D&D General One thing I hate about the Sorcerer

[TwoSix]

It all goes back to how much suspension of disbelief someone is willing to give. My stance is since we can't agree what that line looks like, the safe play is to make it all magic rather than try to sort out what is talent, luck, ambient magic from the planet, etc.

My stance is what it always is for D&D. Characters are unique, and I only have to come up with explanations for specific characters; no one cares enough about the cosmology to worry about WHY the Echo Knight can make a double of himself.

If my player says their fighter is just a humble farmer who got really good at protecting his farm and can now behead demons and dragons, I roll with it.

 

[Remathilis]

Perhaps this will help discussion along.

I accept the D&D fighter (at least by some level) isn’t mundane by average real life earth human comparisons.

I also accept action heroes/olympic athletes/earths most intelligent scientists/etc aren’t mundane in this comparison either.

Those are statements I anticipate we can all get behind.

Nope.

Action heroes and athletes still fall within the boundaries of possible. If human capabilities fall on a scale from 1 (barely possible) to 10 (best in the world) all would fall on the high end of that scale. And if fighters fall along that same limit, we have no issue.

But what happens when magic pushes the game past 10? Because that's what wizards and clerics and even barbarians and monks do. They go to 11 and beyond. What now?

Either we accept that the fighter is permanently stuck at 10 and watches as his magical colleagues go higher and higher to 14, 16 or even 20.

Or we give them access to magic to allow them to get to 11 and higher.

What I don't accept is allowing them to get to 11 or more and say, "but they're really just 10s in the fiction".

 

[Remathilis]

So wait, are we saying that if a new edition comes out, all the old lore from previous editions is no longer relevant and should be considered thrown out? I spent a lot of time reading those books and learning about the history of the game's settings. It's all a part of D&D in my opinion.

I mean, WotC themselves have said they aren't beholden to the old cannon, so...

 

[James Gasik]

If my player says their fighter is just a humble farmer who got really good at protecting his farm and can now behead demons and dragons, I roll with it.

One of the Ultima games has you encounter a farmer who once gave a mad wizard shelter, and in return, he enchanted the farmer's hoe, thus creating

THE HOE OF DESTRUCTION!

 

[FrogReaver]

Nope.

Action heroes and athletes still fall within the boundaries of possible. If human capabilities fall on a scale from 1 (barely possible) to 10 (best in the world) all would fall on the high end of that scale. And if fighters fall along that same limit, we have no issue.

Why do you think mundane refers to that which is possible?

But what happens when magic pushes the game past 10? Because that's what wizards and clerics and even barbarians and monks do. They go to 11 and beyond. What now?

I’d say that’s not in the scope of my statement

Either we accept that the fighter is permanently stuck at 10 and watches as his magical colleagues go higher and higher to 14, 16 or even 20.

Again - not the scope of my statement.

What I don't accept is allowing them to get to 11 or more and say, "but they're really just 10s in the fiction".

I don’t either. Who is suggesting this?

 

[Vaalingrade]

It all goes back to how much suspension of disbelief someone is willing to give. My stance is since we can't agree what that line looks like, the safe play is to make it all magic rather than try to sort out what is talent, luck, ambient magic from the planet, etc.

This is exactly the heart of the issue.

In trying to save time and effort, we have flattened all of fantasy down to 'it's just magic' without variety or nuance. Which is exacerbated in a game that only doles out magic as a specific discrete set of spells. It's made what should be fantastical and exciting super homogenized and boring.

 

[Shardstone]

The books are literally world salad meant go inspire fantastical ideas in you. I am all for literary analysis, but the word salad is meant to justify all interpretations of a concept, not limit them.

 

[James Gasik]

I mean, WotC themselves have said they aren't beholden to the old cannon, so...

To which I say, phooey. If they want to retcon stuff, they can, but until I see it, I say it's official. If the Forgotten Realms isn't the same place I've been playing in for the past 30 ish years then what's my investment in the setting?

 

[TwoSix]

One of the Ultima games has you encounter a farmer who once gave a mad wizard shelter, and in return, he enchanted the farmer's hoe, thus creating

THE HOE OF DESTRUCTION!

Hopefully being so powerfully enchanted will keep the farm tool clean; no one likes a dirty hoe.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Again, the quote you are hanging this on, the "positive statement" does not use the word mundane in the same context. They don't specifically mean, "not-magical". They mean, "in some way a cut above others". It's just as vague most everything else on the subject.

The text says what the text says.

Importantly, the text was put together by people who write rules for fantasy RPGs where the use of the word "mundane" often has specific connotations.

Your interpretation is a choice.