Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E being immune to criticism (forked from Sentimentality And D&D...)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="firesnakearies" data-source="post: 4556177" data-attributes="member: 71334"><p>Yes! This is good. This mirrors my thinking, as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Telling stories or running games which are full of mundane guys with swords is fine. I like low fantasy, too. I like playing in those sorts of campaigns, sometimes, too.</p><p></p><p>But how do you "realistically" explain those mundane guys with swords, who we're declaring to be, essentially, "not much different" from any normal fellow here in our own real world who <em>happens</em> to have trained a lot in fighting with a sword, slaying things like <em>ancient dragons and incorporeal dread wraiths and death titans and hordes of demons and incredibly powerful magic-wielding liches and exarchs of <strong>GODS</strong></em>?</p><p></p><p></p><p>If you keep anything which a "normal guy with a stick" couldn't realistically be expected to be able to defeat <em>out of the game</em>, then sure, a low-magic game where Fighters and Rogues are highly mundane but skilled folks, essentially on par with Navy Seals or CIA operatives or world-champion martial artists or similar real-world "martial heroes" would make a lot of sense and work great.</p><p></p><p>But when you say, "I want all of the martial characters to be really mundane, normal, non-magical, non-mystical basic tough guys with great fighting skill, and only able to do the same sorts of things which George S. Patton or Bruce Lee or Miyamoto Musashi or Richard Marcinko or Alexander the Great or Jack Bauer or Jason Bourne or Indiana Jones could do" and then throw them into a campaign full of insanely powerful supernatural threats and mythological monsters . . . I find <em>that</em> to be a greater strain on credulity and verisimilitude than the idea that maybe the guys who are kicking the crap out of demon princes and fire-breathing beasts the size of large houses with nothing but a four-foot-long piece of steel and a bad attitude just <em>might</em> have to have some superheroic capabilities beyond anything that anyone on Earth can muster.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Conan and Aragorn (and Drizzt, and any other martial-type protagonist in a <strong>D&D</strong>-based novel) were <em>not</em> mundane, even if they <em>didn't</em> throw around anything flashy like fireballs, super speed, flight, or the like. They fought things which no "mundane" man could ever reasonably be expected to fight, and won. Regularly. (More so Conan than Aragorn, but show me the normal fighting man on Earth who could realistically scrap with <em>Nazgul</em> and I'll retract my point.)</p><p></p><p>Being "really skilled" would only take you so far, when you're fighting against magic, myth, colossal beasts and extraplanar immortals of awesome might. There'd almost <em>have to be</em> some degree of superhuman power going on, logically, for these "mundane" sword-swingers and dagger-chuckers to <em>survive</em> in such encounters, let alone <em>prevail</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That's just me, though. I guess if it makes more sense for people to imagine the <em>Krav Maga</em> instructor who lives down the street from you killing the Tarrasque, go for it. It's your game, have fun any way you want.</p><p></p><p></p><p>But <em>if</em> <strong>4E D&D</strong> <em>happens</em> to represent a fantasy world in which the non-spellcasting heroes who are expected to overcome these massive, epic, impossible challenges have some degree of personal, internally-derived "magical" or "mystical" or "supernatural" power which allows them to be victorious, I consider that very much a <em>sensible feature</em>, not a flaw or something which damages immersion for the sake of gamism.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I can, of course, see how some people wouldn't <em>like</em> that style of game. Some people just prefer low(er) fantasy, and I get that. By all means, play what you like. It's not <em>"wrongbadfun"</em> to prefer a less over-the-top, less magical game setting and less superheroic characters. I really like that kind of game or fiction, too. Go go <strong>Lankhmar</strong>!</p><p></p><p>I <em>can't</em>, however, quite get their logic if they're running games which purport to be about protagonist heroes who are as mundane and un-superhuman as normal Earth folks, yet feature the kind of paranormal monsters and magic-using enemies which make up the vast majority of opponents featured in all <strong>D&D</strong> books since day one, as well as <em>most</em> other fantasy stories and roleplaying games, ever.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I tend to view all PC protagonist hero characters in <strong>D&D</strong> as being a whole lot like the concept of "Adepts" from <em>Earthdawn</em>. Everyone had their own kind of "magic", even if that magic was just being able to fight really, really well with a sword, or be an incredible thief. The point was that Adepts were special and could do things that normal people couldn't, because they fueled even their seemingly-mundane skills with an inborn, internally-generated "magical" power.</p><p></p><p>That makes <em>way</em> more sense to me than just, <em>"I'm basically a regular guy, but I've been practicing my sword forms out in the back yard for the last 20 years, so now I can go kill a gargantuan dracolich who could decimate cities and armies . . . with my trusty sharp stick here."</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>$</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="firesnakearies, post: 4556177, member: 71334"] Yes! This is good. This mirrors my thinking, as well. Telling stories or running games which are full of mundane guys with swords is fine. I like low fantasy, too. I like playing in those sorts of campaigns, sometimes, too. But how do you "realistically" explain those mundane guys with swords, who we're declaring to be, essentially, "not much different" from any normal fellow here in our own real world who [I]happens[/I] to have trained a lot in fighting with a sword, slaying things like [I]ancient dragons and incorporeal dread wraiths and death titans and hordes of demons and incredibly powerful magic-wielding liches and exarchs of [B]GODS[/B][/I]? If you keep anything which a "normal guy with a stick" couldn't realistically be expected to be able to defeat [I]out of the game[/I], then sure, a low-magic game where Fighters and Rogues are highly mundane but skilled folks, essentially on par with Navy Seals or CIA operatives or world-champion martial artists or similar real-world "martial heroes" would make a lot of sense and work great. But when you say, "I want all of the martial characters to be really mundane, normal, non-magical, non-mystical basic tough guys with great fighting skill, and only able to do the same sorts of things which George S. Patton or Bruce Lee or Miyamoto Musashi or Richard Marcinko or Alexander the Great or Jack Bauer or Jason Bourne or Indiana Jones could do" and then throw them into a campaign full of insanely powerful supernatural threats and mythological monsters . . . I find [I]that[/I] to be a greater strain on credulity and verisimilitude than the idea that maybe the guys who are kicking the crap out of demon princes and fire-breathing beasts the size of large houses with nothing but a four-foot-long piece of steel and a bad attitude just [I]might[/I] have to have some superheroic capabilities beyond anything that anyone on Earth can muster. Conan and Aragorn (and Drizzt, and any other martial-type protagonist in a [B]D&D[/B]-based novel) were [I]not[/I] mundane, even if they [I]didn't[/I] throw around anything flashy like fireballs, super speed, flight, or the like. They fought things which no "mundane" man could ever reasonably be expected to fight, and won. Regularly. (More so Conan than Aragorn, but show me the normal fighting man on Earth who could realistically scrap with [I]Nazgul[/I] and I'll retract my point.) Being "really skilled" would only take you so far, when you're fighting against magic, myth, colossal beasts and extraplanar immortals of awesome might. There'd almost [I]have to be[/I] some degree of superhuman power going on, logically, for these "mundane" sword-swingers and dagger-chuckers to [I]survive[/I] in such encounters, let alone [I]prevail[/I]. That's just me, though. I guess if it makes more sense for people to imagine the [I]Krav Maga[/I] instructor who lives down the street from you killing the Tarrasque, go for it. It's your game, have fun any way you want. But [I]if[/I] [B]4E D&D[/B] [I]happens[/I] to represent a fantasy world in which the non-spellcasting heroes who are expected to overcome these massive, epic, impossible challenges have some degree of personal, internally-derived "magical" or "mystical" or "supernatural" power which allows them to be victorious, I consider that very much a [I]sensible feature[/I], not a flaw or something which damages immersion for the sake of gamism. I can, of course, see how some people wouldn't [I]like[/I] that style of game. Some people just prefer low(er) fantasy, and I get that. By all means, play what you like. It's not [I]"wrongbadfun"[/I] to prefer a less over-the-top, less magical game setting and less superheroic characters. I really like that kind of game or fiction, too. Go go [B]Lankhmar[/B]! I [I]can't[/I], however, quite get their logic if they're running games which purport to be about protagonist heroes who are as mundane and un-superhuman as normal Earth folks, yet feature the kind of paranormal monsters and magic-using enemies which make up the vast majority of opponents featured in all [B]D&D[/B] books since day one, as well as [I]most[/I] other fantasy stories and roleplaying games, ever. I tend to view all PC protagonist hero characters in [B]D&D[/B] as being a whole lot like the concept of "Adepts" from [I]Earthdawn[/I]. Everyone had their own kind of "magic", even if that magic was just being able to fight really, really well with a sword, or be an incredible thief. The point was that Adepts were special and could do things that normal people couldn't, because they fueled even their seemingly-mundane skills with an inborn, internally-generated "magical" power. That makes [I]way[/I] more sense to me than just, [I]"I'm basically a regular guy, but I've been practicing my sword forms out in the back yard for the last 20 years, so now I can go kill a gargantuan dracolich who could decimate cities and armies . . . with my trusty sharp stick here."[/I] $ [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
4E being immune to criticism (forked from Sentimentality And D&D...)
Top