Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 8368015" data-attributes="member: 92511">I think it safe to say from somewhere in late 3.5-.75, through 4e for sure, and glaringly apparent in 5e, that WotC has all but given up on ANY "martial/non-magical" class. Even the only two main/base/"Big 4" classes that are indisputably not fueled or enhanced by magic have magical sub-class archetypes as a base PHB option.Part of this might be -and I am purely speculating here- that the argument might be made having the magic built in to classes makes for a more "fantastic" feeling game. Also, it opens the class/subclasses/archetypes up to myriad -if not unlimited- further development. The non-martial Barbarian (off the top of my head) could give you a "Conan" analogue base class, a "Viking" styled subclass, perhaps a "Hun/Mongol/mounted archer"  subtype... some cultural warrior that is appropriately African-flavored... That kinda does it. Anyone else: Dar the Beastmaster, storm-throwing-Thor-barbarian, shaman-y shapeshifter barbarian, etc..., those all need magic/access to magic to possess any viable "realism" in a game world [where magic is a presumed reality]. My homebrew system/setting/game is fairly stringent in making sure that the non-magical classes STAY non-magical. Their features/abilities are performed/evoked from the character's own ability, fortitude, training, skills, and strengths.Yes, magical classes have a seeming infinity of variations for classes and specialists, themed-casters, RW cultural flavors, different magical sources, and on and on. It is a real challenge to make sure that if there is going to be a class/subclass added to one of the magical classes (the Mystic and Wizard "groups" whose default classes are Cleric and Mage, respectively) that a class/subclass gets added to one of the non-magical classes (the Warrior and Rogue groups, default Fighter and Thief).This does lead to a bit of overlap...a non-magical "Cavalier" [knight] specialist class of the Fighter...and a "Templar" [paladin-lite] specialist class of Cleric can serve very similar roles in a group. The Bard, to my world/system is a Mystic class. The non-magical "Rake" specialist class, is a non-magical Rogue who relies on charm, wit, cunning, being a capable "face" of a group, and no small amount of knowledge/information gathering/retention from their diversity of contacts among the various social classes. Very similar character types available. One has magic/spells, along with interactive skills, various knowledge/lore, invoking inspiration/bolstering their allies... all the things we think of as "Bard" abilities. One is purely mundane, everyday person that would function entirely well in a game/setting containing NO magic, and could easily be gifted/trained in the lute/mandolin/harp to be every bit the knowledgeable charming wandering minstrel.The mythical, legendary, fantastic, and [pseudo-]historical archetypes (and meaningful mechanical variations) are much fewer and farther between for the non-magical character archetypes. Which is bizarre considering in myth/legend/history workers of magic are all pretty much capable of all the same things. You engage in divinations/premonitions, transmutations and illusions/tricking your target/foe are all the biggies. Summoning storms, commanding/charming people and animals...all that stuff. But the lines between the pseudo-religious Magi, and pantheistic priest castes, spirit-shamans, or witches or wizards or soothsayers of any culture/story is really just a matter of who's telling the story. The person with knowledge and access to magic power are all, fairly, the same character (for good or ill).But in RPGs we've shown them through so many prisms, the separations seem significantly more "obvious" and "real [i.e., worthy of a separate class]" than non-magic classes...which generally are only differentiated by HOW the fight -or sneak- and/or which weapons they like/prefer to use ("You have my sword. And my Bow. And my Axe." ...sooo, you three are all the same guy except for species.)   Anywho, that's probably enough of a rambling diatribe on a single cup of coffee on a Monday morning.I think/hope that I answered or contributed something to the general question of the thread.</blockquote>

Verification