Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 8495070" data-attributes="member: 87792">Asked and answered. This wasn't a problem with 4e where encounter and daily powers weren't repeatable in part because fighters paced themselves. Or you have an anti-spam protection in that if someone has already faced a given trick they get a bonus to defend against it next time because they've seen it before. This is a matter of implementation with multiple possible answers rather than something that should be addressed to the abstract void as if it was something overwhelming.If the wizard can steal the illusionist's key features (and range from Necromancer to Evoker to Bladesinger) and we have a game with both wizard and sorcerer I'm pretty sure that that ship has sailed.The key feature of the monk is that they don't need armour and that they have their unarmed attacks. I have no problem with fighters moving fast - and monks faster. But the idea that because the monk exists the fighter should be less than a real world fighter is one I consider starkly risible.And here's an example of you moving the goalposts. If you are going to run in front of a brick wall and yell at it of course you are engaging a brick wall.Spellcasters are superheroic by your definition from Tier 1. You yourself have admitted that fighters are never superheroic. You yourself in trying to list superheroic abilities reached into tiers 3 and 4 for e.g. the rogue (stroke of luck being tier 4).And now you are arguing with yourself. You have just admitted that super hero powers should not be a problem at tier 4. You are literally saying that someone who remains spry into old age while still dying of old age is a superhero.And as for "D&D is not a superhero RPG", that depends on your definition. As I have pointed out in AD&D 1e a level 8 fighter was literally called a superhero.In a world of fantasy physics being larger than life is not a superpower. Dragons should be too big to fly using their wings. Giants should be impossible by the square/cube ratio. Darkvision should be physically impossible. But they are taken as a given except when they are not.Breaking the laws of physics as they stand in the real world is a thing in fantasy worlds because that is the only way they work. Yet somehow when people do it in the world that becomes superpowers. Someone can breathe fire because it is a spell? That's normal. Someone can because it's fantasy physics? That's a  superpower. This is wholly and completely a double standard that has no purpose other than to dump on martials and by doing so utterly undermine fantasy worldbuilding. Because your world isn't fantastical your giants should just break their legs when they try to walk.And even if this wasn't the case this would be entirely an aesthetic choice by you. It would boil down to "spellcasting is the sort of superpowers that I like and others aren't". Which is a defensible position for one set world - but should not be made into a general principle.All magic is is a subcategory of superpowers with a single common justification. And not even a remotely well defined category of superpowers. Superman has his powers because he's a Kryptonian under a yellow sun.You mean that a first level spell is limited use? And that limits are useful in balancing things?There is, however, a point in demonstrating thoroughly that your view even if it works for your game your attitude is entirely based on special pleading that only a specific subset of superpowers should be allowed so fewer others take it seriously and more recognise it for what it is.You too <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification