Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zustiur" data-source="post: 5968635" data-attributes="member: 1544">This is pretty well in line with what I'm thinking, except I'd stretch it out over 30 levels rather than 20.I dispute that. Wizards in all editions of DND that I have books for (2, 3, 4) gain their access to magic through intense study. There is no mention of the knowledge being secret (which wouldn't invalidate my point anyway), nor of being inherent (in the blood etc). Beyond wizards, yes, some races (and later, sorcerers) gain their magic through inherent means. Very few if any of those races are 'natural' by the game's logic. Beholders for example are an aberration, not a natural creature.Besides, what does the word 'wizard' mean if it does not mean 'arcane technician'?I have no problem with this in theory. Exact detail would take a lot of thrashing out though. One person's crazy is another's subtle.My answer to that is "Because D&D has become it's own entity. It is no longer a hodgepodge of random influences, its sole influence is itself. If we throw in new random things, we would turn it into a different fantasy role-playing game. A lot of people will disagree with me on this, but I want D&D to remain as D&D. A lot of the things people want make me think, "Yes, that would make a good game, but I don't want that in my game." The oft suggested vitality points being just one example. Yes it might better represent what D&D claims to represent within hitpoints, but switching mechanics would take me out of D&D mode.True, but the worlds are generally considered to be earth-like in a lot of ways.To me (and it seems a lot of other players), D&D has always been set in a world which starts out like Earth, but then has a very long list of exceptions. If you don't have an exception for a given situation, real-world rules apply. i.e. everything is normal until otherwise specified. This is why there is a distinction between 'animals' and 'beasts'. If D&D didn't assume an earthlike starting point, griffons would just be animals.It is for this very reason that fighters (particularly human fighters) are thought of as highly trained medieval soldiers. We expect them to do the things that soldiers can do. We don't expect them to move mountains or cut the top off a hill. If a human fighter is to go beyond what a human fighter can do in 3E, we expect an explanation for it. At this late stage any attempt to give fighters something beyond believable martial abilities is going to face an uphill battle.To give a little context: In Diablo 3, barbarians can summon ancient heroes to aid in battle. I don't blink an eye at this because that fits with Diablo's story and feel. If barbarians suddenly started doing the same thing in D&D I'd cry foul regardless of what level the power became available. D&D isn't a generic fantasy RPG. It's D&D. It has baggage.</blockquote>

Verification