D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Vaalingrade]

That doesn't make him correct!

Except it does because in the context of his world, mutants are natural, and the Crimson Gem of Cyrorrak is not.

The X-gene is fiction and produces impossible results. Doing the impossible is the expectation of magic. It may not be defined as magic in the fiction, but it is indistinguishable outside the fiction.

That is also not the definition of magic in our world. I am trying to impress upon you that 'magical' is a subset of 'fantastic', not an equivalent. The direct and specific problem I have is the reduction of every rectangle to a square.

Question: why is the word magic or magical so scary for you.

It doesn't scare me, it angers me that is it being misused to the detriment to the game and the genre by narrowing everything down to 'magic' and in the process making magic itself boring.

Would you prefer a different word?

Yes! A correct one! An accurate one! A meaningfully distinct one!

Do you realize when people say it is magic / supernatural / extraordinary they are simply talking about phenomena that are impossible in RL.

And they are misusing it in a way that robs it and the non-magical fantastic and the non-magical supernatural of their meaning.

The word doesn't matter, it is simply a shortcut for: something that has no rational, scientific, or logical explanation, i.e. impossible.

The word does matter because tis is being used in such a way as to exclude the actual correct words and the actual useful distinction we no longer have in D&D because of it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

No, tech has a rational, scientific, and logical explanation for what it does IRL.

But it is magical until we have that explnation right?

So for example pain is magical because we don't have a clear explanation for it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

In my viewpoint it is pretty clearly fantasy, perhaps sci-fantasy, but fantasy. Using science to explain the X-gene is a red herring and always has been.

Wait.

So you used the right word there.

Why insist on using 'magic' the whole rest of the time?

 

[dave2008]

I apologize if I already responded to this post - my weekend has been rough.

So in D&D terms he was similar to a genasi or an aasimar. Pretty basic thing a character can just be.

That is possible, not issue with personally. Actually Theros has a good mechanic for with too: supernatural gifts and piety - then you could be any species!

That, BTW, is not part of the original myth but a Roman addition. There is an important plot point in Iliad when Patroclus disguised himself as Achilles by wearing his armour. I wondered why would an invulnerable person need an armour, but turns out the invulnerability bit was added later on.

I don't think I new that bit was added.

 

[dave2008]

But it is magical until we have that explnation right?

No

So for example pain is magical because we don't have a clear explanation for it.

No

 

[dave2008]

Wait.

So you used the right word there.

Why insist on using 'magic' the whole rest of the time?

Because people don't seem to like the word "magic." It is no real difference to me. The broad idea of "fantasy" is not game jargon and I am more interested in game jargon.

I am even more interested in what I originally posted about: I would like there to be line in the game, after which certain actions taken are clearly something beyond what we can expect IRL. That is it. I don't really care what you call it, I am just interested in where the line is. I stated my preference in the 1st or 2nd page of this thread, but that was just my preference.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I would posit if it wasn't true for the vast majority of thngs (basic nouns, math, much of science) that a fantasy or sci-fi story would literally be impossible to read. It feels like it is the exceptions to that sameness that makes it fantasy or sci-fi - and are why we seek out the genre.

I'm not sure anyone has proposed a full departure from real world similarity so much as removing the need to use it as a measure for what can or cannot be included in a fantasy roleplaying game.

As I said. It is a convenience when fantasy worlds adhere to our real world expectations. Convenience isn't a bad thing.

But it also isn't a necessary thing.

Edit: And.. by virtue of our choice to participate in fantasy, we should not be expecting that convenience to be present at all times.

 

[dave2008]

Except it does because in the context of his world, mutants are natural, and the Crimson Gem of Cyrorrak is not.

I am not talking about the context of his world. I am talking about the contect of the viewer / reader/ player's world. I feel I have made that clear in post after post.

That is also not the definition of magic in our world. I am trying to impress upon you that 'magical' is a subset of 'fantastic', not an equivalent. The direct and specific problem I have is the reduction of every rectangle to a square.

Well color me impressed - it doesn't matter to me. This distinction was never what I wanted to discuss.

It doesn't scare me, it angers me that is it being misused to the detriment to the game and the genre by narrowing everything down to 'magic' and in the process making magic itself boring.

I am able to see both sides of this, maybe you can if you try. But like I said this is not an argument relevant to what I wanted to discuss. I believe calling it magic, from a viewpoint is more truthful and honest. Is that something I want to fight over - no. So I am done with it.

Yes! A correct one! An accurate one! A meaningfully distinct one!

Me too, but fantasy is no it. It is even more generic and unmeaningful than magic. So come up with some better words please!

And they are misusing it in a way that robs it and the non-magical fantastic and the non-magical supernatural of their meaning.

I disagree, but who cares. I am not a ragger like you - rage if it makes you happy.

The word does matter because tis is being used in such a way as to exclude the actual correct words and the actual useful distinction we no longer have in D&D because of it.

What are the actual correct words? @Minigiant is the only person I have seen apply some reasonable logic to this words as game jargon. How about you give it a try.

Again "fantasy" is to broad for what we are discussing. Find the correct words - have at it and get back to me.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm not sure anyone has proposed a full departure from real world similarity so much as removing the need to use it as a measure for what can or cannot be included in a fantasy roleplaying game.

Well I’d counter no one is saying what can or cannot be included in a fantasy roleplaying game setting. The discussion is around the classification of the fictional elements and not around the whether something can happen in fiction.

 

[FrogReaver]

Edit: And.. by virtue of our choice to participate in fantasy, we should not be expecting that convenience to be present at all times.

No one does…