Search results

I don't want John McLain. John McLain is a pathetic choice of exemplar for a D&D fighter. For all the world I wish his name to never be spoken again I'd be pretty darned happy with Batman's abilities regardless of origin. Stuns, sleeps, paralyzes, restraints, reliable vertical movement...

I mean, I'd admit that it is inconsistent, though I'd prefer it go the opposite direction vs. what you are looking for.

Enhh. Hercules did bearhug Death once, beat at least one god in a wrestling match, shouldered the heavens temporarily, and diverted at least one river single-handedly. Not sure if any of these are likely to be D&D relevant, but I think they're similarly over the top vs some of the anime...

Kinda yeah. It at least means that the only virtue achieved by resemblance to real-world normal is convenience. Fortunately, though fantasy may mean no rules, game mechanics are rules. And the PHB contains the descriptions of the game mechanics for PCs. So you can be confident that the...

The first is a weirdly emphatic statement. Where are the limits to fantasy training defined? And whether mundane or magical, the fighter is still a fantasy creature.

And with that I only just now realized that there are probably breeders for sorcerers.

I expect there is value at both ends of the spectrum. Additional lore makes settings richer but less flexible. Coding that lore into the classes makes the classes more connected to that less flexible setting. It's pros and cons all over.

Fair enough. I, personally, cannot imagine a good reason for there to be rigorously proscriptive worldbuilding elements in the player-facing rules document. If DMs build worlds where spells come from friendly spirits rather than the weave, are they cheating? If Humans are not a Common race...

I find the realm of the plausible to be exceedingly broad within a fantasy setting. I don't have much of a cutoff point as long as the abilities are roughly balanced in terms of scope, relevance, and potence with what other PC classes are doing.

I'd agree that this can be the narrative justification, and it's the one I prefer, but I'm open to others. I'd also note that this narrative justification leaves room for supernatural ability, just filtered through a lens of supernatural level of personal skill rather than a supernatural...

Because it's fun and people like it. Do you really think any of the narrative justifications included in the book were written to serve as guidance for adjudication?

From a certain perspective, it's still more of yourself that you are creating. And, without getting into the particulars, dragons may also enjoy the process of procreation. Zeus did this kind of thing all the time.

Certainly. My interpretation simply benefits from being directly supported by the words in the book. I haven't placed hoops in front of myself to jump through to explain how a class set apart from mundane warriors can still yield mundane warriors. I can just go "Yeah, they aren't meant to be...

I'm not sure what to make of this? People want abilities that are extraordinary in a way that the book doesn't currently provide. But the abilities in the book are not all that extraordinary.. So the abilities we give them can't be all that extraordinary.. This appears to be circular logic?

There is no fluff to ignore. There is an absence of fluff. In the same way that Portent has an absence of fluff. Or Instinctive Charm, or Minor Alchemy, or Aura of Protection, or any other of the dozens of abilities that receive no justification for how or why they work.

Because the rulebook is there to define the game abilities player characters should have, not why they have them. A player's mechanical choices at the table do not change if 100% of the fighter's abilities are coded as magic, supernatural, mundane, or whatever else. Thus, silence leaves room...

I should note. My personal feeling on the fighter quote that I posted is that the fighter is "beyond mundane warriors". I don't need them to be magical. I, personally, would prefer otherwise. But..I. think there is adequate justification for extraordinary abilities..beyond those of the...

The question related to wish at level 1 is distinctively NOT the same as tagging a class's abilities as magical or otherwise. It is asking if fighters get a mechanical ability not what the narrative justification is for any particular ability. Saying a fighter is or isn't magical does not...

The text says what the text says. Importantly, the text was put together by people who write rules for fantasy RPGs where the use of the word "mundane" often has specific connotations. Your interpretation is a choice.

I think that if I tell you I am going to the store, and I don't tell you how I plan to get there, then you don't know how I traveled, and any assumption you make is just that. An assumption. So we get to infer that they are nonmagical despite no positive statement to that effect, and we get to...