Shardstone
Hero
In word salad, there is no true gospel, just hard and soft suggestions.Except crap like the druid 'will not' wear metal armor. That's clearly meant to limit imagination.
In word salad, there is no true gospel, just hard and soft suggestions.Except crap like the druid 'will not' wear metal armor. That's clearly meant to limit imagination.
Okay. But you do agree that silence on fighters getting wish at level 1 does mean the fighter doesn’t get wish at level 1? This establishes a principle, silence on a topic is not always ambiguous.The question related to wish at level 1 is distinctively NOT the same as tagging a class's abilities as magical or otherwise.
So why do you believe silence about the ability means he doesn’t get it but silence about being magical means he could be? Or in more general terms, why is silence about a mechanical ability different than silence about the narrative cause of that ability?It is asking if fighters get a mechanical ability not what the narrative justification is for any particular ability.
Agreed.Saying a fighter is or isn't magical does not change the abilities they are given in the book.
Why? Is this just because Gammadoodler says so?Silence regarding such narrative justifications doesn't not constitute proof either way.
Barbarian rage does claim to bestow supernatural strength and resilience. So I’m not really sure it matters how people view them.As a good example of this, consider the different ways people have viewed Barbarian rage.
No one disagrees with what the text says. Its just ‘not mundane’ does not necessitate supernatural or magical. No interpretation needed to get to this point - it’s the definition.Regarding the fighter write up quote, as I said to Micah, the text says what the text says. Interpretation is a choice.
So that’s quite a different argument than your previous defense of them potentially being magical.I should note. My personal feeling on the fighter quote that I posted is that the fighter is "beyond mundane warriors".
I don't need them to be magical. I, personally, would prefer otherwise.
But..I. think there is adequate justification for extraordinary abilities..beyond those of the mundane warrior.
Well, just because something is inborn doesn't mean it awakened with puberty like a Marvel mutant. Something could be latent and wait for a triggering event to manifest... such as any of the hundreds of weird things that a typical adventurer goes through.As soon as 3E let you just take a level in Wizard if you felt like it, any notion of "inborn talent" was gone. Period. I'm sure some people did complain but they would have needed to have kicked up a real stink. Either way - "inborn talent" is just not compatible with the 3E/5E approach to multiclassing.
Because the rulebook is there to define the game abilities player characters should have, not why they have them.Okay. But you do agree that silence on fighters getting wish at level 1 does mean the fighter doesn’t get wish at level 1? This establishes a principle, silence on a topic is not always ambiguous.
So why do you believe silence about the ability means he doesn’t get it but silence about being magical means he could be? Or in more general terms, why is silence about a mechanical ability different than silence about the narrative cause of that ability?
Agreed.
Why? Is this just because Gammadoodler says so?
Barbarian rage does claim to bestow supernatural strength and resilience. So I’m not really sure it matters how people view them.
No one disagrees with what the text says. Its just ‘not mundane’ does not necessitate supernatural or magical. No interpretation needed to get to this point - it’s the definition.
That was true for 4e’s ignore the fluff and make your own. That’s not the case for 5e. Fluff is just as much a rule as any mechanic again.Because the rulebook is there to define the game abilities player characters should have, not why they have them.
the conclusion here does not follow from the premise.A player's mechanical choices at the table do not change if 100% of the fighter's abilities are coded as magic, supernatural, mundane, or whatever else. Thus, silence leaves room for mechanically irrelevant creative expression.
Okay. Why do you say class fluff isn’t the same?A player's mechanical choices do change if an additional mechanical ability is included for the class. Abilities a player gets are positive statements in the game. Thus, silence, in this case, is the absence of incremental positive statements for PC abilities.
I don’t think your explanations here make a case for them being different at all.Silence in a rule book for these two scenarios is not equivalent.
Of course!So we agree that "Not mundane" means "Not mundane"?
Cool.
There is no fluff to ignore. There is an absence of fluff.That was true for 4e’s ignore the fluff and make your own. That’s not the case for 5e. Fluff is just as much a rule as any mechanic again.
the conclusion here does not follow from the premise.
Okay. Why do you say class fluff isn’t the same?
I don’t think your explanations here make a case for them being different at all.
Of course!
I'm not sure what to make of this?So that’s quite a different argument than your previous defense of them potentially being magical.
I might could get behind this for fighters - of course their extradordinary abilities in the book are mostly only exraordinary in that their numbers are better than their more mundane counterparts. So I don’t know we can use them not being mundane to justify all kinds of extraordinary abilities, whatever not mundane for the fighter means seems fairly limited in scope based on the base fighter abilities they get.
The fighter in the book is not mundane.I'm not sure what to make of this?
People want abilities that are extraordinary in a way that the book doesn't currently provide.
But the abilities in the book are not all that extraordinary..
So the abilities we give them can't be all that extraordinary..
This appears to be circular logic?
Because of this qualification you're actually agreeing with his thesis.It may not be what people want when they say extraordinary