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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Toward a Theory of 6th Edition
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="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7263128"><p>No, it's not. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, I see what you're doing here. </p><p></p><p>Impossible is still impossible, but in make-believe we can pretend it's otherwise.</p><p></p><p>So we can say that in our fantasy world, things that would undoubtedly be supernatural don't need supernatural explanations because in this world people are stronger, better, faster than in the real world. So it's not supernatural for a hero to leap over a wall, because in this world the rules about the energy each gram of human muscle can exert are either different or even not relevant, so we're not constrained by physiology and physics. The "super" is now "natural".</p><p></p><p>Got it.</p><p></p><p>Except...this means that the line between mundane and supernatural/magical/etc. is arbitrary in a fictional world. We can declare something is non-supernatural, non-magical simply by believing it so.</p><p></p><p>And thus your argument about the importance of having classes that derive their powers from non-magical, non-supernatural forces falls apart. Because if the line is arbitrary, and not determined by any laws from the real world, then you are free to simply move that line to whatever suits your purpose. You want non-magical healing? Great, just decide that in your game universe the ability to Lay on Hands is not magical, it's mundane. Humans are just "better" on that side of the veil and you don't need chemistry and biology to explain it, it's just non-magical.</p><p></p><p>Of course, if what suits your purpose is to demonstrate that the game needs non-magical, non-supernatural superpowers, then you can (and do!) adjust the line accordingly. But it's really entirely your choice of where to put that line.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Errr...no, I was arguing the opposite. That supernatural and superhuman can mean the same thing, if we're using "superhuman" to literally mean "beyond what is possible for a human". (There are, of course, metaphorical uses for the word, such as "he put in a superhuman effort to get the report done in time for the meeting.")</p><p></p><p>You, on the other hand, have been arguing that "superhuman" is in a different category than "supernatural". E.g., leaping over a castle wall is merely superhuman because it is a more extreme version of something humans do, while shooting lasers out of your eyes is supernatural because humans don't otherwise emit any light from their eyes. But that's also an arbitrary distinction, easily manipulated to support either conclusion. E.g., teleportation is merely superhuman and not supernatural, because humans do go from point A to point B, and teleportation is just going from point A to point B very, very quickly. The Wish spell is only superhuman because humans do wish for things and sometimes get them, and Wish is just the same thing with a higher success rate. Etc. (Actually this is kind of a fun game....)</p><p></p><p>Getting back to the twilight argument, I was making the point that leaping over an ox could be called superhuman, and leaping over a hut could be superhuman, and leaping over a castle wall could be superhuman, and leaping all the way around the world could be superhuman. Somewhere in there we went from just being "impressively improbable" to "impossible by the usual definition of the word", and the fact that we might not be able pinpoint exactly where that distinction lies does not mean the distinction isn't there. </p><p></p><p>At some point leaping becomes just as impossible and thus supernatural as shooting lasers from your eyes.</p><p></p><p>You have an aesthetic preference for actions which closely resemble real human actions, and that's cool. You are entitled to that preference and I respect it. I have an aesthetic bias that does not include rapiers, especially dual-wielded, and thinks that rogues should stab things not shoot them. Neither of us is going to be able to objectively prove that our preference belongs or does not belong in the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7263128"] No, it's not. Ok, I see what you're doing here. Impossible is still impossible, but in make-believe we can pretend it's otherwise. So we can say that in our fantasy world, things that would undoubtedly be supernatural don't need supernatural explanations because in this world people are stronger, better, faster than in the real world. So it's not supernatural for a hero to leap over a wall, because in this world the rules about the energy each gram of human muscle can exert are either different or even not relevant, so we're not constrained by physiology and physics. The "super" is now "natural". Got it. Except...this means that the line between mundane and supernatural/magical/etc. is arbitrary in a fictional world. We can declare something is non-supernatural, non-magical simply by believing it so. And thus your argument about the importance of having classes that derive their powers from non-magical, non-supernatural forces falls apart. Because if the line is arbitrary, and not determined by any laws from the real world, then you are free to simply move that line to whatever suits your purpose. You want non-magical healing? Great, just decide that in your game universe the ability to Lay on Hands is not magical, it's mundane. Humans are just "better" on that side of the veil and you don't need chemistry and biology to explain it, it's just non-magical. Of course, if what suits your purpose is to demonstrate that the game needs non-magical, non-supernatural superpowers, then you can (and do!) adjust the line accordingly. But it's really entirely your choice of where to put that line. Errr...no, I was arguing the opposite. That supernatural and superhuman can mean the same thing, if we're using "superhuman" to literally mean "beyond what is possible for a human". (There are, of course, metaphorical uses for the word, such as "he put in a superhuman effort to get the report done in time for the meeting.") You, on the other hand, have been arguing that "superhuman" is in a different category than "supernatural". E.g., leaping over a castle wall is merely superhuman because it is a more extreme version of something humans do, while shooting lasers out of your eyes is supernatural because humans don't otherwise emit any light from their eyes. But that's also an arbitrary distinction, easily manipulated to support either conclusion. E.g., teleportation is merely superhuman and not supernatural, because humans do go from point A to point B, and teleportation is just going from point A to point B very, very quickly. The Wish spell is only superhuman because humans do wish for things and sometimes get them, and Wish is just the same thing with a higher success rate. Etc. (Actually this is kind of a fun game....) Getting back to the twilight argument, I was making the point that leaping over an ox could be called superhuman, and leaping over a hut could be superhuman, and leaping over a castle wall could be superhuman, and leaping all the way around the world could be superhuman. Somewhere in there we went from just being "impressively improbable" to "impossible by the usual definition of the word", and the fact that we might not be able pinpoint exactly where that distinction lies does not mean the distinction isn't there. At some point leaping becomes just as impossible and thus supernatural as shooting lasers from your eyes. You have an aesthetic preference for actions which closely resemble real human actions, and that's cool. You are entitled to that preference and I respect it. I have an aesthetic bias that does not include rapiers, especially dual-wielded, and thinks that rogues should stab things not shoot them. Neither of us is going to be able to objectively prove that our preference belongs or does not belong in the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Toward a Theory of 6th Edition
Top