D&D 5E (2024) Preferences in a New Official 5.5e Specific Setting

[Maxperson]

Level Up's Ranger is non-magical. And Pathfinder 1st edition does have a non-magical archetype known as the Skirmisher. It replaced spellcasting with Hunter's Tricks.

Isn't there a non-magical ranger in a UA? I thought there was.

 

[Corinnguard]

Isn't there a non-magical ranger in a UA? I thought there was.

This one? Ranger No Spells

 

[Maxperson]

This one? Ranger No Spells

Yeah. They could use that or make another one. A non-magical Bard is also a possibility.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The baseline is not really compatible with the question imo. I can't think of any conceptually coherent setting that could be designed to fit 5e PCs rather than simply managing to continue functioning in spite of the fact that the PCs are the very embodiment of starfish aliens with no ties to or dependency on anyone/anything in the setting.

Settings like eberron and darksun were possible because PCs had needs their players knew about and it was obviously possible to make big foundational lore choices at the setting level by tweaking how/if those needs are filled. I can't even say that wuxia/xianxia fits because those stories tend to involve characters who struggle under heaven's will & similar with real need for cultivation resources that allow them to skirt the line of power on top of actually having to depend on the world in various ways. At best author self insert isekai would kinda work as long as the table in question agreed which single PC was the main character and accepted that everyone else was nothing but sidekick or meat computer for The Star.

This is a table and social issue, not a setting issue however. If a player is engaged (and the DM encourages that engagement), they will happily interact with the setting as their character. If a player is not engaged with the game, nothing (other than perhaps mechanical rewards) will make them engage with it.
Players suffering under Main Character Syndrome isn't generally going to be setting dependent, but personality and expectations-dependent.

The survey here is asking what sort of settings we, as players and DMs, would like to engage with.

 

[CreamCloud0]

The setting would use fighter and rogue, the non-magical versions only. I know there's a non-magical ranger out there. That one would be allowed.

i think the real question is how low do you need to take the magic to feel 'low magic', like, especially with only humans around how much of the tone of low magic could you feasibly capture only using the three halfcasters and maybe warlock as your 'caster' that gives you eight classes to play about with, fighter, rogue, monk, barb, ranger, paladin, artificer, warlock, that's a pretty decent selection and i reckon spells getting thrown around far less than with the fullcasters around.

 

[tetrasodium]

This is a table and social issue, not a setting issue however. If a player is engaged (and the DM encourages that engagement), they will happily interact with the setting as their character. If a player is not engaged with the game, nothing (other than perhaps mechanical rewards) will make them engage with it.
Players suffering under Main Character Syndrome isn't generally going to be setting dependent, but personality and expectations-dependent.

The survey here is asking what sort of settings we, as players and DMs, would like to engage with.

No I violently disagree and in failing to demonstrate what the PCs still need within 5e you confirmed the problem. A setting can not be built and expect to run on chewing gum like "expect extremely enthusiastic player buy-in or blame the players". The system itself said "give the players what they want" far more than one time too many and that short-sighted looting of the Gm's toolbox failed to provide enough for the setting to interact with just as it failed to provide any tools the gm could use to further player buy-in on the setting.

At a certain point 5e needs to stop blaming players and gms for problems of 5e's own creation and start providing alternatives rule subsystems that start correcting that.

 

[Maxperson]

i think the real question is how low do you need to take the magic to feel 'low magic', like, especially with only humans around how much of the tone of low magic could you feasibly capture only using the three halfcasters and maybe warlock as your 'caster' that gives you eight classes to play about with, fighter, rogue, monk, barb, ranger, paladin, artificer, warlock, that's a pretty decent selection and i reckon spells getting thrown around far less than with the fullcasters around.

Low magic to me is how I described it. Three half-caster classes running around isn't low magic magic to me.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

No I violently disagree

You're entitled to do so.

and in failing to demonstrate what the PCs still need within 5e you confirmed the problem.
A setting can not be built and expect to run on chewing gum like "expect extremely enthusiastic player buy-in or blame the players".

Player engagement is a spectrum, it does not require "extremely enthusiastic buy in" for a player to start being engaged.
If the only players what show any engagement are the extremely enthusiastic ones, it might be an issue with the setting being one that the other players aren't interested in, but is more likely to be due to how the setting is being portrayed by the DM.

The system itself said "give the players what they want" far more than one time too many and that short-sighted looting of the Gm's toolbox failed to provide enough for the setting to interact with just as it failed to provide any tools the gm could use to further player buy-in on the setting.

The DM can always come up with new carrots. DM's showing an excessive preference for using sticks may get pushback however.

At a certain point 5e needs to stop blaming players and gms for problems of 5e's own creation and start providing alternatives rule subsystems that start correcting that.

At a certain point people need to stop blaming 5e for problems of the DM and players' own creation, and start addressing social issues like lack of courtesy and consideration for others themselves, rather than expecting the rules for a magic elf game to do it for them.