D&D (2024) Its till just me or is the 2024 MM heavily infused by more 4e influences?

[Corinnguard]

doesn't going 'totally no magic' on characters restrict you to like 4 classes(or 3 depending on how far you stretch the definition of magic) with access to barely half of their subclasses?

Three-Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue. The Monk (I am assuming you meant this class) is a bit iffy IMO because some of their abilities are seen as being magic-like. Monks straddle the line between martial and spellcaster.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Three-Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue. The Monk (I am assuming you meant this class) is a bit iffy IMO because some of their abilities are seen as being magic-like. Monks straddle the line between martial and spellcaster.

yeah monk is who i meant as the 'fourth'

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Three-Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue. The Monk (I am assuming you meant this class) is a bit iffy IMO because some of their abilities are seen as being magic-like. Monks straddle the line between martial and spellcaster.

If you also rule out anything superhuman, you loose barbarian, fighter and rogue too.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If you also rule out anything superhuman, you loose barbarian, fighter and rogue too.

cool, so everyone will be playing as a classless commoner, Oh man this game is going to be So Fun. /s

 

[Corinnguard]

If you also rule out anything superhuman, you loose barbarian, fighter and rogue too.

This is in the eye of the figurative beholder. In a fantasy setting, who counts as a superhuman?

 

[Hussar]

There's a difference between no magic and low magic. I just did low magic. Basically, I allowed half-casters and warlock. Funny thing is, no one took a half caster although we did pick up a warlock a little ways in. We had a barbarian, a monk, a fighter/rogue and a warlock. Played through Phandelver: Shattered Obelisk right from level 1 to level 13. Worked fine.

So, yeah, 5e does work with very low magic parties. But, it's certainly not geared that way. Most groups, IME, have two or three full casters and probably a half caster as well. Extremely high magic gaming.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This is in the eye of the figurative beholder. In a fantasy setting, who counts as a superhuman?

Quite. Which goes for the monk too. The boundary between the natural and the superhuman isn't a hard cut-off, it depends upon what you believe humans can do. If you believe a human can bounce bullets off their chest and survive almost as much punishment as John McClane on a bad day, then barbarians are fine.

 

[dave2008]

doesn't going 'totally no magic' on characters restrict you to like 4 classes(or 3 depending on how far you stretch the definition of magic) with access to barely half of their subclasses?

I am not even sure, you only need one class (we only used two, everyone played a fighter or rogue), so if there are 2-3 more that is great. I mean, IIRC, AiME classes are mostly all martials and it works.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I am not even sure, you only need one class (we only used two, everyone played a fighter or rogue), so if there are 2-3 more that is great. I mean, IIRC, AiME classes are mostly all martials and it works.

sure it 'can' work, but when you've restricted yourself to like 15% of class options i wonder just how much the game is 'meant' to be played like that.

 

[dave2008]

sure it 'can' work, but when you've restricted yourself to like 15% of class options i wonder just how much the game is 'meant' to be played like that.

I've never been concerned with how the game is "meant" to be played. That was never the question even. My point was and has been, 5e is great if you play it with little or no magic. The core game / rules are really geared for this style. No has WotC supported that style of play, not really. However, the core game is really great for that style.