D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[UngeheuerLich]

Ahh yes, as we all know the best rules are a blank piece of paper so the DM can do whatever they want!

I know that is sarcasm, but to a certain extend this is true.
The move from theater of the mind to battlemaps codified certain rules.

So instead of describing how you duck behind cover and the DM gives you an ad hoc 9/10th cover bonus the resolution changes to looking at the battlemap and drawing lines from one square to the other. Which is time consuming. Which is assuming the battlemap depicts the given situation 1:1. Which ignores that envitoment is 3d and that a character take on different poses to adapt to the cover and so on.

So having less codified rules is an advantage, as long as the DM adjucates fairly.

Probably the fairness was lost and the game became less cooperational between players and DMs for a while so codified rules were needed.

 

[Minigiant]

Do you think a level 10 character with a feat should be able to reduce speed more?

Weapon Mastery is level 1.

I could see level 10, Tier 3 were you can get upgraded Weapon Grandmastery

Then level 18, Tier 4 for Weapon Perfection.

And what is suppression fire supposed to do?

A pin down ability.

Target a foe. If they move, you get 2 ranged bow attacks at advantage.

 

[Minigiant]

Probably the fairness was lost and the game became less cooperational between players and DMs for a while so codified rules were needed.

Fairness WAS lost.

Many DMs suck at combat adjudication.
Many DMs suck at combat role fairness.
Many DMs suck a matching adjudication to the game time and style.

This is even more important in RPGs where the gap between the good and bad are close and when the dice are swingy.

It's like the "Flanking is advantage" rule or "roll a Check for advantage " rule. That's major choices for a DM to allow that can go BAD if made without care.

 

[MichaelSomething]

4e? Don't you mean 3.5? That game had rules for everything.

except high level feats for Fighters D:

 

[Gammadoodler]

Sure, I don't particularly care about the flavor. Problem is, you start asking for things like being able to destroy walls with your spear, or punch through wooden walls with an arrow, or jump really high... and people start demanding it is supernatural.

I'm fine with "a warrior's spirit" and various ki/background magical radiation explanations triggered by training and intense emotion. And if that is the easiest path to get to the things I want from the fighter and the rogue... I'll do it. Because it seems that is the only way I'll stop being asked why the fighter should be able to do this fantasy/mythical feat in my high level fantasy game.

I get it. I just don't feel a particular urge to satisfy folks who are willing to let the game be unbalanced for the sake of a narrative I don't think they should need.

If I were a designer at WoTC, perhaps I'd be more flexible.

But if there's one thing that irks me at some folks' attitude toward game mechanics and fantasy settings it's this banal insistence on specifically magical explanations for everything fantasy under the sun.

And not even fleshed out, principles based magical justifications. Just plain old "add the word 'magic' and we're good" approach to phenomenon explanations.

 

[GobHag]

And that's the point of disagreement.

"jumping and shooting 3 arrows simultaneous at three different opponents" isn't impossible to me. Just really really really hard. To the point that no one but the top warriors can attempt it.

So it's just martial and mundane, just high level.

I don't want it to be high level.

Make it level 5 at most.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't want it to be high level.

Make it level 5 at most.

Jumping and shooting 2 arrows is level 5.

 

[GobHag]

And it should be 3 arrows at level 5 at the very latest

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I know that is sarcasm, but to a certain extend this is true.
The move from theater of the mind to battlemaps codified certain rules.

So instead of describing how you duck behind cover and the DM gives you an ad hoc 9/10th cover bonus the resolution changes to looking at the battlemap and drawing lines from one square to the other. Which is time consuming. Which is assuming the battlemap depicts the given situation 1:1. Which ignores that envitoment is 3d and that a character take on different poses to adapt to the cover and so on.

So having less codified rules is an advantage, as long as the DM adjucates fairly.

Probably the fairness was lost and the game became less cooperational between players and DMs for a while so codified rules were needed.

Thing is I get that there cannot be rules that cover every possible situation, but there can be benchmarks that help the GM to extrapolate consistently. And some situations are not actually that nuanced, like jumping which this was originally about. Like the rules give you a jump distance, and then say you can increase it with an athletics check. But do not say what DC and how much. Why? This is not a nuanced situation that requires giving the GM a lot of leeway, it is very simple situation that just requires we have some concrete numbers.

 

[Minigiant]

Thing is I get that there cannot be rules that cover every possible situation, but there can be benchmarks that help the GM to extrapolate consistently. And some situations are not actually that nuanced, like jumping which this was originally about. Like the rules give you a jump distance, and then say you can increase it with an athletics check. But do not say what DC and how much. Why? This is not a nuanced situation that requires giving the GM a lot of leeway, it is very simple situation that just requires we have some concrete numbers.

5e was made purposely loosely goosey as a reaction to the two precious editions, to appeal to old fans, and to seem easier to new fans.

This however killed consistently of play which was part of the goals of D&D design for 20 years.

Part of the call for the magical or supernatural martial is to increase consistency and solidify expectations.