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

[Hussar]

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.

To be fair, isn't this an Artificer? This is pretty much how artificers work, for the most part. Granted, Artificers also get spells, but, IME, it's more along the line of "Well, once in a while I'm going to use a spell, but, most of the time, I'm plunking away with my magic doohickey"

 

[EzekielRaiden]

As it turns out, supernatural and mundane are different things and possess different properties. Wizards are a class powered by a kind of supernatural, and they can do things that those who aren't supernaturally powered, or even powered by a different supernatural source, can't do. If that weren't the case, then what you're asking for is for everyone to have the same tricks, more or less, with different names. That doesn't sound fun to me.

But this is mundanity in a world that is fundamentally--indeed, radically--different from ours. Demonstrably so.

Flight works enormously differently. The laws of thermodynamics? Fahgeddaboudit. Chemistry? Hah, funny joke, nothing like actual chemistry here. Biology? Welp, hope you're well-versed in spontaneous generation, sci-fi "almost everything hybridizes" stuff, and completely bonkers absence-of-any-explicable-origin things like dungeon monsters that apparently feed on the extremely rare adventurers that stumble upon them.

Even at a brute superficial level, a 10th-level Fighter--whom you claim cannot possibly ever violate IRL Earth laws of physics--can just straight-up no-sale a dragon's fire breath. Hell, a 7th-level Rogue--whom, again, you claim cannot possibly ever violate IRL Earth laws of physics--can take a dragon's fire directly to the face and experience...no damage. No negative impact whatsoever, in fact.

The thin veneer of "it works like Earth does" cracks as soon as you start investigating even small details. It's not even a convenient shorthand; it's at best a useful lie so we can avoid getting bogged down explaining all the ways things don't work like they do IRL, bringing them up only as needed.

Magic: Anything that is beyond the realm of physics, or biology or reality as we know it.

There, you good?

Nope. Because this is, yet again, simply a "proof" by assertion. You have provided no evidence other than your personal assertion that it is the case. Asserting something does not make it true. You must actually SHOW that it is true. Give me a quote from a book that says "everything supernatural is magic" or the equivalent. Hell, at this point I'll take a tweet from a designer. But I sincerely doubt you'll find such a thing, because I'm quite sure it doesn't exist.

Unless and until you can show--not simply declare--that your definition is required, your argument completely falls apart.

D&D already recognizes that there can be things that are supernatural and not magic. Upthread, Rage was referenced as an example of something supernatural but nonmagical. Rogue Evasion, as I mentioned above, is another example of something blatantly supernatural--no one can "nimbly dodge" a dragon's fire directly to their face, yet Rogues can not only do so, they suffer absolutely zero ill effects. Yet it's a thing all Rogues learn, regardless of their magical training or lack thereof. And at level 20, Rogues can literally just declare "nope, I got lucky on this roll, it's a nat 20"--and not even just once a day, they can do it once per rest, short or long.

Where do these things fall, under your definition? They're martial characters, doing only "mundane" training, so--allegedly--they cannot be using "magic." Yet by your own definition, these things, which would be impossible in the real world, and thus must be "magic." We have a contradiction; abilities that simultaneously cannot be "magic" and also must be "magic."

Unless we recognize a form of supernaturalness that isn't magic.

 

[Scribe]

@EzekielRaiden if what I assert is not correct, then what even is your problem with 5e? If my claim is wrong, then there must be no issue, especially in a 5.5 world, so you must be over the moon!

Me personally? I dont like the direction at all, but I found a better alternative.

Literally all one needs, with a few gremlin items.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But this is mundanity in a world that is fundamentally--indeed, radically--different from ours. Demonstrably so.

Flight works enormously differently. The laws of thermodynamics? Fahgeddaboudit. Chemistry? Hah, funny joke, nothing like actual chemistry here. Biology? Welp, hope you're well-versed in spontaneous generation, sci-fi "almost everything hybridizes" stuff, and completely bonkers absence-of-any-explicable-origin things like dungeon monsters that apparently feed on the extremely rare adventurers that stumble upon them.

Even at a brute superficial level, a 10th-level Fighter--whom you claim cannot possibly ever violate IRL Earth laws of physics--can just straight-up no-sale a dragon's fire breath. Hell, a 7th-level Rogue--whom, again, you claim cannot possibly ever violate IRL Earth laws of physics--can take a dragon's fire directly to the face and experience...no damage. No negative impact whatsoever, in fact.

The thin veneer of "it works like Earth does" cracks as soon as you start investigating even small details. It's not even a convenient shorthand; it's at best a useful lie so we can avoid getting bogged down explaining all the ways things don't work like they do IRL, bringing them up only as needed.


Nope. Because this is, yet again, simply a "proof" by assertion. You have provided no evidence other than your personal assertion that it is the case. Asserting something does not make it true. You must actually SHOW that it is true. Give me a quote from a book that says "everything supernatural is magic" or the equivalent. Hell, at this point I'll take a tweet from a designer. But I sincerely doubt you'll find such a thing, because I'm quite sure it doesn't exist.

Unless and until you can show--not simply declare--that your definition is required, your argument completely falls apart.

D&D already recognizes that there can be things that are supernatural and not magic. Upthread, Rage was referenced as an example of something supernatural but nonmagical. Rogue Evasion, as I mentioned above, is another example of something blatantly supernatural--no one can "nimbly dodge" a dragon's fire directly to their face, yet Rogues can not only do so, they suffer absolutely zero ill effects. Yet it's a thing all Rogues learn, regardless of their magical training or lack thereof. And at level 20, Rogues can literally just declare "nope, I got lucky on this roll, it's a nat 20"--and not even just once a day, they can do it once per rest, short or long.

Where do these things fall, under your definition? They're martial characters, doing only "mundane" training, so--allegedly--they cannot be using "magic." Yet by your own definition, these things, which would be impossible in the real world, and thus must be "magic." We have a contradiction; abilities that simultaneously cannot be "magic" and also must be "magic."

Unless we recognize a form of supernaturalness that isn't magic.

How would you personally define "magic"? I think that's what we're missing from what seems to me to be an increasingly semantic discussion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

@EzekielRaiden if what I assert is not correct, then what even is your problem with 5e? If my claim is wrong, then there must be no issue, especially in a 5.5 world, so you must be over the moon!

Me personally? I dont like the direction at all, but I found a better alternative.

Literally all one needs, with a few gremlin items.

View attachment 397470

Really hoping I have a chance to play Shadowdark soon.

 

[Scribe]

Upthread, Rage was referenced as an example of something supernatural but nonmagical.

Magic.

Rogue Evasion, as I mentioned above, is another example of something blatantly supernatural--no one can "nimbly dodge" a dragon's fire directly to their face, yet Rogues can not only do so, they suffer absolutely zero ill effects.

Magic, or just dumb luck.

And at level 20, Rogues can literally just declare "nope, I got lucky on this roll, it's a nat 20"--and not even just once a day, they can do it once per rest, short or long.

Magic, or, really it is just representative of dumb luck, a rogues luck. Trope-tastic.

Unless we recognize a form of supernaturalness that isn't magic.

I dont. It is magic.

Mundane, or Magic. Pick one.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

@EzekielRaiden if what I assert is not correct, then what even is your problem with 5e? If my claim is wrong, then there must be no issue, especially in a 5.5 world, so you must be over the moon!

Uh...no. I'm not even slightly happy with 5.0 when it comes to the treatment of martial characters, and 5.5e is...well, to use an analogy, from my perspective, 5.0 is 0.1% of what I want, and 5.5e is maybe 0.5% of what I want. In ratio terms, that's five times as much!!!! And yet in terms of how much still isn't there, we've gone from 99.9% incorrect to 99.5% incorrect, a relative difference of 0.4%. (Technically, .999/.995 = 1.00402010050251..., but I think calling that a 0.4% improvement is reasonable.)

I hold that your claim is wrong--but the Fighter and Rogue weren't actually designed to DO anything with it. They were forced to cling almost exclusively to "guy at the gym" limits, hardly even resembling the things Olympic athletes can do, let alone truly, sincerely fantastical knights and knaves.

Me personally? I dont like the direction at all, but I found a better alternative.

Literally all one needs, with a few gremlin items.

View attachment 397470

I assume this is the system you mentioned earlier? I'm afraid I do not have the disposable income to buy it (though I did go look it up, at least!), otherwise I would have actually read it properly. I will note the document here uses the phrase "who carve their legends with steel and grit." That, to me, says that it is possible for someone using purely steel and grit--"mundane" techniques, training, equipment, etc.--to eventually transcend the limits of dull mundanity and achieve the status of legends. Hence why I keep pushing on this point. The legendary hero, who became a living legend with steel and grit, not "magic"--because legends are beyond the limits of mere mundanity, despite this one having gotten there through superlative mastery of steel and grit.

 

[Scribe]

I hold that your claim is wrong--but the Fighter and Rogue weren't actually designed to DO anything with it. They were forced to cling almost exclusively to "guy at the gym" limits, hardly even resembling the things Olympic athletes can do, let alone truly, sincerely fantastical knights and knaves.

For what its worth, 'Action Hero' which I would put beyond Olympic athlete level, would suffice for me. Anything beyond that, is just magic by another name.

I assume this is the system you mentioned earlier? I'm afraid I do not have the disposable income to buy it (though I did go look it up, at least!), otherwise I would have actually read it properly. I will note the document here uses the phrase "who carve their legends with steel and grit." That, to me, says that it is possible for someone using purely steel and grit--"mundane" techniques, training, equipment, etc.--to eventually transcend the limits of dull mundanity and achieve the status of legends. Hence why I keep pushing on this point. The legendary hero, who became a living legend with steel and grit, not "magic"--because legends are beyond the limits of mere mundanity, despite this one having gotten there through superlative mastery of steel and grit.

Its not an epic system, its a nice middle ground (to me) of OSR and some 5e attributes. I dont know about there being anything dull about kicking in a door and hacking at the crawling horror that is on the other side, but I suppose to each there own.

Think grittier. Think dirty, think about stealing that treasure, and leveling because of the party you threw with your now spent wealth. Legend? Sure. Most legends are dead though.

Oh, and here.

Shadowdark RPG Quickstart Set (PDF)

Get the FREE digital Quickstart Set for the award-winning Shadowdark RPG. Rules, characters, and an adventure. The perfect way to introduce you to the game.

www.thearcanelibrary.com

 

[EzekielRaiden]

How would you personally define "magic"? I think that's what we're missing from what seems to me to be an increasingly semantic discussion.

"Magic" is any of the following:

1. Potions and other alchemical processes
2. Enchantments/curses (functionally, the two are the same, just one is intended to be beneficial and the other detrimental)
3. Prophecies/portents/signs
4. Artifacts, and more generally "magic items" (I hope you will forgive the mildly circular terminology there; I can't find a good alternative phrase for "items with special powers bound to/in them, or which direct such powers")
5. Spellcasting and rituals
6. Divinity (and other "transcendental existence" or "others' belief makes you powerful" stuff)
7. "Sympathetic" effects (e.g. so-called "voodoo dolls"...even though sympathetic magic is primarily a British Isles thing)

In D&D, 2, 3, and 7 are almost totally merged into spellcasting (as far as player-facing mechanics are concerned) in the vast majority of cases. There are exceptions, such as Diviner's Portent, but by and large these things have been folded into spellcasting, and WotC's current designers have repeatedly tried to move even more of the above (especially 6) into spellcasting as well. Further, 1 and 4 are functionally extensions of spellcasting, because these things need to be created by a person who can use one of the other forms...which almost always means spellcasting or divinity.

As a result, within the D&D milieu, we end up with rather a reduced set for what "magic" is:

1. Spellcasting, rituals, and the temporary(=potions/alchemy) or permanent (=magic items) implements spellcasting creates
2. Divinity etc.
3. Agents with innate power (e.g. genies)

By comparison, there are a great many things that don't fall into these categories. A dragon's ability to fly, for example, isn't any of the above things, because it's just a physical attribute dragons happen to possess (and, notably, one that rarely passes to their hybrid children, even though we know--explicitly!--that a dragon's magic DOES pass to its offspring). Rage, Evasion, Indomitable, Second Wind, Stroke of Luck, a Halfling's Lucky trait, and many other things besides are not "magic", yet they still contain some element of the supernatural in them.

 

[Clint_L]

The ones who are controlled by players. The others, nope.

What about the players who want to RP as Conan, not Hercules?

The game already has plenty of magic infused warrior options. Leave some of us alone to be able to build our Conans and Sgt. Vimes. It ain’t broke, except for a few folks who turn every thread into ALL FIGHTERS SHOULD BE GOKU.

Which is fine. House rule that. But the most popular and hardest hitting class in the game doesn’t need to change for everyone else.

Or, you know, if you’re in love with how 4e handled martials, there’s a game for that.