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

[GobHag]

While I generally agree with you, I do feel the need to point out that systems like Fate-derived and PBTA systems handle "supremely magical guy" and "ordinary dude" in the same group relatively well, since the system focuses less on in-world differences than narrative control mechanically.

But if you're looking for a D&D-style tactical combat system? Yeah, no idea how you'd square that circle.

A lot of TacRPG does this actually--Like for example, in Icon a Knave(a sort of blackguard dirty fighter) is supposed to be the same level as someone that shoot lightning from their sword but this is because Icon embraces abstraction so 'lightning wreathed swordstrike' and 'punch to the dick' can both be do similar enough damage--in fact, considering how the Knave is in the big bruiser supertype that Punch in the Dick is gonn ahurt a lot more.

Actually, let's consider something from Pathfinder where the Demigod class is not necessarily the best at doing fighting because good 'ol fashioned Fighter has an extra tier of accuracy above the Demigod class so it's generally true that the FIghter is better.

 

[TwoSix]

1) The opposite of mundane is not "magic". It could be supernatural, or paranormal, or transmundane, or preternatural. But not specifically "magic". "Magic", in a fantasy game, is constrained to practioners who say magic words and use rituals and special ingredients.

2) Using "magic" in a fantasy game to describe someone capable of supernatural feats that don't involve chanting and rituals weakens the word, and confuses the discourse. Update your verbiage. Superman is not magic. Saitama is not magic. They are something else.

3) D&D (as a genre) does not exist in a mundane world, or a world of magical realism, or a world operating within fairy tale logic, where normal people wander into a magical otherspace. D&D exists in a supernatural world.

4) In a supernatural world, mundane limits only exist until some kind of mechanism demonstrates why they do not. It is entirely possible for mundane actions to produce a supernatural result.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Yep! It's the most verisimilitudiness and most realistic thing(and I"m being very generous actually!) to have the normal, unpowered underdog... to be underpowered and an underdog. Everyone is happy!

How is Normal Guy happy? He never said he wanted to be an unpowered underdog. YOU wrote that in. Here is what he said:

I want to play a character who doesn’t use any magic at all. Magic killed his parents, stole his girlfriend, and ran off with his dog. He never, ever, ever will use or do anything magical.

Let's assume Normal Guy has the same desires as Magic McMagic. They both want to have fun playing the game. They both want to live out heroic fantasies as larger-than-life heroes (whatever "hero" means, could be amoral murder-hobo, that's D&D).

They get to mull over over having to carry a torch or a length of ripe while I can teleport choke-slam every skeleton in a mile-wide radius!

Do you honestly feel that is a fair solution for these two players at your table?

Fate-derived and PBTA systems handle "supremely magical guy" and "ordinary dude" in the same group relatively well, since the system focuses less on in-world differences than narrative control mechanically.

Ding ding ding. We have a winner. This is always an argument about narrative control. What it exposes is the belief system that, according to some (not you, BrokenTwin), non-magical characters and the players who are foolish enough to play them do not DESERVE as much narrative control as magical characters.

But if you're looking for a D&D-style tactical combat system? Yeah, no idea how you'd square that circle.

By playing 4e. zing

Part of my issue whenever this conversation comes up is exactly what the badass normal is supposed to be doing that isn't supernatural.

According to some in this thread: nothing! Because literally anything that transcends normal human capability even a little bit is magic.

You're always going to the up with the normal dude left behind as long as one gets to break the rules.

Exactly. There is even a term for this, from the late lamented wizards CharOpt forum (in Armisael's signature so I assume he invented it):

Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).

But what a lot of people seem to be saying is that the Mountain Cleave Rule does not apply. Magic McMagic can warp reality with his spells, but Normal Guy With A Sword? Screw that guy. He can't do anything even remotely "magical" to break reality.

make sure that the system isn't as over the top with magic as it currently is.

We're not talking about any system other than D&D, here.

That depends entirely on what you mean with Normal Guy.

The two characters, to me, sound completely incompatible. One player wants to play a demigod-wizard and the other player wants to play a commoner.

No, he does not. That is your assumption. Allow me to quote him again:

I want to play a character who doesn’t use any magic at all. Magic killed his parents, stole his girlfriend, and ran off with his dog. He never, ever, ever will use or do anything magical.

And allow me to reiterate this assumption:

Let's assume Normal Guy has the same desires as Magic McMagic. They both want to have fun playing the game. They both want to live out heroic fantasies as larger-than-life heroes (whatever "hero" means, could be amoral murder-hobo, that's D&D).

My point is that D&D is fundamentally badly designed, because high level martial characters are highly restricted in many ways, while casters are overpowered.

In 5e, maybe.

I'm saying that a "Normal Guy", if you mean "Realistic" is a commoner.

Why, though? Why couldn't he be the D&D equivalent of a SEAL Team 6 operator? The absolute peak of human physical development and training, just without the tech and guns. What can Normal Guy now do, in your game?

The real problem here is that D&D makes it so that magical characters are more competent than non-magical characters.

Maybe in 5e.

Wanting to play a non-magical character you have to accept to play a worse class.

Maybe in 5e.

The fix is obviously to make martials more competent, but it'll take a while until we have a viable high level non-magical martial.

It was done in 2008.

 

[Remathilis]

Exactly. There is even a term for this, from the late lamented wizards CharOpt forum (in Armisael's signature so I assume he invented it):

Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).

But what a lot of people seem to be saying is that the Mountain Cleave Rule does not apply. Magic McMagic can warp reality with his spells, but Normal Guy With A Sword? Screw that guy. He can't do anything even remotely "magical" to break reality.

My take on mountain cleave is that as long as the game is vaguely gesturing at a rationale (blood of giants, demigod, seventh son a of seventh son, the chosen one, etc) cleave mountains. But I don't like the idea that any farmer who kills enough goblins can cleave a mountain and that is a natural part of the world. Partially because it makes magic less magical. If you can cut a mountain in half or divert a river with enough hard work, why need magic? That's just cheating to bypass hard work.

I'm all for greater equality between wizards and fighters, but don't tell me cutting a mountain in half is a natural thing anyone can learn to do after enough XP. At least tell me why there isn't high level champions of the realm removing pesky mountain to improve trade routes!

 

[Scribe]

Then aything that your fighter has done is magic

I mean we can reach for absurdities if you like.

Drawing and swinging a sword is Magic? Sure.

 

[TwoSix]

My take on mountain cleave is that as long as the game is vaguely gesturing at a rationale (blood of giants, demigod, seventh son a of seventh son, the chosen one, etc) cleave mountains. But I don't like the idea that any farmer who kills enough goblins can cleave a mountain and that is a natural part of the world. Partially because it makes magic less magical. If you can cut a mountain in half or divert a river with enough hard work, why need magic? That's just cheating to bypass hard work.

I'm all for greater equality between wizards and fighters, but don't tell me cutting a mountain in half is a natural thing anyone can learn to do after enough XP. At least tell me why there isn't high level champions of the realm removing pesky mountain to improve trade routes!

If you define the setting as such that 99.9999% of people can't cleave mountains simply by training, but there are a select few people who can for reasons that simply aren't understood, shouldn't that be sufficient?

Some people are just born special.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Part of my issue whenever this conversation comes up is exactly what the badass normal is supposed to be doing that isn't supernatural. You can give a fighter 20 attacks per round and he's still hosed when the wizard casts fly and buggers off. What then? The fighter can fly too? Wuxia! The wizard can't fly? That's magic 101! You're always going to the up with the normal dude left behind as long as one gets to break the rules.
Or put another way
View attachment 397252

Well, had I my druthers:

1. Fly is one of the spots where spellcasting can be allowed to just do a really cool thing that doesn't have a direct response. It's actually okay for spellcasting to have a few things like that....so long as the transmundane martial also has cool things they can do that are Just Better than any response/retort a spellcaster could attempt using spells. You may note, this is one of the things I've been pushing for all along, special things unique to martials that casters can't replicate. I don't personally think weapon masteries achieve the job, but they're an exceedingly rare step in the right direction, so I don't want to criticize them too much.
2. I'm very much in favor of interesting asymmetrical design and asymmetrical balance. If we did just give martials a perfect counter to every spell and spellcasters a perfect counter to every maneuver, all we would accomplish is making both sides equally bland. Instead, I would suggest offering varied benefits to each side. Example: Spellcasters can create food out of nothing (create food and water, goodberry, heroes' feast, etc.) That's a perfectly acceptable thing for only explicitly magical characters to do. An asymmetrical but still analogous thing to do? Maybe martial characters can resist Exhaustion, perhaps even becoming nigh-immune to it at very high levels (again, Beowulf swimming home across the ocean while carrying 30 suits of armor).
3. Some of the bones of some good things can be found in various features...but a lot of them are given to spellcasters and martials alike, with no real pattern. I would like to see things like Reliable Talent made exclusive to martial classes, to show how such adventurers achieve truly superlative skill and ability. Iterate further on this, developing both clearly powerful uses for skills and clearly skill-forward features that encourage martial characters to think along those lines, just as spellcasters are innately encouraged to think along the lines of "when and how should I use my slots?"
4. Amongst my 13 "missing" archetypes from 5.5 (13 rather than 12 because there is no 5.5e Artificer yet), I have a class I call "Machinist", though I don't really care for that name and am still thinking of better ones. Regardless, it's the warrior-of-technology, someone who wields machinery, devices, non-alchemical chemistry, and other sorts of things. As they transcend the limits of mundanity through their skill and precision and knowledge, they'd become rather like the stereotype of Batman, having a utility belt with a bazillion esoteric but useful tools. (Probably, I'd make it involve skill rolls and having only a chance to pull out the most-useful thing? I dunno, I'm totally spitballing here, but that mechanic worked alright for the 3.5e BO9S Crusader, so...)

Essentially, we solve this problem by:

• Further developing the reductions in top-end caster power, without going back to the bad old days of "ope, you ran out of your 3 spells, time to fling darts!" because...that's not what people today find fun or engaging.
• Adding more classes that aren't inherently magical. The Warlord is the obvious first choice, particularly since adding it would be an ENORMOUS olive branch to a group of fans that often--absolutely not always, but certainly often--feel snubbed. Others include my "Machinist" idea, an innately spell-free Ranger (which is what it should've been all along), and possibly Assassin and Avenger (though they're at least a bit magical too.)
• Concentrating skill- and action-based mechanics much more heavily in the so-called "martial" classes, particularly those that are purely opt-in for magic (Barbarian, Fighter, reworked Ranger, Rogue, Warlord, "Machinist", etc.), while pushing spellcasters to more completely rely on spells or magic features to achieve their own superlative effects.
• Add, at very very high levels, "~~feats~~ deeds of might", or some equivalent thing, where martial characters can get some powerful effects. Offer a range of things, some more obviously, let's say "dramatic" than others, so that people who are really against this sort of thing have some options that are at least closer to their preferences.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

1) The opposite of mundane is not "magic". It could be supernatural, or paranormal, or transmundane, or preternatural. But not specifically "magic". "Magic", in a fantasy game, is constrained to practioners who say magic words and use rituals and special ingredients.

2) Using "magic" in a fantasy game to describe someone capable of supernatural feats that don't involve chanting and rituals weakens the word, and confuses the discourse. Update your verbiage. Superman is not magic. Saitama is not magic. They are something else.

3) D&D (as a genre) does not exist in a mundane world, or a world of magical realism, or a world operating within fairy tale logic, where normal people wander into a magical otherspace. D&D exists in a supernatural world.

4) In a supernatural world, mundane limits only exist until some kind of mechanism demonstrates why they do not. It is entirely possible for mundane actions to produce a supernatural result.

I couldn't have put this better myself. Thank you!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I mean we can reach for absurdities if you like.

Drawing and swinging a sword is Magic? Sure.

His point was that the initial claim is what is absurd. That by watering down "magic" that far, you've debased the term until it can be applied to almost anything now. Far from keeping magic magical, you've trivialized it so that nearly anything is "magic", no matter how absurd that becomes.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

My take on mountain cleave is that as long as the game is vaguely gesturing at a rationale (blood of giants, demigod, seventh son a of seventh son, the chosen one, etc) cleave mountains. But I don't like the idea that any farmer who kills enough goblins can cleave a mountain and that is a natural part of the world. Partially because it makes magic less magical. If you can cut a mountain in half or divert a river with enough hard work, why need magic? That's just cheating to bypass hard work.

I'm all for greater equality between wizards and fighters, but don't tell me cutting a mountain in half is a natural thing anyone can learn to do after enough XP. At least tell me why there isn't high level champions of the realm removing pesky mountain to improve trade routes!

I don't understand why this makes magic less magical. There are still things magic can do that non-magic can't. Creating objects genuinely out of nothing, for example. No non-magic character can do that. I wouldn't want them to!

But by that same token, why is magic somehow not magical if there are things you can do with other skills that magic simply can't replicate? Why is magic somehow not magical if there are other, slower, harder routes?

It's not cheating to...learn smarter, not harder. That's kind of the whole point of an education, to skip past the tedious, slow, iterative process of learning that hundreds of people before you went through. Education compacts 30,000 years of hard-won civilizational advancement into 13-20 years of relatively mild classwork.

I don't get how martial characters having nice things makes your magical character's nice things somehow not nice anymore.