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

[Voadam]

I'll admit ignorance on the series. What are the things that wizards can't do that only mundanes can?

Talk on or use a cell phone.

Harry Dresden the detective, secret wizard has a rotary phone for his home/business. And paper files I believe.

Wizard magical ability in the Dresdenverse interferes with high tech a bit, mostly very short range so it is tough to use that as an asset.

Shadowrun has a gremlins drawback you can take that works the same way with most anything higher tech than could be found in WWII. I played a troll wizard with that and it was a lot of fun.

 

[Remathilis]

DnD's pseudo-medieval setting might be the wrong place to implement it exactly but magic and tech being mutually incompatable is a fairly common trope in media, in The Rivers of London book series the modern day protagonist learning magic has to be careful about his casting as he'll reduce the circuitry of any nearby tech with a current running through it when he does so to powder with even small uses of magic and repeatedly looses his phone this way.

magic items would be the nearest equivilant i can see, it might make a player think twice about their desire to play a wizard when they learn they can't use that cloak of protection at all or will suffer a penalty to their casting if they do wear it, if being a jedi who used the force interfered with their ability to use blasters and lightsabers or the responsiveness of their ship Han and Chewie would be much Much more important contributiors to the team.

There are games where you can sufficiently handcuff magic to allow tech to make up the gap, but it doesn't seem to be overly common. Mage from WW did it via paradox, for example. D&D used to have greater handcuffs via things like tracking material spell components and arcane spell failure (or the druid provision on metal armor) but over the decades the handcuffs have loosened to the point it's impossible to keep them on. The only thing I see going forward is that the muggles learn some "magic" of their own. Because left to their own devices, magical characters will become capable of doing everything a mundane character can and a lot of things they can't.

 

[Minigiant]

The main thing mortals in Dresden have are numbers (the RPG gives them a significant edge in Refresh, or FATE points per session, but that's a game construct and not narrative). When it comes to good shooting, you want someone like Jared Kincaid who's pretty magical himself, even if he doesn't cast spells.

Kincaid is just a tiefling with tiefling feats. His shooting is due to him practicing shooting instead of magic.

 

[Oofta]

Nope. There are literally a dozen suggestions in this thread for making fighters stand alongside Wizards without having them do the same thingns.

There have been suggestions, there are also people who have told you that those suggestions don't work for them.

As for citations, are you joking? You’re skeptical of the axiomatic notion that two roleplaying game elements with very different conceptual fantasies should do different things?

I’m sorry but that’s such an out there position to take that I feel no obligation to even pretend to kind of take it seriously. It’s farcical.

I find it farcical that you don't accept that some people, as far as I can tell from personal experience most people, don't see the same issues that you do. That others don't have the same problem.. But rather than discuss why others don't see an issue you just insist that you are the sole arbiter of truth. That there are plenty of classes to play if you want to play a character that overtly relies on the supernatural.

And the better way does not involve making fighters teleport and summon meteors, nor taking those things out of any class that has them.

Either “solution” is just abject failure. Better to not waste the time and just give up and walk away, except luckily those are not actually the only two options.

Well, the only real options are to accept that there's not going to be drastic change coming from WOTC because fighters, despite the issues some people have with them, are still the most popular class by far. You can voice your opinions on the official surveys for the 2024 edition and hope enough people do the same for them to change something. You can make some house rules and perhaps discuss them as others have on this forum. You can find some 3PP material that makes them work for you. That's pretty much it.

But endlessly complaining about how terrible their implementation in 5E is? On pretty much every thread that even touches on fighters? Pointless. It will change nothing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There have been suggestions, there are also people who have told you that those suggestions don't work for them.



I find it farcical that you don't accept that some people, as far as I can tell from personal experience most people, don't see the same issues that you do. That others don't have the same problem.. But rather than discuss why others don't see an issue you just insist that you are the sole arbiter of truth. That there are plenty of classes to play if you want to play a character that overtly relies on the supernatural.



Well, the only real options are to accept that there's not going to be drastic change coming from WOTC because fighters, despite the issues some people have with them, are still the most popular class by far. You can voice your opinions on the official surveys for the 2024 edition and hope enough people do the same for them to change something. You can make some house rules and perhaps discuss them as others have on this forum. You can find some 3PP material that makes them work for you. That's pretty much it.

But endlessly complaining about how terrible their implementation in 5E is? On pretty much every thread that even touches on fighters? Pointless. It will change nothing.

It will change nothing at WotC. It could lead to new versions of these things for 5e from other publishers or individual DMs, or new games altogether.

 

[Oofta]

It will change nothing at WotC. It could lead to new versions of these things for 5e from other publishers or individual DMs, or new games altogether.

Which is why I mention 3PP. If they come up with something that suits your needs better, buy their products! No game will ever be for everyone, but if you want to slap on a fresh coat of paint onto D&D there are a multitude of problems. Start up a thread on this forum about what supplements you use and why you like them. That would be helpful. Derailing every single thread that's remotely associated to fighters into the same old same old? Pointless.

 

[Voadam]

Most games balance things out by having magic be able to do things mundanes cannot but have them cost character resources that mundanes do not have to spend their points on so magical characters either are more specialized in their good things or are spread thinner in competencies.

Shadowrun, GURPS, 7th Sea, etc. this is mostly the formula whether it is straight character points or other character build resources.

D&D not so much. It used to be in 3e that most full casters had only two skill points per level, the lowest amount in the game, which was a pretty poor balance, particularly because skills were fairly weak, wizards got bonus skill points for their higher int casting stat, druids got four per level, and fighters had only two skill points as well combined with int as a natural dump stat for the class.

In 5e bards went from 3e's skilled half casters hanging out at the bottom of the class power rankings to full caster top skill class who are generally all around fantastic.

5e also gave everybody at least four skills, which I think is a good thing, but also leaves out that as a decent design place for mundane classes to really shine over magical ones.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

There have been suggestions, there are also people who have told you that those suggestions don't work for them.

What’s that got to do with me telling someone that sea a much bigger issue than I do that taking spells away from wizard is a bad solution, as is mimicking those spells in fighter?

I find it farcical that you don't accept that some people, as far as I can tell from personal experience most people, don't see the same issues that you do.

What the hell are you talking about? Did you conflate me with someone else? Did you not read the exchange leading to the comments you’re replying to?

That others don't have the same problem.. But rather than discuss why others don't see an issue you just insist that you are the sole arbiter of truth.

I objectively have not done so.

That there are plenty of classes to play if you want to play a character that overtly relies on the supernatural.

I literally have been advocating for not making the fighter supernatural.

Well, the only real options are to accept that there's not going to be drastic change coming from WOTC because fighters, despite the issues some people have with them, are still the most popular class by far. You can voice your opinions on the official surveys for the 2024 edition and hope enough people do the same for them to change something. You can make some house rules and perhaps discuss them as others have on this forum. You can find some 3PP material that makes them work for you. That's pretty much it.

None of this has any bearing on the discussion, which is not about trying to convince wotc to do anything.

But endlessly complaining about how terrible their implementation in 5E is? On pretty much every thread that even touches on fighters? Pointless. It will change nothing.

You definitely have me mixed up with someone else. What’s more, I find your tone egregiously rude and aggro.

Go back and actually read what you’re replying to ffs. You have repeatedly argued against the same thing I’m arguing against as if I am arguing for it. I don’t know if the person I’m arguing with has you blocked and you only see my comments, or what, but this post by you is utter BS.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Which is why I mention 3PP. If they come up with something that suits your needs better, buy their products! No game will ever be for everyone, but if you want to slap on a fresh coat of paint onto D&D there are a multitude of problems. Start up a thread on this forum about what supplements you use and why you like them. That would be helpful. Derailing every single thread that's remotely associated to fighters into the same old same old? Pointless.

You know this is literally a thread about exactly what you’re complaining about people discussing, right?

The only person detailing the thread is you, my dude.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No. This is not correct. Even here in the real world we(huge numbers) believe in spirits, magic and the supernatural. If the existence of the supernatural makes it natural as you say above with the fantasy world, then the same thing applies here. The existence of spirits and divine miracles would be perfectly natural here in the real world. Except it isn't.

So, simply saying, "no" doesn't make the other guy wrong. OTOH, resting your argument on something that simply isn't true, does make you wrong.
There are beliefs about the supernatural IRL. But, while the beliefs exist, the supernatural does not. The definition of supernatural you want to use is based upon the non-existence of the supernatural, making it useless in a setting where magic and other such forces actually exist.

Just as in this world the supernatural(magic, spirits, gods, etc.) exists and is different from the natural(mundane things), the same categories exist in fantasy worlds and explicitly in D&D.

We do not need a different definition, because the same one works perfectly well. If it's natural here, it's natural there. If it's supernatural here, it's supernatural there.

Obviously it doesn't work at all, or we wouldn't have these discussions.
The scientific-leaning definition from RL is useless in fantasy, because the whole world may well be supernatural. Trying to build the same sort of definition in the context of a D&D-like fantasy setting where spells are repeatable, testable, phenomena would, conversely, make magic natural, even mundane.

We'd need a definition better suited to the genre. Like, instead of invoking scientific or natural laws, base it on mundane, everyday experience. Even then, it would probably only work if the supernatural were sufficiently rare to avoid being a mundane part of everyday experience - something D&D makes difficult, since anyone, in theory, could acquire a casting class...

If we were to root the mundane in the everyday, and conceive of the supernatural as deviating from that, then scientifically explainable, but very rare events, like a solar eclipse, meet the definition of supernatural (oh no, a giant serpent is devouring the sun!). Not exactly inappropriate to genre.

IMHO, D&D would benefit from a line like 3e drew between (EX)traoridnary and (SU)supernatural, with the ordinary or mundane a third baseline category. If we consider the mundane to be ordinary, everyday things, that literally anyone can do (if not particularly well) any time, then the extraordinary can be similar things done much, much better, and the supernatural would be things outright impossible.
So, for instance, anyone can hop over a low obstacle or across narrow ditch or the like, a stronger, more agile person could clear greater obstacles - so if you're extraordinarily strong/skilled, you can jump great distances, even beyond what might be scientifically impossible outside a fantasy world. Superhuman feats aren't off the table, if they're what humans do, but more.
But, you can't fly. ( Maybe you could stick feathers to your arms like Daedalus and Icarus, and fly that way, IDK. )

When a huge barbarian leaps over a castle wall, that's extraordinary, he's really strong, he's doing something ordinary people can do (jump) but way more so, because hes way stonger. Close enough for fantasy physics. When the bookish guy in robes casts a Jump spell, OTOH, he may be jumping the same distance, but he does it by chanting and breaking cricket legs, not by flexing huge muscles and taking a running start.

And that's a funny thing about these discussions. Supernatural or magic is often held up as needing to be far more powerful than the mundane to be "really magical," but how you do something can make it supernatural, or not.