D&D 5E Martial Characters vs Real World Athletes

[Stalker0]

One thing I wish that 5e had done was make explicit what the tiers of play actually mean. If I'm an archetype of my class, what does that actually mean? Is an 18th level fighter still bound by normal human standards or not? I'm very much in the "no" camp, but, I do wish they'd actually step up and make it explicit.

I think its a matter of degrees for most people.

For example, I think most people are okay with a 20th level fighter being stronger than the strongest real life person. But how much is the question? 10%, 20%? Maybe. 100%....probably not.

Same with speed. Could the fastest 20th level fighter keep up with a greyhound dog? Yeah I could see that. A cheetah? Probably not.


Then again...I think there is some power level where you have to let all characters break the mundane limit, or balance is beyond impossible. Maybe that is "epic level", maybe that is the 16-20th level tier, but I think it has to be somewhere. And some point "Joe the Fighter" gains a little immortals blood, becomes the chosen of a god, absorbs some of that magic from those items he has had all of these years, etc.

 

[orangefruitbat]

Or maybe we shouldn't sweat the small stuff

Based on the OP analysis, it seems that the rules don't model real-world physics perfectly - for all characters level 1-20 AND attributes from 3-20. But the Fireball spell doesn't really correspond to the physical properties of a real fire either (hold a piece of paper in your hand, and if you survive the blast, the paper is unharmed!).

But that's OK. Most of us don't really know how much an elite Olympian can dead lift, or throw a shot-put or whatever. The important thing is that the STR 20 character is the strongest in Greyhawk, that the agile rogue is the quickest runner in Waterdeep, that the ranger is the finest archer in the kingdom. And the rules model this just fine.

 

[DEFCON 1]

One thing I wish that 5e had done was make explicit what the tiers of play actually mean. If I'm an archetype of my class, what does that actually mean? Is an 18th level fighter still bound by normal human standards or not? I'm very much in the "no" camp, but, I do wish they'd actually step up and make it explicit.

Wouldn't matter. The only reason we usually care about seeing things made explicit is because we hope it will reduce the amount of bitching people make here on the boards, complaining about it.

But right now rather than folks complaining about not knowing whether an 18th level fighter should be considered magical or not... they'd complain that WotC was dictating how they play their game by stating outright an 18th level fighter was considered magical or not.

So it doesn't matter how implicit or explicit any of their rules are... people are going to bitch about it regardless and we'll have to read them.

 

[SilverfireSage]

But, if you look at the OP, much of the records are far above what the best and strongest martial character can do. In no cases is the martial character ever better, and in fact, is rarely even close, or, to be honest, even competitive.

A clearer example would be to look at, say, college level athletics and then do the comparison. Surely my 20th level fighter should be better at just about everything than a college athlete.

They are better, just not at specifically that one thing the college level athlete is good at. I would say that world class/collegiate level athletes have "levels" in that one area. Michael Phelps is a 20th level Swimmer, Usain Bolt is a 20th level Runner. They are the best that any human has ever been at that one thing, so why on earth should a fighter who is good at a whole bunch of things ever get that close? the fact that some of them are pretty close is actually pretty impressive! A fighter has to know how to use 20 different weapons effectively, has to be able to run, jump, swim, climb, all extremely effectively, all while attacking and being attacked by magical beings.

For college, many of the things that were close in the world record range the fighter blows out of the water. The rogue is much faster than a collegiate swimmer, the fighter can jump several inches higher, a few feet farther, etc. Simply look up the records on line, and it's easy to see that a character in D&D has the potential to be better than most pro athletes, but aren't, and shouldn't be, better than the best ever.

 

[billd91]

Frankly, no its not. While they may SAY thats what they are after, it ALWAYS boils back down to "Fighters cant have nice things."

That's a bald faced lie and, frankly, I'm sick of seeing it.

 

[N'raac]

There is another problem too, though: if my 20th level, 20 STR fighter can't be as good as any real world champion athlete then I will probably suck in comparison to Aragorn, Conan, Beowulf, Hercules, Batman, Green Arrow, Hawkeye etc.

I also find it spoils verisimilitude that fighters are capable of fighting at a physical level that surpasses the humanly possible (eg trading blows with storm giants) but lack comparably preternatural physical prowess in their non-combat endeavours.

I love this - it's unrealistic if they are realistic!

 

[JasonZZ]

I love this - it's unrealistic if they are realistic!

That's a bit disingenuous, don't you think? The complaint is not that martial heroes are "unrealistic for being realistic", but that D&D martial heroes are not only not larger-than-life like their models, but even fall short of reality. "Smaller than life" rather than "larger than life", if you will.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Frankly, no its not. While they may SAY thats what they are after, it ALWAYS boils back down to "Fighters cant have nice things."

That's a bald faced lie and, frankly, I'm sick of seeing it.

Whatever someone may actually /be/ after, if the demands it leads them to making do boil down to not allowing the Fighter class any "nice things," it's no different in effect than if that denial is their only goal.

Frankly, what Marshall is saying is more a tautology than a lie. He's saying that people who argue against fighters having nice things are arguing that "fighters can't have nice things." Well, yeah, they are, otherwise they wouldn't be arguing against the fighter having something "nice."

Whatever the value of 'nice' is in that context...

 

[Hussar]

Wouldn't matter. The only reason we usually care about seeing things made explicit is because we hope it will reduce the amount of bitching people make here on the boards, complaining about it.

But right now rather than folks complaining about not knowing whether an 18th level fighter should be considered magical or not... they'd complain that WotC was dictating how they play their game by stating outright an 18th level fighter was considered magical or not.

So it doesn't matter how implicit or explicit any of their rules are... people are going to bitch about it regardless and we'll have to read them.

I can see your point. But, at least if they stated it clearly then we could have a better grasp on what that character's archetype should be close to.

A wizard archetype is Merlin. He can do fantastical things. A cleric's archetype can be found in a number of stories from real world beliefs. But what is a fighter's archetype? Is it Aragorn, who is just a really good swordsman, or is it Hercules and Beowulf?

There should be something in the setting design guidelines IMO that discusses this.

 

[Umbran]

Frankly, no its not. While they may SAY thats what they are after, it ALWAYS boils back down to "Fighters cant have nice things."

I think you are confusing cause and effect. And, I think you may have an issue that "nice things" is not a well-defined description. What you think of as nice, and what they think of as nice, may be different things.

That's a bald faced lie and, frankly, I'm sick of seeing it.

You probably want to back away from calling people liars. Quickly. He may be misinformed, or wrong - but a lie implies an purposeful desire to mislead. If you know his intentions that well over the internet... go lend yourself out intelligence agencies, or become a superhero, or something, as you are probably telepathic.