D&D 5E 2024 D&D is 2014 D&D with 4E sprinkled on top

[EzekielRaiden]

Magic can be as broad, or narrow, as you like.

But there are things that aren't magic that are still supernatural. Which is my whole point. "Magic" is not 1:1 synonymous with "supernatural." Some supernatural things are not magic. All magic is supernatural.

No matter how broad or narrow you decide to fill the category of "magic", there will always be things you could make that aren't magic, but are still beyond the natural.

3e called them [Ex] abilities. They could do things beyond what was normally possible, like outright hiding in plain sight, and yet nothing that affects or interacts with magic could affect such a thing. 3e did very few things right, but the recognition of [Ex] abilities was one of them.

"Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical. They are, however, not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training. Effects or areas that suppress or negate magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities."

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

the point is that a player character is not special, they are just a person in the world no different from the others, whether PC or NPC

No they're player characters. They're heroic.

 

[Scribe]

But there are things that aren't magic that are still supernatural. Which is my whole point. "Magic" is not 1:1 synonymous with "supernatural." Some supernatural things are not magic. All magic is supernatural.

No matter how broad or narrow you decide to fill the category of "magic", there will always be things you could make that aren't magic, but are still beyond the natural.

3e called them [Ex] abilities. They could do things beyond what was normally possible, like outright hiding in plain sight, and yet nothing that affects or interacts with magic could affect such a thing. 3e did very few things right, but the recognition of [Ex] abilities was one of them.

"Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical. They are, however, not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training. Effects or areas that suppress or negate magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities."

Or, you can just call it magic. Ghosts are Magic. Dragons are Magic. Fey are Magic. Planes are Magic.

Your example of a Javelin Toss of a Mile, the current world record is something like 98 Meters. A Mile being ~1609 meters.

Thats Magic.

 

[Hussar]

Is fighting a T Rex mundane???

That would be my point.

It’s perfectly okay to say that a fighter is mundane when it can kill a T Rex with a sword. But being able to jump thirty feet - something that people in the real world man do - must be magic.

 

[mamba]

No they're player characters. They're heroic.

we are not going to agree on this, they might be the ones setting out on adventure, but they are no different from their neighbors that stay home at that point

 

[Lord Twig]

Why does magic get to be terrifying in a way that non-magic does not?

What does magic have to do with it? Fire Bolt is not terrifying. At least it is less terrifying than a Fighter with a sword or a bow.

Fire Ball is a limited resource. The Wizard can't throw Fire Balls all day. A Fighter can swing his sword as much as he wants.

Also, magic in D&D is like science in the real world. Soldiers can see in the dark and hurl bits of metal at terrifying speeds because of science. In the real world no one expects a naked guy to see in the dark or throw a chunk of metal at greater than the speed of sound because he did 100 pushups every day. He uses science, or in D&D terms, magic.

 

[Lord Twig]

That was a response to all the OS people who were bemoaning how gear was no longer in the hands of the DM and players were entitled for buying the necessary upgrades rather then keeping quirky fun stuff the DM gave. 5e opted for the magic items as gravy approach to satisfy that contingent of grognards.

And it became the most popular version in D&D history. So looks like the grognards were right!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why?

Why is it so impossible to accept that there are stories--even in foundational European tales, the very things that inspired Tolkien himself and thus 99.9% of D&D's milieu!--where there are people who explicitly, emphatically DO NOT use ANYTHING "magical", and yet still do things that should be impossible?

"Magic" is far, FAR more specific than "things that aren't physically possible with completely mundane skills." Magic means curses, or alchemy/potions/elixirs, or spells (which, in D&D, have mostly absorbed curses), or enchanted items, or explicitly divine "boons" or the like. None of those things describe Atalanta, or Odysseus, or Beowulf. They just, flat, don't.

The only conclusion one can draw, which doesn't contradict the explicit text of the stories involved here, is that you can have things that are not "magic"--they aren't any of the things that fall under the meaning of that term--but which are beyond-the-natural. That it is possible for someone's prowess or skill or speed to become so great, it manages to break the rules, even though none of the practice that went into developing that power ever broke the rules itself.

"Magic" is not the only thing that can break the rules of nature. Other things can too. Transmundane abilities are among them. Such explicitly non-magical breaking-of-nature's-rules is rife in fiction the world over, going back thousands of years to the very foundations of storytelling.

I'm happy to use the term "supernatural" rather than magic if you prefer, but if you're doing something that isn't possibly by real life physics, at all, it it by definition not mundane. I'm perfectly happy to accept multiple varieties of supernatural power, including the narrow definition of magic you are describing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

How is it not relevant?

What the player characters can do has nothing to do with what non player characters can do.

Because the above is not a universally accepted belief, but rather a personal, subjective opinion. It is relevant to you.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

What does magic have to do with it? Fire Bolt is not terrifying. At least it is less terrifying than a Fighter with a sword or a bow.

Go ahead and tell that to the orderlies at the "mad mages" wing of the local sanitarium. I DARE you.

I mean, when they get old and weak and mentally unstable, a fighter can STILL be disarmed. After which they're much less dangerous and do NOT burn everything flammable around them. Unless they're actually a monk. In which case I believe the standard practice is to build them a nice, pretty home off in the middle of nowhere and call them sensei until some nutjob seeking "a worthy opponent" comes along and flattens them.

Less chance of warrior-types raising titanic undead armies or blasting large parts of the countryside away when they forget that they ALREADY conquered the world anyway.