• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

Vaalingrade

Legend
I know this isn't your position specifically, but I can't seem to connect the two ideas that "martials need to be powerful enough to feel fantastic" and "casters can do everything martials can and more."

Not that they're opposing, but it feels like one can interfere with the other. If martials can move mountains, casters can as well, simply because they can cast True Polymorph or transform into a creature even more powerful. And while you can say they do so limitedly, apparently that argument isn't enough.
First, I don't really care what casters have at this point. Balance can come later, but the current and most important facet is getting martials, fighters especially an opportunity to do something interesting and fantastic things.

Also, the beauty of the broken system that is 5e is that the caster can never gain feats of class features, so even if they're a dragon, they can't grab a goblin by the legs and beat his buddies with him. You know, if the fighter would ever be allowed to have the kind of fun.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

What do you mean describe them. You seem concerned with classifying things into boxes. I don’t think it matters at all.

You want a semi-sentient semi-liquid antagonist for the party, fine, use an ooze. But let’s not pretty it’s some kind of fundamentally different force.

A wolf with frost breath is magical, an owl with a 15 foot wingspan is magical, adamantine is magical. I don’t mean enchanted, I mean beyond normal = magical.
If you're going to define 'magical' as 'beyond normal', I suppose that's fine...

All you need to do now is define "normal" in the context of diverse fantasy worlds built by a diverse set of DMs and module authors. Seems like a trivially easy task that should result in zero diversity of opinion...
 

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
No I think he's using the quote ok, but there's another step or two in the chain that adds extra clarity depending on usage
No, really, it's about as appropriate in this discussion as the aphorism "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". Wait... that aphorism may be more appropriate because The Sword is trying aimlessly to turn every argument into a nail "magic" so they can hit it with a hammer.
 

TheSword

Legend
They're fantastic elements that aren't magical.

I feel like the following attempt to crush the word 'magic' as it pertains to D&D suggests differently:

~casts detect magic~

Oh look, no there' not.

By this definition, aluminum is magic. You need to harness lightning to make it and it is unusually light. So magic!

edit: also, they ARE normal for their world. They're naturally occurring.
Sorry but oozes are magical. That’s a simple fact. They can’t exist in the absence of magic or a world which’s physic is so outside out own to effectively be magic.

Using in game ‘rules’ to justify out of game decisions, has a name… I forget which.
 

TheSword

Legend
If you're going to define 'magical' as 'beyond normal', I suppose that's fine...

All you need to do now is define "normal" in the context of diverse fantasy worlds built by a diverse set of DMs and module authors. Seems like a trivially easy task that should result in zero diversity of opinion...
How else would you describe things that lie outside the normal rules of nature, other than as magical?
 



tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
No, really, it's about as appropriate in this discussion as the aphorism "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". Wait... that aphorism may be more appropriate because The Sword is trying aimlessly to turn every argument into a nail "magic" so they can hit it with a hammer.
That one is called maslow's hammer or the law of instrument. I disagree with you though*. d&d is a magical world with magic in it. The whole mythical power but not magical is in conflict with that & sets up problems like the monk's "no it's not magic no monksdon't use anything they just ignore that because ki so expect the monk player to always expect it to be argued as whatever is most favorable in any given situation". If it's like magic then actually treat it as such in the rules

* I think, this thread seems to jump by 2-3 pagers every time I glance at it today so I'm not exactly building a flowchart to track everyone's position.
 

How else would you describe things that lie outside the normal rules of nature, other than as magical?
Do you mean the normal rules of nature for this setting or the normal rules of nature for the setting they come from? Because these are two very different things.

D&D normally takes place in a setting in which oozes can happen - and are not seen as magical. If I'm playing an inhabitant of that world who hasn't been Isekai'd there then I'm playing someone who exists where oozes are natural (if rare) creatures. And I want characters to fit that setting.

And an ooze in the real world would be supernatural but not necessarily magic. And certainly not a spell.
 

Fighters can exert influence… it’s called character choice… when character choice is more challenging we use skill checks to moderate. When you want to skip those rules and force an outcome you have magic. Incidentally available to 92% of classes if they want it.
Indeed. Fighters have as much choice as (a) commoners and (b) wizards who choose not to cast spells. They have a lot less ability to carry out challenging choices and make them work than e.g. rogues or monks - or any casting class.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top