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

[I'm A Banana]

there's still the fact this fails the fantasy for the people who want their characters to be powerful and competent by their character's own merits, where the awesomeness is part of the character rather than all the trinkets they're carrying, if the guy next to me could be just as powerful if they were given my stuff how does that make ME any part of the hero? and if the wizard does manage to get their hands a belt of giant's strength and ring of invisibility then they're just outclassing me twofold.

This isn't a dealbreaker, it's just a requirement of the design.

Like, we have spells that only work for people who know how to use them.

Maybe the sword that cuts through dimensions also only works for people who know how to use it. Weapon masteries are already a step in this direction (if a mastery is about equal to a cantrip, there could be HIGH LEVEL MASTERIES!), not too hard to expand that.

Just like mages get access to levelled spells based on a class spell list, martials could have levelled magical items based on a class equipment list (your rogues get rings of invisibility, your fighters get flametongues, etc.).

Admittedly, we're flirting close with 4e's "everything is a power" design here, because what's the real difference between a druid spell that lets you wield a blade of fire and a fighter gear option that lets you wield a blade of fire. And that's....there's tradeoffs to that design. Homogeneity. Over-standardization. Sameyness. So this isn't a win without risk.

But, "how do you distinguish classes when everyone has very similar capabilities" is at least a different problem.

And, we wouldn't necessarily be repeating 4e's definition of every class based on combat ability. A ring of invisibility works differently from an invisibility spell, and we can keep that distinction to some degree. Fighters maybe get invocation-like abilities. A suit of armor that casts false life, etc. But now I've gone and stirred up the "every class should be a warlock" contingent.

 

[Scribe]

So, again: "My preferences are better than your preferences. Get used to it."

I reject such hostile design.

And I reject having every class be magical.

 

[Scribe]

Clearly, this isn't something everyone agrees with. I've already laid out how "magic" has TONS of baggage that make it not an acceptable term.

Then call it a gremlin.

Every class other than Fighter, essentially functions with a power source of gremlin.

Leave Fighter alone, as the single option for people who don't want a gremlin power source.

 

[mamba]

So, again: "My preferences are better than your preferences. Get used to it."

I reject such hostile design.

isn’t your approach as hostile, just with your preferences in the center?

You would need a second set of classes to allow for both approaches, not change the existing ones at a minimum

 

[Scribe]

Magic in D&D language is a specific thing. Barbarian rage is not magic, but it is not natural/mundane either. It's essentially extraordinary and so close to supernatural they can make out. Monk ki/focus is likewise. Anti-magical abilities don't affect either, but I would not call either of them mundane. This is that third space where things are more supernatural than mundane, but not exactly magic either.

5e doesn't even really do these spaces though.

It's some kind of gremlin, or it's not.

 

[Joshua Randall]

But now I've gone and stirred up the "every class should be a warlock" contingent.

Every class in 4e is a wizard, right? /s

(Ironically, the warlock in 4e is the least like any of the other PH1 classes. Sure, it has the same AEDU design, but its powers seem like they were designed in a closed room away from anyone else.)

 

[dave2008]

The issue here is that if magic is natural and not supernatural, then you end in a world where the supernatural is integrated into life (ghosts can own shops, gargoyles deliver the mail) and everything is magic (bakers can prepare heroes feasts, farmers can shield plants from harm, masons carve stone that is indestructible.) Essentially Eberron on steroids. In such a world, supernatural or mythic feats wouldn't be limited to just PCs, but to any sufficiently talented NPC as well. nothing is supernatural because everything is.

There is a middle ground too. A setting can be infused with magic, that doesn't mean everyone has the ability to cast spells and also doesn't mean there can't be limits. It is just the limits might be beyond what we an do here IRL.

My ideal would be that most of the world's population is mundane, but every PC has something special built into their class that makes them special. A cut above the unwashed masses. An innate spark of supernatural power that lets them channel primal magic into rage, prepare arcane magic, or smite enemies with divine fire. The normal folk can be guards and bakers and brigands. Yes, that puts the PCs into main character syndrome. No, I don't care. PCs are already special by virtue of being played by a player and having the game focus on them.

That is fine, but I prefer an option to play characters that can compete on extreme natural ability and skill, up to a point, that is much like RL here on earth. For me, level 10 seems like a good point of demarcation. So you get:

• Levels 1-10 mundane abilities that can compete (to some degree) with magical ones
• Levels 11-20 supernatural abilities that can compete (to some degree) with legendary magic
• Levels 21+ epic / immortal supernatural abilities and magic

 

[dave2008]

5e doesn't even really do these spaces though.

It's some kind of gremlin, or it's not.

Actually the 5e designers have specifically called it "innate" magic. Like a dragon's, or beholder's, ability fly. This is magic that can't be dispelled. I don't think this is ever noted in the books, but I could be wrong.

 

[CreamCloud0]

There is a middle ground too. A setting can be infused with magic, that doesn't mean everyone has the ability to cast spells and also doesn't mean there can't be limits. It is just the limits might be beyond what we an do here IRL.

That is fine, but I prefer an option to play characters that can compete on extreme natural ability and skill, up to a point, that is much like RL here on earth. For me, level 10 seems like a good point of demarcation. So you get:

• Levels 1-10 mundane abilities that can compete (to some degree) with magical ones
• Levels 11-20 supernatural abilities that can compete (to some degree) with legendary magic
• Levels 21+ epic / immortal supernatural abilities and magic

I just got a ping saying my message was quoted in this, did you edit?

 

[CreamCloud0]

Actually the 5e designers have specifically called it "innate" magic. Like a dragon's, or beholder's, ability fly. This is magic that can be dispelled. I don't think this is ever noted in the books, but I could be wrong.

*can’t I think you meant here