Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 8776397" data-attributes="member: 53980"><p>Frankly, blind fighting sucks. In every edition (except those where it doesn't exist). It gives you a slight edge if your opponent is also blinded, but that's about it. It hardly meets a criteria sufficient to playing a conceptual blind swordsman.</p><p></p><p>This drives at my point. The D&D design for martial characters has generally to be to "err on the side of reality", resulting in fundamentally mundane characters. Meaning that martials generally can't even accomplish what accomplished people from the real world can achieve, much less their mythic counterparts.</p><p></p><p>If having the fighter wear a headband of the third eye allows the mythic blind swordsman to actually be designed "erring on the side of awesome/myth" while still preserving the sense of verisimilitude of the mundane martial crowd, I'd be all for it. Because it's the type of fluff I can easily ignore (obviously, so long as it is designed with the intent to be unobtrusive, such as these items not requiring attunement).</p><p></p><p>As to spells, I would say that the fault lies in design far earlier than that of 5e. As early as 2e, casters were allowed to choose their spells (even though it required a check to do so successfully). By 3e, I believe the check to learn new spells was only required for spells found in acquired spell books, not on level up. However, this isn't a trend that's likely to be reversed anytime soon. (The magic loving contingent would have a conniption if WotC tried.) So, IMO, the best open direction to take the design would be to make some magic items martial class features.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fanaelialae, post: 8776397, member: 53980"] Frankly, blind fighting sucks. In every edition (except those where it doesn't exist). It gives you a slight edge if your opponent is also blinded, but that's about it. It hardly meets a criteria sufficient to playing a conceptual blind swordsman. This drives at my point. The D&D design for martial characters has generally to be to "err on the side of reality", resulting in fundamentally mundane characters. Meaning that martials generally can't even accomplish what accomplished people from the real world can achieve, much less their mythic counterparts. If having the fighter wear a headband of the third eye allows the mythic blind swordsman to actually be designed "erring on the side of awesome/myth" while still preserving the sense of verisimilitude of the mundane martial crowd, I'd be all for it. Because it's the type of fluff I can easily ignore (obviously, so long as it is designed with the intent to be unobtrusive, such as these items not requiring attunement). As to spells, I would say that the fault lies in design far earlier than that of 5e. As early as 2e, casters were allowed to choose their spells (even though it required a check to do so successfully). By 3e, I believe the check to learn new spells was only required for spells found in acquired spell books, not on level up. However, this isn't a trend that's likely to be reversed anytime soon. (The magic loving contingent would have a conniption if WotC tried.) So, IMO, the best open direction to take the design would be to make some magic items martial class features. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D
Top