D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Ruin Explorer]

Why have magic if it doesn’t make you more powerful?

Realistically?

Because it lets you do things you couldn't otherwise do, duh. That's how magic works in tons and tons of fantasy settings. Being able to say, turn into a sparrow is an incredible trick that can get you crazy places or out of bad situations, but does it make you "more powerful" in some general sense? No. It's situational. Magic quickly just becomes a lame superpower when it's simply a better replacement for normal stuff.

Early D&D chose to make magic powerful and but tried to make it peculiar and specific. Unfortunately people kept adding and adding and adding to try and make magic do everything, because early gamers weren't good designers, and weren't thinking about design in most cases. 2E made magic even better, and then 3E made it insanely better by removing like 90% of the things that made being a caster not great. PF1E said that it fixed that but made it much, much worse (just making a few individual spells less powerful). The power level was always entirely arbitrary.

 

[Chaltab]

Why have magic if it doesn’t make you more powerful?

Realistically?

...I don't think that's the point.

Magic makes you more powerful than not having magic. But so does being really good at fighting.

 

[Lanefan]

Fighter don't need to be wuxia.

Fighters do need to be able to level powerwise to an Archmage. Just how Barbarians with enough levels become the Incredible Hulk.

They do only if one wants balance at every level. That's not a priority for some; I'm fine with the long-term balance of warrior types being boss at low levels and mages becoming boss at high levels.

As for Barbarians, I wouldn't miss them were the class to quietly disappear......well, as quietly as Barbarians ever do anything...

Now I think there should be a "wuxia" class.

There already is. It's called Monk.

 

[Chaltab]

There already is. It's called Monk.

The 4E Monk at least. Man I had a lot of fun with that one.

Even the A5E Adept and Laser Llama's Alternate Monk haven't quite had the same level of 'you're martial arts legend, you're Jet Li/Jackie Chan/JeeJa Yanin' as the 4E Monk.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because it lets you do things you couldn't otherwise do, duh. That's how magic works in tons and tons of fantasy settings. Being able to say, turn into a sparrow is an incredible trick that can get you crazy places or out of bad situations, but does it make you "more powerful" in some general sense? No. It's situational. Magic quickly just becomes a lame superpower when it's simply a better replacement for normal stuff.

Early D&D chose to make magic powerful and but tried to make it peculiar and specific. Unfortunately people kept adding and adding and adding to try and make magic do everything, because early gamers weren't good designers, and weren't thinking about design in most cases. 2E made magic even better, and then 3E made it insanely better by removing like 90% of the things that made being a caster not great. PF1E said that it fixed that but made it much, much worse (just making a few individual spells less powerful). The power level was always entirely arbitrary.

IMO, new abilities and versatility equals more powerful. If I can turn into a sparrow and you can't, all else being equal I am more powerful. No amount of non-supernatural training will teach you to turn into a sparrow.

 

[Lanefan]

They couldn't delete them in 5.5, they had said they would retain backwards compatibility. A point you've made a few times is how dangerous insisting on backwards compatibility is to design. I strongly suspect they would have made them into a new class if they hadn't promised that.

I don't see any reason not to delete them in 6E.

And replace them with... ?

There's no way you can have Crouching Tiger-like stealth warriors and knights in shining armour be the same class; and there's very much a place for Crouching Tiger-like stealth warriors.

 

[Micah Sweet]

...I don't think that's the point.

Magic makes you more powerful than not having magic. But so does being really good at fighting.

But being really good at fighting doesn't let you turn into a sparrow.

 

[Chaltab]

But being really good at fighting doesn't let you turn into a sparrow.

Sure, but if you can snipe a sparrow dead with a longbow from 100 yards then who is more powerful?

Or think of it like Goku and Babidi. The former is a very powerful spellcaster but I don't think anyone would describe him as 'stronger' than Goku.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but if you can snipe a sparrow dead with a longbow from 100 yards then who is more powerful?

Or think of it like Goku and Babidi. The former is a very powerful spellcaster but I don't think anyone would describe him as 'stronger' than Goku.

Not familiar with DragonBall, but doesn't Goku have supernatural abilities?

 

[Lanefan]

???

So it as cool when you were 12 but is "a sad commentary" when you're like, what, 60?

It's been my stance since forever that the primary market should be college-age and higher, because:

--- aiming at that cohort means the game doesn't have to be sanitized or made "family-friendly"
--- it can be written to an adult level of comprehension
--- by that age, or shortly after, people tend to settle into their lifestyles and ideally you want those lifestyles to include the game you're trying to market