How is the Wizard vs Warrior Balance Problem Handled in Fantasy Literature?

[KahnyaGnorc]

IF the fighter took a full-on hit, THEN he is dead. The measure of his remaining hit points, and not what the giant rolled to hit, is the sole determinant of whether or not he took a full-on hit in D&D.

That would mean that it would be impossible for the giant to ever get a full-on hit with his/her first attack, since the top crit would still not exceed the fighter's hit points. There are death by massive blow optional rules, but a high-level fighter can breeze through the required Fort Saves.

Or redefining what human means to exclude fictional heroic characters who fall within human capability, right?

No one in the Die Hard setting can withstand the punishment that John McClane can. That is superhuman to me.

 

[Raven Crowking]

That would mean that it would be impossible for the giant to ever get a full-on hit with his/her first attack, since the top crit would still not exceed the fighter's hit points.

And.........?

If the fighter is not in top form, he won't be at top hit points, and may well take a full-on hit with the first attack. Likewise, the giant might have the opportunity to do something akin to a coup de grace, which may well translate into a full-on hit.

No one in the Die Hard setting can withstand the punishment that John McClane can. That is superhuman to me.

Which movie are we talking about?

It seems to me that McClane is human in Die Hard, but I would agree that he seems superhuman in the later movies. Especially the last one. Frankly, that damages my enjoyment of those films.


RC

 

[Harlekin]

Okay. Let's see it.

Let's see your Batman, Conan, and Odysseus in D&D terms with their "quasimagical/mythical" abilities.

I'm serious. I'm truly interested in how you're going to (a) give them abilities that you feel can "compete" with a wizard's, while (b) keeping them "normal" enough that people like me, who aren't interested in a magical Batman or Conan at all, playing the game.

My guess is that you don't care about (b). Which is fine, and will save a lot of time if you just say it outright.

Narrative control by their player? A couple of times, the player gets to say "And next, X happens". For example, "The Dragon when trying to gain height fast tears open an old injury in a wing and has to land". Of course you need to limit what exactly X could be, to make sure this ability is useful but not overpowered. Nevertheless, it should be easy to set up so that in the game world, things just happen to work out for the fighter.

If you wanted to draw a further distinction between Batman an John McLane, you could say that things work out for Batman, because he planned them that way, while JML just got lucky.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No one in the Die Hard setting can withstand the punishment that John McClane can. That is superhuman to me.

So...there's a Die Hard movie in which it is revealed that he is indeed tougher than each and every one of the other 6.5 billion people in that version of the world?

I don't think so- at best, all we know is that he's the toughest guy on the screen.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

So...there's a Die Hard movie in which it is revealed that he is indeed tougher than each and every one of the other 6.5 billion people in that version of the world?

I don't think so- at best, all we know is that he's the toughest guy on the screen.

You really and sincerely do not understand what narrative is, do you? I don't mean that as an insult, I mean I honestly don't think you know.

That would explain a whole lot.

 

[CuRoi]

I have only been paying half attention to this thread, so apologies if I throw in soemthing thats been beat to death, animated, ressurrected, beat to death again, animated and further pummled.

I dropped out somewhere along the lines of the neverending batman debate : ) But here is something tagnetially related and a fun read:

*WARNING* this is a link to a very tongue in cheek "top ten" list which includes some off-color language. Please don't click if you might be offended by juvenile humor peppered with obscneities. If you have a completely childish sense of humor like myself, its worth the read, and I think adds some perspective to the whole "super human" versus "normal" debate.

Real Life Heroes

THATS super human. And despite the tongue in cheek, snarky story telling, it's all based on actual human abilities.

IMO - Discussing whether someone is superhuman or not regardless of a setting or fiction level for that matter is a moot point. A good story requires characters doing fantastic things, whether a fictional account or something based plainly in fact. That's what makes the story good to begin with.

To the topic at hand -

There is no "balance" issue in fantasy literature simply because the supreme and ultimate decider of what is "balanced" is the story. If the actions create a good story, then its "balanced". Just ignore the rules when they make your story suck and you'll be fine.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You really and sincerely do not understand what narrative is, do you? I don't mean that as an insult, I mean I honestly don't think you know.

What + Ever.

The narrative of Die Hard does not require that John is the toughest man in the world, merely tougher than anyone else in the movie. There is no larger context in which to place him, as there is with Bats & the whole DC universe.

For all we know, John is in approximately the same relation to his world as James Bond is to his. Bond has encountered several opponents tougher than he is...he just found other ways to defeat them.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The problem is that people are getting extremely caught up in the "world" and they either ignore or don't understand the "narrative."

In the "world" of Die Hard, JMC is a normal man. He has no magical powers. He has no mutant abilities. He can't cast any spells. He is an "average human."

In the "narrative" of Die Hard, JMC is the protagonist, which in of itself imbues him with ability that no other person in the "world" of Die Hard has. You cannot compare JMC to the 6.5 billion other people in the world because they don't exist in the narrative. The narrative is not on "the planet Earth," the narrative is on one part of New York City. Asking if John McClane is better then those 6.5 billion people isn't just missing the point, it's a nonsense question. Those people don't exist.

Although JMC is a "normal human," because he is the protagonist, he can take more pain, shoot with better accuracy, and is just plain smarter, faster, and more versatile then the cops and SWAT are. By being the protagonist, JMC is inherently extraordinary because the narrative is focused on him. In the narrative, that level of being extraordinary is focused through his ability to take more punishment, outsmart a man who has just about everything fully planned, and go from standard detective to a one man terrorist murdering army.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I have only been paying half attention to this thread, so apologies if I throw in soemthing thats been beat to death, animated, ressurrected, beat to death again, animated and further pummled.

I dropped out somewhere along the lines of the neverending batman debate : ) But here is something tagnetially related and a fun read:

*WARNING* this is a link to a very tongue in cheek "top ten" list which includes some off-color language. Please don't click if you might be offended by juvenile humor peppered with obscneities. If you have a completely childish sense of humor like myself, its worth the read, and I think adds some perspective to the whole "super human" versus "normal" debate.

Real Life Heroes

THATS super human. And despite the tongue in cheek, snarky story telling, it's all based on actual human abilities.

No but you see literally any single person, even those posting at EN World right now, could do any of those things because they're just human beings and not extraordinary at all and rjrgndkjfgnjfng I can't even do this in jest.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In the "narrative" of Die Hard, JMC is the protagonist, which in of itself imbues him with ability that no other person in the "world" of Die Hard has. You cannot compare JMC to the 6.5 billion other people in the world because they don't exist in the narrative. The narrative is not on "the planet Earth," the narrative is on one part of New York City. Asking if John McClane is better then those 6.5 billion people isn't just missing the point, it's a nonsense question. Those people don't exist.

Your statement is overbroad.

The narrative only demands that the protagonist be able to do what is asked of him, not that he is uniquely qualified to do so. Others within the world may be equal or even superior in capability, but they will not be the ones to act as the protagonist does. Those other competent individuals may be incapacitated, dead, secretly the antagonist or a myriad of other things.

In Westworld, he protagonist is weaker, less robust and generally less "manly" than his buddy...but he's possibly the only person who survives. (His buddy did not.)

In Deliverance, the protagonist is, at best, the second best archer in his foursome, and is nearly incapable at being a hunter. Yet despite his incompetence, it is he who delivers the killing shot that saves his friends.

We cannot say that, as the protagonist, John is the baddest dude in Die Hard- at best, we can say he is the baddest dude in a position to act.