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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6765218" data-attributes="member: 42582">Do you think that there are many RPGers who have a different preference from this?This doesn't get us very far, though. It doesn't tell us anything about the (imaginary) conditions in which someone learns to fight with supernatural martial arts, nor in which someone learns to be exceptionally accurate with their attacks. In the case of the latter, we don't even know whether the accuracy is due to luck or skill.This doesn't get us very far either. As you have posted in the past, in 4e there were multiple ways to mechanically represent a character being a vampire (eg feat, race, class). In AD&D there are multiple ways to represent a character being a holy warrior who performs miraculous healing with a touch (cleric, paladin). In 5e there are multiple ways to represent a character who is a warrior mage (eg multi-class wizard or sorcerer with fighter; eldritch knight; some bard builds; etc).I don't agree with this at all.For instance, to make a longsword attack I have to be equipped with a longsword, which is a bladed weapon purchased from the "weapon" section of the equipment list. To use a bow, I need to be equipped with a bow and with arrows, both of which are purchased from the same list. While fighting with a longsword, I am liable to effects that are triggered by weapon attacks (eg parry effects that improve AC vs weapon attacks or mitigate damage dealt by them). And I can continue to fight effectively in an anti-magic field. (Similarly with a bow.)To use a shield, I need to be equipped with an item called a "shield" purchased from the "armour" section of the equipment list. And I don't need to have defeated any enemies (bony or otherwise).A player or GM might use the rules for longswords, bows etc to balance new abilities of the sort that you describe - and in the case of your eldritch blast example, they might even take the view that not being able to attack in an anti-magic field is a suitable balance for not needing to be equipped with arrows, and otherwise leave everything as is. Though there would also be the issue that a sword or bow attack relies on STR or DEX, whereas nearly all magic use in 5e is based on mental stats.But this would all be homebrewing, not "reflufffing".The same issues arise, mutatis mutandis. For instance, why do I have to read a spell book to spit alcohol through a torch? And why can I do it only once per day?I tend to disagree with both strands of this claim.4e has no "martial fireballs" - no martial fire damage, no martial area attacks, etc. And in 5e, there are spells that work basically the same as weapon attacks (roll to hit, roll damage) - with no real difference but the relevant stat (mental rather than physical).If someone takes the view that his/her PC's spellbook is written in hieroglyphs rather than alphabetical sigils, does that fundamentally break the divide between martial and magical? I don't see how. If someone takes the view that his/her PC became a wild sorcerer after reading a cursed tome that infused him/her with chaos energy, is that any sort of violation of the concept of a sorcerer? I don't see how. If someone takes the view that his/her PC learned supernatural martial arts because s/he was taught by a magical animal that s/he used to meet with at the end of the garden as a child, is that any sort of violation of the concept of a monk? I don't see how.Etc.</blockquote>

Verification