The examples definitely seem to be all be teaching DMs to not consider non magic
Is that really the case in 5e? because if all the examples ever mentioned are explicitly created magic items and spells the more flexible thinking is being discouraged. I could be misremembering something though.
I am not here to try and defend 5e. I am just explaining there is another way. One we use and it accomplishes the task some people are looking for. This is just how we play and how we have played since 1e.
Only you would consider that an example.
Yes we gave an open ended one about magic so a magic item can do the trick or a monster with magical abilities could do it but some how Dave considers it an example that opens up non-magic
I doubt I am so creative to unique in this ability. It is rather a common troupe that magic creatures have magic body parts. The idea of magical blood goes back even further (Greek and Norse mythology at least). Seems many people with knowledge of these sources would come to a similar idea. And that is in fact what happens at our table. It is not me that comes up with these ideas, it is my players. So, no I am not the only one who comes up with these ideas, my players do all the time!
We called that DM may I as an option in 1e land and the DM is being taught to answer no since the system removed the non-caster method explicitly defined in 4e and maybe 3e.
4e is may favorite edition of D&D, but I don't remember it handling this situation any different. I know we definitely played it the same way in 4e that we do in 5e. Can you remind me how 4e handled this differently?
yeh but how do you encourage that by never mentioning non-caster/non-magic options?
It is a DM book, the players don't know what is being encouraged. They are they are the one's coming up with the ideas on how to handle these situations.
They gave the caster explicit options... just fine and somehow that did not remove your creativity
(and casters can use your non-magic option just fine and I bet at most tables have a higher chance of knowing it too)
I want the game providing non-casters the same privilege of having the game explicitly supporting them.
I am sorry you feel 5e doesn't do that for you, but I thought 4e was the edition you played anyway? It this just a rant to relieve stress?
I guess, IMO, the paucity of the example actively encourages finding another answer or excepting harsh realities. My current group (2 fighters, a rogue, and a wizard) doesn't have anyone that can cast greater restoration or another spell that necessarily makes sense (at least that I can think of) or any magic item. They have 2 options:
- Except their fate and be petrified.
- Find a creative solution
My players almost always chose option #2. IMO the game, and by game I mean D&D (any edition) and RPGs in general, encourages creativity. That is the whole point of playing the game for us, to be creative and imaginative.
However, I understand your point that explicitly providing options is helpful to some and likely wouldn't negatively affect my group. So I hope you can enjoy an edition or game that more fits your taste or 1D&D changes more to your liking. I don't see any good in getting stressed by a game that is about having fun.