Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8548882" data-attributes="member: 5142">FYI, the reason why I keep mentioning the Battlemaster Fighter is because I think that most of us can agree that a Battlemaster does not cast spells. (This is also why I asked you whether Battlemaster maneuvers should be considered spells.) Instead, the Battlemaster utilizes a suite of martial power mechanics, which can reliably manipulate the game fiction, called "Maneuvers." IMHO, the Battlemaster provides a clear example for the sort of non-magical things that people are often calling for when it comes to fixing the fighter.Even if we say that the Ranger casts spells, most people (from as best as I can tell) consider their ability Natural Explorer to be nonmagical in nature. It's just a skill or knack that Rangers have. This ability nevertheless expands their capability in the Exploration pillar without utilizing what spells they have.I know you played Pathfinder, so you should be keenly aware of how 3e/PF1 did it: Extraordinary Abilities. 3e even said that Extraordinary abilities were nonmagical abilities that could break the regular laws of physics: "Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical, though they may break the laws of physics. They are not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training."This is something that optimizers like Treatmonk often talk about. Classes like Barbarians, Fighters, and Rogues are often short-changed when it comes to getting new, cool, and useful class features in the upper echelons of play.</blockquote>

Verification