I'm ready to fight him!

Superman Player: I ram into the Earth at the speed of light and destroy the entire planet.

Batman & DM: Bruh.
 

Remove ads

Top