D&D 5E Rule of Three: 7 Feb. 2014

[RevTurkey]

Hey EnglishLanguage

Fair points and well made. My views on that are:

1. This is D&D not a Conan novel or a Greek Myth. The game has a history of it's own. It is not generally considered a magic weak game. In all editions except perhaps the last...a wizard became very powerful at higher levels. I think games like Runequest would be better suited to cover those low magic styles of play. If you dangle the carrot of world changing, reality warping magic in a low level mages face...I don't think it is good to then say...sorry but that 'Wish' spell is only worth a plus one because it might upset the player who is playing a guy in a loincloth with a lump of iron. Just to be clear my all time favourite class to play is a Fighter. I don't care that the wizards are better at high level...I am having my own fun, charging about and battling monsters. The stand off-ish nature of a mage class is a bit too boring for my liking. By the way...I don't do multi-classing and don't allow it in my games. A discussion for another thread but I think it leads to power gaming/ point matching and that is not my thing.

2. I used to have a character that had a vorpal blade in 2nd edition. That little sword and some lucky rolls made my hero the match of any wizard. I guess it is each to their own...in games I have played it is not common for wizards to end up with loads of magic items other than those that enhance their normal class abilities. Staves, wands, rings, scrolls...stuff that lets them turn people to dust. Because we avoid multi-classing...the Fighter types get the magic armour, big shiny pointy stuff and glowing shields..that tend to level the playing field for them without having to nerf the mage or pretend that the fighter's suddenly got bitten by radioactive spiders and start running up walls and acquiring the strength of ten men etc. That's how we play and as such where my comments and experience come from.

3. Roleplaying has nothing to do with class? Well it does a bit doesn't it. A good banana is not the same as a good apple but they are both still fruit. The actions and conversations you role-play are going to be different based on class...

anyway...I guess we play and want different things from the game. No problem..it looks like Mearl's and co. are putting in options to allow both of us to be happy. Hope that happens

 

[Sadras]

Yeah, becauseremember all those old myths where the tough strong guy got his rear end handed to him by the caster guy? I mean, there was Conan where...wait, he beat the snot out of caster guys....uh..

Conan never went up against Harry Potter.
Conan never went up against Dr Strange or Zatana.
And everyone knows Superman's weakness is magic, enter Captain Marvel.
If a wizard can turn a creature such as a dragon to dust I do not see the reason why you feel the warrior in his tin suit or in a loin cloth should have a better chance.

Oh hey, but what about all those greek myths. Surely there were plenty of..wait no, all the greek heroes are big tough guys who beat up sorcerors.

Circe could have turned Odyseus into a pig anytime - there are no saving throws in Greek Mythology just like there weren't any in Willow. So do not assume D&D is Greek Mythology and that the Warrior should always win. It doesn't work that way.
All you need to do is ban some spells off the spell list or increase the cost of spells to emulate the type of play you desire - so increase gold cost, make powerful magic age, cost HD/Surges, inflict Fatigue levels...etc or a combination of thereof, that is if you want to play that sort of game.

 

[Hussar]

Conan never went up against Harry Potter.
Conan never went up against Dr Strange or Zatana.
And everyone knows Superman's weakness is magic, enter Captain Marvel.
If a wizard can turn a creature such as a dragon to dust I do not see the reason why you feel the warrior in his tin suit or in a loin cloth should have a better chance.



Circe could have turned Odyseus into a pig anytime - there are not saving throws in Greek Mythology just like there weren't any in Willow. So do not assume D&D is Greek Mythology and that the Warrior should always win. It doesn't work that way.
All you need to do is ban some spells off the spell list or increase the cost of spells to emulate the type of play you desire - so increase gold cost, make powerful magic age, cost HD/Surges, inflict Fatigue levels...etc or a combination of thereof, that is if you want to play that sort of game.

But, why do D&D casters need to be modelled on Harry Potter, Dr Strange or Zatana?

Why can't D&D casters be modelled closer to other sources? Why does magic have to be "fantastic cosmic powers"?

 

[Grydan]

And everyone knows Superman's weakness is magic, enter Captain Marvel.

If by "everyone knows", you mean "nearly everyone gets out wrong", sure.

Superman doesn't have a weakness to magic. Kryptonite weakens him, causes him pain, and can potentially kill him. Red sunlight can strip away his powers. Magic does neither of these things to him in and of itself.

Superman's "weakness" to magic is simply a lack of any special protection against it.

Say you have a magical flaming sword. That's pretty neat ... now hit Superman with it and what happens? The same thing that happens if you hit him with any other chunk of fiery metal: pretty much nothing.

A sword that's enchanted to never lose its edge and need sharpening? Congratulations, you won't dull your blade as you flail at him uselessly, doing no damage.

A sword that's enchanted to cut through ANYTHING ... well, that'll cut Superman.

A sword that slays anything it hits? That can kill Superman.

Captain Marvel (when contrived circumstances place him in conflict with Superman), is able to challenge Superman not because he's magic, but because magic has granted him comparable abilities. Such characters as Mr. Majestic, Apollo, Doomsday, and the Martian Manhunter are all non-magical, and fare just as well as (or better than, given some of their other advantages and mindsets) Captain Marvel (who, for trademark reasons is now known officially as Shazam).

(And of course, the true winner of any fights between any of these characters is Batman, because it's all part of his plan, and because Batman cheats.)

 

[Sadras]

But, why do D&D casters need to be modelled on Harry Potter, Dr Strange or Zatana?

Why can't D&D casters be modelled closer to other sources? Why does magic have to be "fantastic cosmic powers"?

Lol, you will find no disagreement from me there. I was debating a completely different point with the previous poster. I would like to imagine that the majority or D&Ders would prefer a less cosmic power magic system, closer to literature, I'm not sure why that didn't translate through the editions even after they removed the AD&D balancing effects.
4e got it right mostly, but that's a completely different game for those of us that want to play a more traditional version of D&D.

Currently I find I make house-rules about cantrips, rituals and spells for the magic system to fit into the setting I envision - closer to literature. I have had to do it with all systems so far, including 4e.
It's amazing this hasn't been addressed more so by the designers. I can't imagine I am the only one who is trying to emulate a grittier, lower magic setting. It's not so much the class balance that affects me, but rather the high-magic built into the system.

Look I suppose to a degree that's what E6 and P6 is all about anyways so should we want that type of game it does exists.

 

[Sadras]

Superman doesn't have a weakness to magic. Kryptonite weakens him, causes him pain, and can potentially kill him. Red sunlight can strip away his powers. Magic does neither of these things to him in and of itself. Superman's "weakness" to magic is simply a lack of any special protection against it.

Sure, when I meant 'weakness' I mean that he cannot defend himself against it, not that it weakens him like Kryptonite, Achilles's heel if you will, hence I did not state "Superman is weakened by magic".
But that doesn't make my statement any less true.

Say you have a magical flaming sword. That's pretty neat ... now hit Superman with it and what happens? The same thing that happens if you hit him with any other chunk of fiery metal: pretty much nothing. A sword that's enchanted to never lose its edge and need sharpening? Congratulations, you won't dull your blade as you flail at him uselessly, doing no damage.
A sword that's enchanted to cut through ANYTHING ... well, that'll cut Superman. A sword that slays anything it hits? That can kill Superman.

In the context of my conversation with the previous poster we were talking of magic not magical weapons per say. A caster turning a warrior to dust was the example so I was elaborating on that not vorpal weapons and weapons of slaying, life trapping...etc
But yes I am not in disagreement with what you have posted on this topic.

Captain Marvel (when contrived circumstances place him in conflict with Superman), is able to challenge Superman not because he's magic, but because magic has granted him comparable abilities. Such characters as Mr. Majestic, Apollo, Doomsday, and the Martian Manhunter are all non-magical, and fare just as well as (or better than, given some of their other advantages and mindsets) Captain Marvel (who, for trademark reasons is now known officially as Shazam).

Agree. Although people that have access to powerful arcane spells such as Zatana, Dr Fate and Dr Strange can easily magic Supes, that was my point. Powerful magic (such as classic D&D) against Humans in Metal should win everytime. But lets not get into the nitty gritty of Paladin's swords of 50% MR and what not.
What need to change is the spell list or the spell cost or both to keep the casters comparable to the fighters.

(And of course, the true winner of any fights between any of these characters is Batman, because it's all part of his plan, and because Batman cheats.)

Of course, the bastard.

 

[Erekose]

I've not been following 5E that closely since the initial playtest material.

That said . . . isn't this where it could be argued that a Fighter having high hit points can shrugging off damage from spells and a Fighter could become harder to affect by magic with improved saving throws???

This doesn't address the utility of the Fighter in non-combat situations but IMHO with the right balance of HPs and Saving Throws I can see how level-for-level a Fighter could maintain his/her combat dominance against a magic using class.

 

[technoextreme]

Conan never went up against Harry Potter.
Conan never went up against Dr Strange or Zatana.
And everyone knows Superman's weakness is magic, enter Captain Marvel.
If a wizard can turn a creature such as a dragon to dust I do not see the reason why you feel the warrior in his tin suit or in a loin cloth should have a better chance.

Superman regularly beats cosmic magical forces on a regular basis so its probably not a great example to provide.

Circe could have turned Odyseus into a pig anytime - there are not saving throws in Greek Mythology just like there weren't any in Willow. So do not assume D&D is Greek Mythology and that the Warrior should always win. It doesn't work that way.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Superman got turned into a pig and still managed to beat the cosmic magical forces.

 

[Argyle King]

I'm fine with D&D mages gaining powerful magic. However, what I'm not fine with is that there's generally no drawback to using such power. I'm not a stickler for balance, but I feel like even something as simple as increasing casting times or making arcane components actually matter would help. I also feel that such things would help move D&D closer to some of the movies and literature that many people want to emulate; I believe finding a middle ground between the seemingly completely unrestricted gonzo power of D&D magic and what tends to be found in literature would be a good thing. (Though, admittedly, there are likely people who feel that would be a bad thing.)



I'm not a stickler for balance. I think characters should be in the same general ballpark of usefulness, but I'm ok with there being some leeway. However, I remember being a player in 3rd edition games (and, more recently, in some higher level Pathfinder games,) and the group needing to ask the player playing a wizard to not do anything for a round or two so that we'd actually get a chance to do something. Eventually, many members of the group simply stopped playing classes which didn't have access to magic. We didn't really miss having a "meat shield" at all because we'd simply have a cleric who was nearly as good in melee as a fighter would be, a druid with an animal companion who could tank, or possibly both.

For what it's worth, I highly enjoy 3rd edition. I'm a player in a game right now; I play on Sunday nights in a 3rd Edition game. I made the subpar decision to multiclass as a wizard/druid; even with doing that, I'm still (in my opinion) keeping pace with the rest of the party in spite of the fact that I don't have some of the spells available to me that I normally would at this point in the game. I'm currently Druid 3/Wizard 1; getting ready to take my second level of Wizard. I chose to multiclass because it fit my character concept, and, honestly, partially because I view myself as being more experienced with 3rd than some of the other players in the group, so I took it upon myself to tone down what I could do so as to give them more of an opportunity to participate in the game.

 

[Sadras]

Superman regularly beats cosmic magical forces on a regular basis so its probably not a great example to provide.

Yeah, but IMO, the villains are written poorly and do not behave as they should (its a case of bad DMing by the writers...similar in vain to that boregasm they unloaded on the general public last year, Man of Steel)

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Superman got turned into a pig and still managed to beat the cosmic magical forces.

I'm sensing you're a supes fan. But that would a sight - a flying laser-shooting cold-breath blasting pig.