I'll try to get around the dripping sarcasm and reply to this. Yes, D&D combat is not an accurate representation of real world combat due to the abstract nature of things such as hit points and a single attack roll per round. However, it is a false dichotomy to say that we must either abstract everything or simulate everything precisely. There is a sliding scale of detail, and it can be the case that to simulate one process more accurately requires a level of complexity that isn't worth the trade-off.
"Dripping"! I presumed I was splashing people!
Anyway, back to serious time; I never said that everything done in D&D must be super-fantastical and be at the very edge of our ability to imagine it. All I'm saying is that limiting physical maneuvers by a certain number per combat or day makes
exactly as much sense as limiting magical powers the same way. We could limit
either through the same mechanics, and it would make just as much sense. We could say that you can't use more than 10 complex physical maneuvers or magical spells per day or else the nether beasts will eat your brain. What's more important in the end, though, believable combat mechanics, or balance?
I have in the past worked in creating stochastic models of biological systems. It is absurd to think that you have to model every detail of a living cell in order to get something meaningful out of a model of a specific system within that cell. It is also the case that ignoring certain details will give you results that are meaningless. There is a balance to be found in determining which processes you model in detail. I understand that you prefer your game to be more like an action or super-hero movie, but some of us place value on process simulation, and being able to make a decision in-character that does obey the rules of physics and common-sense. I would argue that D&D has always tried to obey those rules for physical combat, with 4th edition taking a step back to framing those rules in the metagame.
The rules of physics and common sense is internal to the game world. I once ran a game where the entirety of known land was actually a huge series of floating islands above a vast ocean. Within the game world, that's simply how the world worked. Nothing about it broke the laws of physics
in that world. So if, in the world you live in, it's common that people only have the mental focus or ki energy, or whatever, for one of a particular sort of maneuver before refocusing or resting, then that's just how the world works. Same thing with when magic works that way. It may not make sense in our world, but it's
not our world. Obviously it's not...
Magic is testament to that. If we limit what martial characters can do based on real world physics, then how can we expect them to keep up with the people who
don't have to worry about real world physics? The only way we can do it is by arbitrarily limiting the latter, such with the nonsensical per encounter or day or whatever.
The original fiction for wizardly spellcasting was that they literally had to memorize the spell in order to then cast it later in the day. This got modified into preparing the spell in order to cast it later in the day, and then became unclear. The rules of magic, as I said, might have been based on the idea that you can only memorize so much at once. If you think of it like preparing for an exam, you have some limited capacity to keep all the information in your head, and after the exam is over, more often than not, you actively relax and feel mentally drained. There are only so many exams you can prepare for in a single day.
There are only so many people you can stab each day before you get too tired to keep doing that, too. Once nobody's around who you need to stab, you relax from that, too. What's your point, here? I understand where what the ideas for magic have been, I'm more interested in moving into a system that's good, that does not give the undue advantages to the people with the magic. If magical heroes and non-magical heroes are going to be equal, then either non-magical heroes need to defy physics
anyway, or magic has to be nerfed to the point it doesn't really do much physics defying.
Now I'm not saying that magic has to follow this, just that this is where that particular point of view was probably coming from. Magic is magic and can follow any rules you choose. I will repeat though, that for those of us that like more sandbox games, more process simulation, it really helps if the ability to use magic is limited in some way in order to construct a coherent world.
I agree that magic should be limited. I agree that everything should be limited. However, magic is
magic. How is it okay for someone to fling fire at their enemies through some gestures and magic words and then forget how he just did that, but it's not acceptable for a dude to super-kick another dude and then forget how he did it? You could say that magic is just limited that way in order to balance it, and in-game that's just how the world works... and you can do that with martial abilities, too.
So, for some of us, there is good reason to model physical combat and magic differently, and thus to limit their use differently.
Yes, and for some of us, there isn't. It's all based on subjective tastes. Martial combat in D&D is absolutely unlike martial combat in real life as it is, though, so I don't understand the desire for this particular limitation. I mean... why draw the line there, instead of somewhere else? Why is
that super unbelievable, but, say, entering into a rage where you don't die until you're out of the rage regardless how much damage you take while in it is? How is sneak attack realistic? When you're in combat, you're
already aiming for the weak points, so why do only rogues do extra damage when they get a nice shot at them? What makes that realistic?
