D&D 5E Thoughts on Divorcing D&D From [EDIT: Medievalishness], Mechanically Speaking.

[Gammadoodler]

You said yourself: Indiana Jones rarely if ever encountered monsters, and he went to all sorts of exotic locations.

I dunno, I feel like when he went to the exotic locations, he encountered exotic creatures.

Whatever the you'd say was in the ark of the covenant, the ghost knight, some aliens at one point.

He didn't fight them (that I recall), but there was usually something weird to find in the weird places.

And those movies are set in near-modern Earth rather than a fantasy world.

 

[Reynard]

No. As I said, anyone with the same talent, time, and training should be capable of the same things, although random chance is always a factor.

So this brings me back to not really understanding what your concern is, then. If there is potential for some specific NPC to be as special as a PC, what's the issue?

 

[Cadence]

Don't put armor on the equipment list.

Maybe:

• Allow proficiency on AC when using a weapon you're proficient in against melee attackers you're aware of. (Like you're parrying as part of combat. Maybe against just one?)
• Have a feat that gives proficiency on AC to dodge any number of attacks you're aware of per round. (Give that feat for free for any class that would have had medium or heavy armor proficiency.)

[They don't stack]

 

[Gammadoodler]

It sounds like you want an in-fiction explanation, which is cool, but not really what I am concerned about. I want the style and some mechanics to back it up. That's just the way the world is and the way it "looks on the screen." The aesthetic sets the perameters, not the other way around.

The OP appeared to be a statement of a design goal (D&D adventures in a near modern setting) and your proposed changes to the mechanics (take away armor, add a bunch of guns, and rework classes) to achieve that design goal, with an invitation for others to provide their thoughts.

My thoughts are that your proposed mechanics seem to be reasonably correlated with near-modern sensibility but orthogonal/contrary to D&D adventuring. I'd prefer mechanics that support both.

 

[Yaarel]

Yeah, that conceit ("magic is rare and mysterious unless you're a PC, in which case it is exactly the opposite") always annoyed me. It perpetuates what I see as the myth of PC specialness. Don't make PCs the exception to worldbuilding, I say, otherwise you're basically telling them the world doesn't matter as far as they're concerned.

From a worldbuilding perspective, the significant difference between PC and NPC is level. They all start out about the same level, but soon the PCs drastically outpace them. There is no narrative to satisfactorily explain this acceleration.

PCs arent really different in kind, but in speed.

It is impossible to maintain a medievalesque setting if the general population is very high level. At this point, it would be a superhero setting.

A plausible "medi" sensibility requires tier 1-4 be common, 5-8 be uncommon, and 9-12 be vanishingly rare. Humanoids normally dont accelerate in level. Something about PCs is "special", but no setting narrative has made sense of this fact.

In my medi settings, the rise of PCs has something to do with "fate". But this isnt an explanation in itself. Especially, ttthe concept of fate is a freewill choice

 

[Reynard]

The OP appeared to be a statement of a design goal (D&D adventures in a near modern setting) and your proposed changes to the mechanics (take away armor, add a bunch of guns, and rework classes) to achieve that design goal, with an invitation for others to provide their thoughts.

My thoughts are that your proposed mechanics seem to be reasonably correlated with near-modern sensibility but orthogonal/contrary to D&D adventuring. I'd prefer mechanics that support both.

I am curious why you think they are so inherently contrary. The only real change being presented is a preference for ranged combat, since the proposal of using an Unarmed Defense bonus means, mechanically, there is no real difference as it relates to defense. Armor does not have any other major effects in 5E.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I dunno, I feel like when he went to the exotic locations, he encountered exotic creatures.

Whatever the you'd say was in the ark of the covenant, the ghost knight, some aliens at one point.

He didn't fight them (that I recall), but there was usually something weird to find in the weird places.

And those movies are set in near-modern Earth rather than a fantasy world.

If he didn't fight them, then armor can't really be an issue, to be fair.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So this brings me back to not really understanding what your concern is, then. If there is potential for some specific NPC to be as special as a PC, what's the issue?

Is there such potential in your scenario?

 

[Baron Opal II]

How could their not? Belloq was a great EHP in the last scenes of the movie. Undone by his hubris, even.

Realizing that we're looking more at S&W Model 3-10 or even Colt .45s (1870-1911 range), I can see that you would find some sort of "dodge bonus" more applicable to what you want. You could have a breastplate type armor of some utility, but it would then be sparing, heavy, uncomfortable, and only used in very specific and short term situations.

Going with rifles and pistols, the other major thing that comes to mind is transport. Rail and steamship are quicker than horses or sail, and telegraph allows for limited long distance communication.

 

[Reynard]

Is there such potential in your scenario?

I don't see why not. Protagonists need rivals, after all.