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

[Micah Sweet]

Alright. My argument, then, is that the lines in the sand a lot of people draw are impractically close to the real world, not to practical and functional game design.

Fair enough. Just a matter of preferences then.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Simple enough question. What are your thoughts?

Depends on the rest of the campaign.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

We do in a way have both. The monks can do anime king fu crouching tiger stuff. We have eldritch knights.

We also have champions and battlemasters.

And with any of these we can get fey touched, magic initiate etc.

If I like to play classic stuff—-Conan or King Arthur or whatever, why would I want to lose the option for mundane? If you have both you can have the flavor you want.

Do I like the idea of a fighter hitting 12 guys for 8d6 in a round just because a wizard can? No.

But surely a guy with 8 hit dice or more has some blessing…some favor…some power. We just don’t see it as overtly as we do a fireball.

I don’t want to lose that and have no problems with martials up to 10th level. I have played so little above 10th that maybe it breaks down after and that is what the fuss is about?

 

[W'rkncacnter]

No. Absolutely the hell not.

Never in a million, billion years.

"Artificer" is an invention of the modern era. The blacksmith who can make supernatural things with genuinely mundane tools is a myth, legend, fairy tale, and folktale as old as blacksmithing itself.

Stop trying to make all supernatural things automatically spellcasters.

i have to say, i hate 5e's interpretation of the artificer as a spellcaster.

 

[Oofta]

We do in a way have both. The monks can do anime king fu crouching tiger stuff. We have eldritch knights.

We also have champions and battlemasters.

And with any of these we can get fey touched, magic initiate etc.

If I like to play classic stuff—-Conan or King Arthur or whatever, why would I want to lose the option for mundane? If you have both you can have the flavor you want.

Do I like the idea of a fighter hitting 12 guys for 8d6 in a round just because a wizard can? No.

But surely a guy with 8 hit dice or more has some blessing…some favor…some power. We just don’t see it as overtly as we do a fireball.

I don’t want to lose that and have no problems with martials up to 10th level. I have played so little above 10th that maybe it breaks down after and that is what the fuss is about?

They worked fine in every game I've been in as player or DM, we played up to 20th.

 

[Micah Sweet]

i have to say, i hate 5e's interpretation of the artificer as a spellcaster.

Agreed. I far prefer Mage Hand Press's Craftsman class.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

They worked fine in every game I've been in as player or DM.

Well here is a confession. We also have a diviner wizard 10 in our party and he does not dominate.

I don’t want to be accused of minimizing other peoples issues…but I sincerely wonder if my group may have a different play style or focus.

But back on topic, flavor matters and options matter. If fighters as a standard power jump like the hulk and punch everyone in a huge are like the Flash on amphetamines, count me out!

It’s cool for others. No judgment! Just does. It fit the game I like best

 

[MichaelSomething]

I don’t want to be accused of minimizing other peoples issues…but I sincerely wonder if my group may have a different play style or focus.

So the solution is to exclude people who don't have the correct playstyle???

 

[Warpiglet-7]

deleted due to joke in bad taste

 

[Warpiglet-7]

if you read my previous post(s) you will see I advocate for both options so that everyone can have the style they want and there are levers to pull.

My group prefers more classic play largely but not entirely.