D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[Micah Sweet]

I agree. And to me, it's a magic trick. The NPC mage or druid or spy is supposed to invoke the feel of a wizard, druid or rogue without necessarily needing uncanny dodge or arcane recovery. The NPC stats are pretending to represent a member of that class without being mechanically the same.

Then there are some (like noble or performer) that don't really represent a class and are just people. I don't think the guard stat block represents a fighter at any level. Just a guard.

The thing is, nobody says "hey! Telenicus the Merciless isn't a real wizard, he's just an archmage!" The illusion is that the archmage is filling that role of wizard even if he doesn't have real spell slots or a spell book. It requires suspension of disbelief, which you'd think would be easy in silly elf game, but apparently is in shorter supply than I knew.

Suspension of disbelief doesn't apply equally to everything for everybody.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"If you're wondering how they cast or fight
Or other character facts (la la la!)
Repeat to yourself it's just a game
I should really just relax"

The MST3K mantra is one way to handle this dissonance, sure, if you're inclined to think that way. For others, it simply seems dismissive of things that matter to them.

 

[Lanefan]

Yes, that's the kind of metagaming that the DMG warns you about. "Hey, if he's a wizard, why does he have magic resistance? The wizard class doesn't get that!" Or "how did he cast counterspell 3 times AND cast fireball and dispel magic? He should be out of level 3 spell slots!"

Except given that a character could also observe and note these things in the fiction, it's not metagaming. Instead, it's a character assessing its opponent and wondering wtf (or drooling over whatever magic items the foe has that are granting all those extra spell slots).

 

[Remathilis]

Except given that a character could also observe and note these things in the fiction, it's not metagaming. Instead, it's a character assessing its opponent and wondering wtf (or drooling over whatever magic items the foe has that are granting all those extra spell slots).

Considering that not every spellcaster is the game world belongs to one of the 12 PC classes, nor do all casters get the same amount of spells, nor does the NPC need to correspond to a particular level, such analytics are dubious at best. But believe me, if some player tried counting spell slots to argue that an NPC isn't abiding to the spell chart, that NPC would suddenly get meteor swarm at ∞/day.

 

[TwoSix]

Except given that a character could also observe and note these things in the fiction, it's not metagaming. Instead, it's a character assessing its opponent and wondering wtf (or drooling over whatever magic items the foe has that are granting all those extra spell slots).

Yes, but the characters would only be wondering "WTF" if they lived in a world in which every person who held a particular occupation learned the exact same skill set in the exact same order. If they live in a world in which every person develops their talents at their own pace, and in their own particular order, then there's no confusion.

Embedding identical class progression into the fiction is an aesthetic choice, and not one I'm a fan of unless LitRPG/progression fantasy tropes are designed into the setting. (Which I have done before!)

 

[James Gasik]

Yes, but the characters would only be wondering "WTF" if they lived in a world in which every person who held a particular occupation learned the exact same skill set in the exact same order. If they live in a world in which every person develops their talents at their own pace, and in their own particular order, then there's no confusion.

Embedding identical class progression into the fiction is an aesthetic choice, and not one I'm a fan of unless LitRPG/progression fantasy tropes are designed into the setting. (Which I have done before!)

The idea that there could be hordes of low level characters across the world with the exact same training, regardless of their origin, is also a bit dubious. That'd be as if our world no longer had different chef schools or martial arts styles.

We know that this probably isn't true, and not everyone who could be a Fighter is actually a member of the generic Fighter class. And the game reflects this. A Hobgoblin has an unusual ability to wield a sword? Well, he just went to an elite Hobgoblin academy. Why can't you go to that academy or learn that technique?

The same reason that the Hobgoblin can't use Action Surge. It's something his academy didn't teach and yours did. From his perspective, in fact, he might be wondering "how the hell did that guy make so many attacks?! Nobody I know can do that!". And he has no answers.

Furthering this point, sure, the Fighter's ability to take an extra action is defined. But let's look at the description given:

Action Surge​

Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action.

Once you use this feature, you must finish a short or long rest before you can use it again. Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice before a rest, but only once on the same turn.


"He pushes himself beyond his limits" is a terrible explanation for how the Fighter can basically alter the flow of time itself. Even magic (Haste) can't double his Extra Attacks, yet this is something every 2nd level Fighter learns to do!

In fact, every ability in the game could be described thusly! "How do you take half damage from swords when using Rage? How do you stun people by punching them? How do you turn into a bear?"

"I push myself beyond my limits!"

Now, I can already hearing the people who want more explanations saying "well, that's exactly what I'm talking about! WotC should give us more information about how that ability works too!".

But think about how big the gamebooks would have to be to do that! And while you might fork over 100 bucks for a double-sized PHB full of in-game lore about every special ability that defies belief, how many people wouldn't?

 

[Remathilis]

Now, I can already hearing the people who want more explanations saying "well, that's exactly what I'm talking about! WotC should give us more information about how that ability works too!".

But think about how big the gamebooks would have to be to do that! And while you might fork over 100 bucks for a double-sized PHB full of in-game lore about every special ability that defies belief, how many people wouldn't?

It's also a catch 22 because while people want explanations, they also don't want lore in the core books. Imagine for a moment you say all martial characters draw on the power of Zangief, God of Muscle Power, and it allows them to transcend the boundaries of mortals. You have a warrior who can match magic in terms of power, you have an explanation for why it happens, but now the anti-lore crowd is crying we've introduced lore that doesn't fit prior settings or their specific vision. So somehow you have to thread a needle that allows martials to transcend mortality, explain how, but not provide a why.

THAT is a Labor worthy of... Uh a high level character I guess...

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's also a catch 22 because while people want explanations, they also don't want lore in the core books. Imagine for a moment you say all martial characters draw on the power of Zangief, God of Muscle Power, and it allows them to transcend the boundaries of mortals. You have a warrior who can match magic in terms of power, you have an explanation for why it happens, but now the anti-lore crowd is crying we've introduced lore that doesn't fit prior settings or their specific vision. So somehow you have to thread a needle that allows martials to transcend mortality, explain how, but not provide a why.

THAT is a Labor worthy of... Uh a high level character I guess...

I'd be cool with lore in the core books. That's been the case with large portions of the PH and DMG in several editions, and throughout the MM.

You talk about what "people" want and don't want a lot. Where are you getting your information?

 

[Remathilis]

I'd be cool with lore in the core books. That's been the case with large portions of the PH and DMG in several editions, and throughout the MM.

You talk about what "people" want and don't want a lot. Where are you getting your information?

I read this board and don't feel I need to name names. I can recall arguments about how much lore is allowed in the core books and being told the proper amount is the two sentence descriptions Shadowdark used.

 

[James Gasik]

In order to have mass market appeal and to at least provide token support for all of it's potential settings, D&D is at least slightly lore-agnostic. The books will refer to various characters and concepts, but there's not many hard stances I can think of.

And when they do put a piece of lore front and center, like talking about The Weave in the magic section, you get people annoyed because that's a Forgotten Realms concept and shouldn't apply to other settings. Even statements like "magic is found in everything in the multiverse" could get pushback from people who don't care for the implication that their Fighter is somehow magical in any way!

And let's not forget that time they changed D&D's lore in the core books, doing away with concepts like The Great Wheel or having nine distinct alignments...