D&D 5E Casters vs Martials: Part 2 - The Mundane Limit

[Azzy]

An enemy once in a while, sure. That happens in movies, and in an RPG doesn't even require an ability to happen. Goading everyone on a reliable basis to the point where they must attack if they fail a save? Absent some mental or supernatural ability, I've never seen that in movie, but I suppose some super cheesy B movie might have had it happen. I tend to avoid those.

In game, it would be every once in a while because it could only be used once per short rest. THe thing is, when you codify something a fictional character can do into rules for an RPG, it becomes somewhat reliable (because the needs of the game). That, however, doesn't suddenly make it magic or mind control. That's just silly.

 

[Maxperson]

Martial exploits with an amount of narrative control are not magic. Its just another lie to stop martial characters from getting nice things.

Except I'm not arguing that they shouldn't have them.

 

[Maxperson]

In game, it would be every once in a while because it could only be used once per short rest. THe thing is, when you codify something a fictional character can do into rules for an RPG, it becomes somewhat reliable (because the needs of the game). That, however, doesn't suddenly make it magic or mind control. That's just silly.

If an NPC uses the ability against my PC and I fail my save, can I opt to do something else or am I forced to take an action I don't want to take?

 

[Eubani]

If an NPC uses the ability against my PC and I fail my save, can I opt to do something else or am I forced to take an action I don't want to take?

Well we are lucky that PC and enemy abilities from a martial stand point are designed different.

 

[Vaalingrade]

An enemy once in a while, sure. That happens in movies, and in an RPG doesn't even require an ability to happen. Goading everyone on a reliable basis to the point where they must attack if they fail a save? Absent some mental or supernatural ability, I've never seen that in movie, but I suppose some super cheesy B movie might have had it happen. I tend to avoid those.

You've never seen the deal where the someone is taunting the hothead and they're trying to hold back and their level headed friend is telling them not to let it get to them, then the taunter says something the make Mr. Level headed be the one that goes off on them?

Or Spiderman? His banter distractions and getting people to launch themselves into walls has never failed.

 

[Azzy]

If an NPC uses the ability against my PC and I fail my save, can I opt to do something else or am I forced to take an action I don't want to take?

Can you opt out of playing by any of the other rules of the game?

 

[Maxperson]

Well we are lucky that PC and enemy abilities from a martial stand point are designed different.

In 5e some NPCs can by RAW have class levels, which would include those abilities to use against PCs.

 

[Maxperson]

You've never seen the deal where the someone is taunting the hothead and they're trying to hold back and their level headed friend is telling them not to let it get to them, then the taunter says something the make Mr. Level headed be the one that goes off on them?

I've already said that once in a while(several combats) an individual(hothead) can be affected that way. Multiple combats(or even multiple times in a single combat) are what we are looking at, though.

Or Spiderman? His banter distractions and getting people to launch themselves into walls has never failed.

It fails the vast majority of the time. It sometimes works on the specifically stupid or hot head types, but most of the time it's just banter.

 

[Maxperson]

Can you opt out of playing by any of the other rules of the game?

I'm not opting out of playing. I'm asking if my character can choose the option he wants or if he's forced to take an action that he doesn't want to do?

 

[Scars Unseen]

But it still forces them to resist as if magic, where words can't do that. Not on any sort of reliable basis forced saves give anyway.

I have my problems with the way 4E was structured, but this specifically is not one of them. That's just a resolution mechanic, and the only difference between forcing a save and, for example, making a skill check is whose ability is in question. If I make a skill check, I am specifically determining whether I am good enough at what I'm attempting to pull off the desired result. If I force a save, it's a given that I'm skilled enough; the question is whether or not the target is good enough not to be affected.

I don't see any reason why a wizard can be good enough at casting magic that they're able to successfully cast 100% of the time, but a melee combatant can't be good enough at controlling the flow of combat that they can 100% draw an opponent into the action they desire, given that the opponent themself isn't wary enough to see through it.

Honestly, I'd be open to the idea of more combat actions outside of direct attacks being save based. It would vary up combat and possibly open player up more to the idea of just trying stuff in combat, something the groups I played with used to do with AD&D because otherwise combat was fairly boring.