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

[overgeeked]

It depends on the edition. If I'm playing a b/x d&d (or clone), then martials are mundane. If I'm playing 5e, then they're supernatural like everyone else.

In the past, I've been very resistant to the idea of martial classes being supernatural; until I realized that the assumptions in 5e are not what I want out of my sword and sorcery RPG.

That’s a good point. Older editions of D&D are explicitly trying to cover completely different subgenres of fantasy than 5E. Sword & sorcery is closer to where AD&D sits. High or epic fantasy is closer to where 5E sits. Nothing wrong with either, but arguing for sword & sorcery in 5E is just as pointless as arguing for high or epic fantasy in AD&D.

 

[Sacrosanct]

1st level fighter gets a +1 sword and adds magic to every attack roll.

1st level wizard gets a scroll of magic missile and can cast the spell once per day.

Which character is more magical?

A fighter gets a little better to hit and damage. The magic user bends reality. Manipulates minds. Launches rays of magical energy. Creates illusions. Conjures matter out of thin air. Turns invisible. Teleports. Changes their shape. Etc etc.

Is that even a serious question? Even ignoring that, the fighter isn’t doing anything magical. The magic user magic comes directly from the class as inherent ability.

Edit: something weird with the quote break

 

[not-so-newguy]

That’s a good point. Older editions of D&D are explicitly trying to cover completely different subgenres of fantasy than 5E. Sword & sorcery is closer to where AD&D sits. High or epic fantasy is closer to where 5E sits. Nothing wrong with either, but arguing for sword & sorcery in 5E is just as pointless as arguing for high or epic fantasy in AD&D.

Yeah, I felt like I was constantly trying to "fit a square peg into a round hole" when running a 5e game. The 5e game was adequate, but didn't really work for me.

 

[I'm A Banana]

That’s a good point. Older editions of D&D are explicitly trying to cover completely different subgenres of fantasy than 5E. Sword & sorcery is closer to where AD&D sits. High or epic fantasy is closer to where 5E sits. Nothing wrong with either, but arguing for sword & sorcery in 5E is just as pointless as arguing for high or epic fantasy in AD&D.

Exactly!

It's also a different kind of game design. 1e is closer to "dungeon survival," with 5e being closer to a narrative kind of game (with a clear emphasis on combats).

A fighter gets a little better to hit and damage. The magic user bends reality. Manipulates minds. Launches rays of magical energy. Creates illusions. Conjures matter out of thin air. Turns invisible. Teleports. Changes their shape. Etc etc.

The 1e MU only does this if they find the right treasure, just as the fighter only lops of heads if they find the right treasure.

The 5e Wizard does this if they want to, and the 5e Fighter should be able to basically do stuff like this if they want to, as well. Magically manipulate minds, fire arrows that burst into energy, create illusions, conjure items out of thin air (or at least a magical sack), turn invisible, teleport, change shape, etc.

Give everyone those tools (more like 5e) or give no one those tools (more like 1e), but don't expect that you can put a "mundane" character without those tools in a game where wizards are promised those tools without seeing that discrepancy. It's not a problem of Big Enough Numbers or Enough Cool Options, exactly, it's more a problem of genre expectations.

Is that even a serious question? Even ignoring that, the fighter isn’t doing anything magical. The magic user magic comes directly from the class as inherent ability.

Yeah, it's a serious question! Because how "magical" something is can be a moving target. If using an explicitly magical sword every round is less magical than turning invisible, once, then we've got some handy guidelines to the aesthetics of magic.

And a fighter who can turn invisible once a day is then not "mundane" anymore.

But a fighter who can't turn invisible once a day isn't going to feel equal to a Wizard to a lot of people (no amount of Hide Real Good is going to match this vibe).

So, I'm proposing, we just let the fighter turn invisible. Let's just be supernatural. She learns a rune she can scribe onto armor that lets her do that. Booyah.

 

[Li Shenron]

Simple enough question. What are your thoughts?

Mundane by default.

The game has no shortage of options anyway to add magic or supernatural to any individual character if you want to.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

That’s a good point. Older editions of D&D are explicitly trying to cover completely different subgenres of fantasy than 5E. Sword & sorcery is closer to where AD&D sits. High or epic fantasy is closer to where 5E sits. Nothing wrong with either, but arguing for sword & sorcery in 5E is just as pointless as arguing for high or epic fantasy in AD&D.

It's a shame that the old sword and sorcery isn't a genre covered at all by DnD anymore. Dark Sun as the last vestiges of it, and they've confirmed that setting has been axed.

I like high/epic fantasy, but I don't want that to be almost everything.

 

[delericho]

At low levels, they could be either. Once you get to level 5 or so, they're clearly superhuman, and we should probably just accept that - or play strictly at low levels.

And, unfortunately, it does matter what stance the game takes on this, because if a 20th level Fighter has to be considered mundane (albeit the best of the best), that really tightly constrains the powers that they can have - and as discussed in the "bucket of crabs" thread, that's then a problem for the wider caster/non-caster balance.

 

[Tonguez]

Exactly!

The 1e MU only does this if they find the right treasure, just as the fighter only lops of heads if they find the right treasure.

The 5e Wizard does this if they want to, and the 5e Fighter should be able to basically do stuff like this if they want to, as well. Magically manipulate minds, fire arrows that burst into energy, create illusions, conjure items out of thin air (or at least a magical sack), turn invisible, teleport, change shape, etc.

Give everyone those tools (more like 5e) or give no one those tools (more like 1e), but don't expect that you can put a "mundane" character without those tools in a game where wizards are promised those tools without seeing that discrepancy. It's not a problem of Big Enough Numbers or Enough Cool Options, exactly, it's more a problem of genre expectations.

see I dont think the problem is that Wizards can do any one of those things as their shtick, taken individually they balance. The problem is that Wizards get to do ALL of those things without any real impediments. If the Mystic was just manipulating minds, while the Thief was hiding in plain sight, the Fighter was shooting barrages of fire arrows and the Summoner was opening an escape portal, then it would be okay, maybe even fun

The problems is the Wizard can do ALL those things, they are too versatile, while the Fighter just hits more stuff.

 

[teitan]

Both? Depends on the player and the world.

 

[Corinnguard]

The term is Badass Normal.

Badass Normal is one person taking down a whole room of professionals soldiers all by themselves. And then saying "amateurs..."