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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 6379211" data-attributes="member: 1879">It is tied in some of the underlying assumptions that drove the earlier versions of D&D. Today a lot of that trope has bled out of the system over the years, but people still want to retain the possibility of portraying these world. Which you can do if there exist mundane classes, but you cannot do if there are no mundane classes.If I wanted to run as swords and sorcery game I could pretty easily do it by saying classes are limited to Barbarians (No Totem), Fighters (No Eldritch Knights), Rogues (No Arcane Tricksters) and Warlocks. And then taking a pretty hard look at race selection.  Yes, of course I'm talking about the original literature. It's still read in some circles. And there is a reason we still discuss D&D spell casting in terms of Jack Vance.However not all modern fantasy (thank God) is D&D deriviative. Lois BuJold's fantasy works portray two universes where magic exists but looks nothing like D&Ds commonplace yet only for combat magic. (Chalion and the Lakewalker books.) A lot of modern fantasy is urban monster genre stuff which does not resemble D&D although it's usually pretty close to World of Darkness. The point being that some people want to portray D&D worlds where things look like you would expect them to look, unless someone is tapping into otherworldly powers. And there is nothing wrong with that. For most of D&Ds history the assumption has been that heroes are extraordinary people and run in extraordinary circles. Yes a highlevel planescape group might use +1 swords as units of currency, but the majority of people in a D&D world like Greyhawk are assumed to be peasant farmers who have seen little magic in their lives except perhaps a hedge wizard at a carnival or a wondrous everburning torch that one time they went to the big city. Now, not everyone likes that, in fact Eberron was pretty much a reaction to that trope and it is hugely popular. I am not saying, in the slightest, that one way is better than another. I am saying that "Mundane" classes serve the valuable function of supporting a classic playstyle/world building ethos. Given 5es direct goal of bringing back old players they could not possibly have failed to support it and met their design goals.So with that in mind I see no point in compaining that the fighter does not do a job he was never supposed to do, of portraying mythic heroes like Beowulf and Hercules who do flatly superhuman things like wrestleing rivers and holding their breath for a day. That is a job for another class, or at very least a different sub-class. Champion ≠ Demigod.</blockquote>

Verification