D&D 5E [+] Ways to fix the caster / non-caster gap

[Vaalingrade]

Like principles behind all of Fantasy and Fiction?

Yes. Things like 'This is fiction' and 'this is not going to accurately reflect our mundane world; at the very least things will be heightened for dramatic effect' for fiction and 'even if this is set on earth, prepare to accept some weird crap just at base; turns out willing suspension of disbelief includes the word WILLING' for fantasy.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Well obviously that's not where I want the bar to be, which is why we're not going to meet here. I apologize for the hyperbole, but I am extremely tired of people telling me what I want isn't real or can't be done. Its rude and disrespectful, and I know you wouldn't appreciate it if the positions are reversed (as you've just shown me).

I am not telling you it isn't real or can't be done. I am telling you it isn't how D&D does it. And what I am doing here is pointing out what the rules of D&D 5e actually say. Which in this case is that an entire keg of gunpowder exploding within 10ft of you does 7d6 damage, DC12 dex save for half (and as such is less dangerous than the standard 20ft radius 8d6 fireball). Your average first level PC has in my experience a 50 % chance of making that saving throw (Dex being a favoured stat), and by about third level the question isn't whether if they are right next to a literal powder keg when it blows up whether they will be turned into kibble (that won't happen even to first level characters) but whether they will be conscious and able to keep fighting.

This is what the rules of D&D actually say. You can house rule otherwise. But any version of D&D 5e where the physics are realistic rather than where a character can basically be dropped from orbit and, after a simple and mundane medicine check can stand back up with zero broken bones is not one where realism is anything other than a collection of house rules.

It's like how @Reynard keeps making threads to talk about playstyles with a simulation and/or worldbuilding bent, and all of them keep getting invaded by narrative game fans poo-pooing the premise while pretending they aren't. I am sick of it.

I am not saying that you are wrong to want what you do. I own Torchbearer and multiple editions of both GURPS and WFRP. I am saying that the rules of D&D 5e are clear in what they present. And it is emphatically not real world physics. And I wish you would stop presenting your personal house rules as if they were the actual rules of D&D 5e. And by doing so and denying what the actual rules of D&D 5e say you are poo-pooing those of us that enjoy what is actually presented and passing off misinformation (that D&D is realistic) as if it were true. And I'm sick of that.

 

[Baron Opal II]

For a giant to function they would need some new form of matter completely unknown to science. No metals we know of would allow a human-sized mecha to exist alone, yet alone a biological material.

Well, it is centauroid rather than humanoid, but there is the Kuratas mech.

Give me an example of a explicitly non-supernatural human being in a story jumping a 20 foot gorge unaided. Or from real life. That would work too.

At the 1968 Summer Olympics, Bob Beamon jumped 8.90 m (29 ft +). Which is talented peak performance, but it does show what people are capable of without (assumedely) magical assistance and extensive training.

A useful question I think is now that we can peg peak human performance, 30 ft., at what level or attribute score would this kind of long jump be a) possible to attempt and b) succeed regularly.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Wuxia is explicitly supernatural for my money.

The entire genre? Explicitly supernatural?

"Explicit" means that they come right out and say what's happening and why. We don't "consider" something to be "explicitly" anything. That's the point of something being explicit in the first place; there's no need to consider or interpret because it spelled out in black and white.

As it applies here, for the long jumping martial artist to be "explicitly supernatural", in the story the character should be openly described as having some specific supernatural gift, tapping into some supernatural power or otherwise clearly and unambiguously describing what makes the character supernatural.

This is what it means when something is "explicitly supernatural"

And this is something which varies from wuxia story to wuxia story.

What you're really telling us is that if you see something you consider to be superhuman take place in a work of fiction, then, in the absence of any other evidence, it must be supernatural, regardless of the context.

 

[TwoSix]

I am not saying that you are wrong to want what you do. I own Torchbearer and multiple editions of both GURPS and WFRP. I am saying that the rules of D&D 5e are clear in what they present. And it is emphatically not real world physics. And I wish you would stop presenting your personal house rules as if they were the actual rules of D&D 5e. And by doing so and denying what the actual rules of D&D 5e say you are poo-pooing those of us that enjoy what is actually presented and passing off misinformation (that D&D is realistic) as if it were true. And I'm sick of that.

If we're going to air forum grievances, I'm a little tired of the assertion that being fiction or narrative focused means you don't value consistency and verisimiltude.

My play style has evolved to be more fiction focused precisely because I think orienting the game around extrapolation of the setting from the rules constructs is damaging to both consistency and verisimilitude.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Wuxia is explicitly supernatural for my money.

TBF, in some ways of thinking, Qi (or whatever the correct pinyin is for it atm), is quintessentially natural. Not that the wuxia genre (let alone xianxia) is exactly into that line of thinking, I'm sure they're more like, what spectacular stunts and visual effects can we do to keep the fans watching the next 40 episodes on TenCent....

 

[Micah Sweet]

I am not telling you it isn't real or can't be done. I am telling you it isn't how D&D does it. And what I am doing here is pointing out what the rules of D&D 5e actually say. Which in this case is that an entire keg of gunpowder exploding within 10ft of you does 7d6 damage, DC12 dex save for half (and as such is less dangerous than the standard 20ft radius 8d6 fireball). Your average first level PC has in my experience a 50 % chance of making that saving throw (Dex being a favoured stat), and by about third level the question isn't whether if they are right next to a literal powder keg when it blows up whether they will be turned into kibble (that won't happen even to first level characters) but whether they will be conscious and able to keep fighting.

This is what the rules of D&D actually say. You can house rule otherwise. But any version of D&D 5e where the physics are realistic rather than where a character can basically be dropped from orbit and, after a simple and mundane medicine check can stand back up with zero broken bones is not one where realism is anything other than a collection of house rules.

I am not saying that you are wrong to want what you do. I own Torchbearer and multiple editions of both GURPS and WFRP. I am saying that the rules of D&D 5e are clear in what they present. And it is emphatically not real world physics. And I wish you would stop presenting your personal house rules as if they were the actual rules of D&D 5e. And by doing so and denying what the actual rules of D&D 5e say you are poo-pooing those of us that enjoy what is actually presented and passing off misinformation (that D&D is realistic) as if it were true. And I'm sick of that.

The rules of D&D are maliable, by design, and I'm almost always talking about D&D in general unless I specifically say otherwise, by which I mean a game by any company roughly derived from TSR's family of games that were called some variation of Dungeons & Dragons, and which use similar conventions. Some versions of that game are more realistic than others, and those versions are the ones I prefer to play, often houseruled further. I don't usually reel off page numbers because I'm not talking about a specific book unless I say so.

My title is Level Up and OSR enthusiast because those are the versions of D&D I favor, and very much not the current WotC interpretation of the 5e rules, a company I care about only because it sets the "standard" for the industry and the D&D community and because it unfortunately is the owner of some IP in which I am emotionally invested. I doubt that is confusing for you or for many of this board's more prolific members.

 

[Micah Sweet]

TBF, in some ways of thinking, Qi (or whatever the correct pinyin is for it atm), is quintessentially natural. Not that the wuxia genre (let alone xianxia) is exactly into that line of thinking, I'm sure they're more like, what spectacular stunts and visual effects can we do to keep the fans watching the next 40 episodes on TenCent....

I'm sure that's true for some. I'm not a big fan of anime, and if I were I would treat it like the story it is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The entire genre? Explicitly supernatural?

"Explicit" means that they come right out and say what's happening and why. We don't "consider" something to be "explicitly" anything. That's the point of something being explicit in the first place; there's no need to consider or interpret because it spelled out in black and white.

As it applies here, for the long jumping martial artist to be "explicitly supernatural", in the story the character should be openly described as having some specific supernatural gift, tapping into some supernatural power or otherwise clearly and unambiguously describing what makes the character supernatural.

This is what it means when something is "explicitly supernatural"

And this is something which varies from wuxia story to wuxia story.

What you're really telling us is that if you see something you consider to be superhuman take place in a work of fiction, then, in the absence of any other evidence, it must be supernatural, regardless of the context.

I guess that is what I'm saying yes. I apologize for misspeaking.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, it is centauroid rather than humanoid, but there is the Kuratas mech.


At the 1968 Summer Olympics, Bob Beamon jumped 8.90 m (29 ft +). Which is talented peak performance, but it does show what people are capable of without (assumedely) magical assistance and extensive training.

A useful question I think is now that we can peg peak human performance, 30 ft., at what level or attribute score would this kind of long jump be a) possible to attempt and b) succeed regularly.

Sounds good to me. Mundane in gaming shouldn't fall short of what is demonstrably possible in real life.