Search results

Right, so in the case of what we are calling the "non-magical" classes (the PHB does not label them this way), if the book specified physical abilities that aren't Earth normal, then those would be specified in exactly the same way that the ability to cast spells is specified.

What would be a good example of the verbiage you would look for?

Why though? Do your players require you to provide specifics for why their PCs are able to cast spells in the setting while the players cannot do so in their living rooms?

It's all frame of reference. I choose the relevant frame of reference to be that of the characters in the setting. For the fighter jumping chasms, do they or their peers recognize such a feat as being magical..or is it just something they've done enough mundane training to accomplish (or eaten...

I think that people who go into a fantasy game should go into it with the assumption that they, the players, cannot understand all of the rules of the world. i think this is a healthy approach to fantasy. Where there is similarity to Earth, it is a matter of coincidence, and/or convenience...

Maybe, but this is not a game-useful definition of "supernatural". Saying that everything in a fantasy setting is fantastical (by earth standards) should not be that surprising.

They aren't Humans then? And never have been, what with all their ability to become wizards and sorcerers and such. Casting spells is already several steps beyond what humans can do on Earth. The decision to constrain physical capabilities is just kinda arbitrary.

Because we are playing a fantasy game in a fantasy setting with a whole bunch of fantasy stuff in it. And those humans are able to become fantasy heroes of all stripes. (And this is ignoring that humans are 1 race out of 9 in the PHB). I honestly have a hard time reconciling how people are...

Are all Earth humans 7ft tall and play pro basketball in the NBA? Are all of them able to powerlift at exactly equal ability? Are all of them able to become kung fu masters and break stacks of concrete with their limbs and head? Of course not. And that's plain old Earth human differences...

And yet that is exactly how I feel about it. I realize you disagree. Edit: though to be more precise, it's less that no one else should care, and more that those who care can handle it at the table. The game doesn't have to address it (and addressing it often does more harm than good).

How could be something like the heavy armor master feat, just some flat damage reduction,which could scale over time (I'm not necessarily proposing this so much as pointing out that a precedent exists). "Why" is a semantic exercise and open to debate.. You say absorbing the ambient magic from...

I mean..maybe until the wizard gets 5th level spells and can choose "skill empowerment".

Holy hyperbolic inaccuracy Batman. Every single page? In detail? Using the PHB means making every realm exactly like the PHB? Get outta here.

This is explicitly contradicted in the beginning of the 5e PHB. See '"Worlds of Adventure" starting on pg 5.

I mean the easiest "why wouldn't theys" are danger, difficulty, time, resources required, etc. The 6-second cast time for spells is not a universal component of magic in myth or literature. Safe magic is not either, nor predictable magic. It also is not universally as powerful as D&D magic can...

There isn't a lot of actual logic in here. So much as a set of unsupported assertions. Some of which are easily counterable (a common counter to the trained vs. untrained fighter is the trained guy getting beaten by the guy who is untrained but much bigger/stronger) But in general, it's a bad...

It works at both ends of the power spectrum. And it works for both magic and non-magic. The point is that there is no narratively essential hierarchy of magical and non-magical capabilities. It's all just stuff the game allows for. And they could be comparably potent at both the high and the...

Magic lets you do the things the game says magic can do. Not-magic lets you do the things the game says not-magic can do. The issue is solely in the differences in what the game allows for each.

I'm not sure I understand the logic that supports this set of conclusions.

I think we might both be guilty of pedantry. There appear to be something like 10 references to the realms in a 250 page book. It appears you see that as "quite a bit". While I see it as "almost nothing". It's possible we're both right/wrong. In either case, I don't think the Realms are as...