Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9593576" data-attributes="member: 6790260">1 is literally just saying "magic can be better because magic is better." Magic operates by whatever rules you WANT it to operate by. You're not somehow off the hook for creating rules that blatantly and objectively favor magic over all other approaches! Fiction is creationist, not evolutionary! You are quite literally saying, "Magic is better because I said it is" in response to someone asking WHY magic is just always better. That's not an answer.2 is simply straight-up false, and a HUGE part of why martial characters constantly get dumped on for incredibly frustrating AND FALSE "realism" reasons. You cannot "go pick up and swing a piece of metal right now" and have it be "the same as a Fighter doing it." I promise you that. You need, y'know, TRAINING to do it correctly. You need practice and timing. You need a body that is fit for the purpose, which emphatically would not mean the lovely rippling muscles of weightlifters (which I am quite a fan of!), because those lovely rippling muscles are for show, not for use.Claiming that your own swinging of a random long piece of metal would be exactly the same as a trained Fighter wielding a sword is precisely the huge, huge, huge problem D&D has with martial characters. It's what I like to call the "guy at the gym" argument, or perhaps fallacy (though throwing around the word "fallacy" tends to raise hackles, regardless of its truth or falsity). Martials are restricted to what laypeople think a guy at the gym could do, which is provably and objectively less than what even real-world Olympic athletes can do and have done, let alone actually fantastical feats of strength or speed or precision.</blockquote>

Verification