Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 6147492" data-attributes="member: 78752">First of all, I never suggested that they shouldn't.&nbsp; Second, it's /exactly/ the same thing; magic should permeate a fantasy setting the way science does reality.&nbsp; There is no shame in the setting's magical underpinnings being the reason why a martial character is able to do things he could never have done on Earth.&nbsp; Medieval longbowmen didn't know the first thing about ballistic physics, but they still killed a lot of heavily armored dudes with it.&nbsp; You don't have to understand physics to apply it, and you don't need to cast spells to take advantage of magic. What you're essentially proposing is that a martial character should stubbornly resist any and all association with the nature of the world he lives in.&nbsp; And that guy?&nbsp; That guy doesn't get fiat, no.&nbsp; He also doesn't get +5 weapons.&quot;But J,&quot; you protest, &quot;if there's no shame in martial characters making use of the magic in the world, why aren't warlords D&amp;D?&quot;&quot;I'm glad you asked!&quot;&nbsp; I exclaim.&nbsp; It's class glut, plain and simple.&nbsp; A warlord is, in fluff, no different than a warpriest of the philosophy of battle.&nbsp; He just has different, redundant, and (in my opinion) illogical crunch governing his &quot;spell list.&quot;&nbsp; ...And third, you're trying to solve problems that don't need solving.&nbsp; For 40 years, players have found both martial and arcane characters to be viable and fun concepts.No thank you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 6147492, member: 78752"] First of all, I never suggested that they shouldn't. Second, it's /exactly/ the same thing; magic should permeate a fantasy setting the way science does reality. There is no shame in the setting's magical underpinnings being the reason why a martial character is able to do things he could never have done on Earth. Medieval longbowmen didn't know the first thing about ballistic physics, but they still killed a lot of heavily armored dudes with it. You don't have to understand physics to apply it, and you don't need to cast spells to take advantage of magic. What you're essentially proposing is that a martial character should stubbornly resist any and all association with the nature of the world he lives in. And that guy? That guy doesn't get fiat, no. He also doesn't get +5 weapons. "But J," you protest, "if there's no shame in martial characters making use of the magic in the world, why aren't warlords D&D?" "I'm glad you asked!" I exclaim. It's class glut, plain and simple. A warlord is, in fluff, no different than a warpriest of the philosophy of battle. He just has different, redundant, and (in my opinion) illogical crunch governing his "spell list." ...And third, you're trying to solve problems that don't need solving. For 40 years, players have found both martial and arcane characters to be viable and fun concepts. No thank you. [/QUOTE]

Verification