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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannager" data-source="post: 5809907" data-attributes="member: 73683">Here's the issue as I see it.You have spellcasters, who use magic. Magic can basically do anything. In fact, if your magic system doesn't allow magic to be used to do anything, it's typically seen as incomplete.Then you have non-spellcasters, who use things that are not magic. Sure, they might have a handful of magic items, but we're already talking about a magic item system that is largely beyond the players' control, so they are not to be relied upon. Non-spellcasters can really only do such things as are believable (in some cases, perhaps, Ripley's Believe-It-Or-Not believable, but believable all the same) in the real world.The problem is that these two groups have to interact. Each group has to be able to challenge (and potentially overcome) the other in the normal course of play.This is no problem for spellcasters. Magic can do anything, including turning a spellcaster into a melee monster, or just outright killing a non-spellcaster with an offensive spell.This is a problem for non-spellcasters. Remember, magic can do anything. A magic system that does not allow you to fly, or turn invisible, will be seen as incomplete by a lot of players. And that flying, that turning-invisible, those things are very, very hard to compete with from a non-spellcaster's perspective.It's really a sort of Venn diagram issue - the sphere of control over the world that spellcasters enjoy is complete (or so near to complete as to be indistinguishable from it during the normal course of play), while the sphere of control over the world that non-spellcasters enjoy must be limited or players begin to decry a lack of verisimilitude.Yes, sure, magic is limited in terms of use. You only have so many spells per day. The fighter can swing his sword forever. That's awesome. But that's not how the assumed course of play in D&D has really ever worked. Spellcasters ration their spells, or supplement them with cheap consumables, and are thus able to extend their effectiveness. But above all, the non-spellcasters are essentially tethered to the effectiveness of their spellcasting companions; the hit in party effectiveness that a party completely out of spells takes is too great to risk continued adventure, and we get the X-minute adventuring day problem.So for those who need verisimilitude to be a priority: How do you reconcile a personal need for verisimilitude with a professed desire for magic to be powerful and flexible, and a professed desire for non-spellcasters to be viable, exciting, and useful contributing members of the party? You want the villain to be capable of flying, and turning invisible, and protecting-from-arrows himself, because that's the sort of magic D&D ought to have. But where does that leave the non-spellcaster, confined to the bounds of the believable? How does he compete?</blockquote>

Verification