D&D 5E (2014) Should martial characters be mundane or supernatural?

[overgeeked]

Cool. So then the noble background feature is mind control because it forces all peasants the worlds over to kowtow to you despite not necessarily even knowing you're a noble. They all somehow just know that you're better than they are and will be instantly obedient regardless of your being a noble from their country, a neighboring country, a neighboring continent, a neighboring planet, or a neighboring plane of existence.

Do people object to that kind of background on a fighter? Or is that level of explicitly supernatural nonsense given a pass for some reason?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Cool. So then the noble background feature is mind control because it forces all peasants the worlds over to kowtow to you despite not necessarily even knowing you're a noble. They all somehow just know that you're better than they are and will be instantly obedient regardless of your being a noble from their country, a neighboring country, a neighboring continent, a neighboring planet, or a neighboring plane of existence.

Do people object to that kind of background on a fighter? Or is that level of explicitly supernatural nonsense given a pass for some reason?

I do object to the noble background actually, and have done so on this site.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Existing in a narrative with background extras that react to your character based on the plot is clearly supernatural mind control.

 

[Maxperson]

This is a little more nuanced area of debate. First, it depends on how the taunt ability is framed. If the fighter is imposing disadvantage to attack other targets but him, I don't view that as mind control. I can still target a different foe if I want to, I'm just penalized if I do. No agency is lost. Now if the taunt forces me to attack on them, that costs the player agency. I'm less ok with that, but again it depends on what the parameters are. If I am a wizard and I'm goaded into attacking a fighter, there is a world of difference between "ok, I will fireball the fighter and fling all my firebolts at him" vs. "I will brazenly run up into melee and wack at him with my staff!" Even if forced to attack only the fighter, I still have a choice in how.

I'm willing to give some leeway though because a lot of D&D assumes mundane abilities can override player agency. Perception and insight checks, saves vs fear or horror, social/charisma skills, etc. I'm as willing to accept my character can be goaded into having disadvantage vs other foes as I am to being tripped or tricked with dirty fighting. If agency can never be revoked, then nothing can ever impede a PC.

That's not as bad, but it still affects the mind of my PC by forcing fear, nervousness or whatever on him. If the fighter was next to me and his skill was causing me disadvantage if I attack someone else, that wouldn't be mind control. But if mere words can affect my PC's mind like that, it's supernatural, because words can't do that to someone except in rare circumstances where the taunter knows what someone is very weak to, IF a person has such a weakness. I don't. There's nothing anyone can say to me that would affect me like that.

 

[Pedantic]

Cool. So then the noble background feature is mind control because it forces all peasants the worlds over to kowtow to you despite not necessarily even knowing you're a noble. They all somehow just know that you're better than they are and will be instantly obedient regardless of your being a noble from their country, a neighboring country, a neighboring continent, a neighboring planet, or a neighboring plane of existence.

Do people object to that kind of background on a fighter? Or is that level of explicitly supernatural nonsense given a pass for some reason?

All that of line is argument gets is "wow, yeah those background abilities I'd forgotten about are weird" or for a more seasoned objector, "yeah, it was bad they put those in." Background abilities tend to scan fine, right up until someone tries to use them to force a meaningful change in the gamestate, and then they clash with the aesthetics at play and provoke frowns and rulings from your high DM authority fans.

It's not an effective pivot that will change anyone's mind about what the mundane aesthetic requires in the design.

 

[Maxperson]

Goading happens in reality at bars across the world every weekend. It's great that you have enough control over your emotions that it wouldn't work on you. But let me tell you my ED is full of the susceptible and prideful every weekend.

And I'm sure alcohol plays no small part in that, as does the taunter knowing the weakness of the one he is taunting. A sober complete stranger will rarely be affected like that. Certainly nowhere near as reliably as the battlemaster ability.

 

[Oofta]

Cool. So then the noble background feature is mind control because it forces all peasants the worlds over to kowtow to you despite not necessarily even knowing you're a noble. They all somehow just know that you're better than they are and will be instantly obedient regardless of your being a noble from their country, a neighboring country, a neighboring continent, a neighboring planet, or a neighboring plane of existence.

Do people object to that kind of background on a fighter? Or is that level of explicitly supernatural nonsense given a pass for some reason?

The noble background only works locally as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Remathilis]

That's not as bad, but it still affects the mind of my PC by forcing fear, nervousness or whatever on him. If the fighter was next to me and his skill was causing me disadvantage if I attack someone else, that wouldn't be mind control. But if mere words can affect my PC's mind like that, it's supernatural, because words can't do that to someone except in rare circumstances where the taunter knows what someone is very weak to, IF a person has such a weakness. I don't. There's nothing anyone can say to me that would affect me like that.

I view it as a combination of distraction, fear and irritation. Much like chanting "hey batter batter" at a baseball game to break the batter's focus. And if your PC is supposed to be cool under pressure, well, that's what the Wis save is for. It's no different than my agile "dance on the head of a pin" monk getting tripped.

 

[overgeeked]

All that of line is argument gets is "wow, yeah those background abilities I'd forgotten about are weird" or for a more seasoned objector, "yeah, it was bad they put those in." Background abilities tend to scan fine, right up until someone tries to use them to force a meaningful change in the gamestate, and then they clash with the aesthetics at play and provoke frowns and rulings from your high DM authority fans.

It's not an effective pivot that will change anyone's mind about what the mundane aesthetic requires in the design.

Nothing ever is. People have their opinions and hold them even in the face of contradictory evidence. There’s been studies on this. People don’t change their minds.

 

[Minigiant]

That's not as bad, but it still affects the mind of my PC by forcing fear, nervousness or whatever on him. If the fighter was next to me and his skill was causing me disadvantage if I attack someone else, that wouldn't be mind control. But if mere words can affect my PC's mind like that, it's supernatural, because words can't do that to someone except in rare circumstances where the taunter knows what someone is very weak to, IF a person has such a weakness. I don't. There's nothing anyone can say to me that would affect me like that.

Well goading in 5e requires a weapon attack hit so that's not a problem. So that's one.

So. How about a maneuver that doesn't have a secondary effect and just rolls the superiority dice 3 times to damage if you stand still and have advantage to the attack.

AKA sniping.