D&D 5E (+)What Ubiquitous DnD Tropes Get It Totally Wrong?

[billd91]

There’s mythological precedent for lots of problematic things.

Maybe. But a lot of things have become problematic as contexts have changed. It isn't particularly weird for darkness to take on connotations of fear, danger, and even evil and for light to represent the opposite. But in contexts involving rampant racism/classism/even caste-ism directed at people with darker skin colors, it takes on problems.
So I don't necessarily have a problem with some of those mythological precedents as much as I have a problem with poor use of them in later contexts when these problematic issues are better described and understood.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe. But a lot of things have become problematic as contexts have changed. It isn't particularly weird for darkness to take on connotations of fear, danger, and even evil and for light to represent the opposite. But in contexts involving rampant racism/classism/even caste-ism directed at people with darker skin colors, it takes on problems.
So I don't necessarily have a problem with some of those mythological precedents as much as I have a problem with poor use of them in later contexts when these problematic issues are better described and understood.

Well said, I agree.

 

[Lem23]

Feudal tyrants usually being lawful evil (psychologically. As in self aware.)

That being typical is all wrong.

Most tyrants dont think of themselves as evil.

As a matter of fact most tyrants think of themselves as "good" and arent actually trying to be the awful POS's they frequently are. So their alignment being listed as LE the majority of the time is very misleading.

LE does fit for a tyrant; just because they think they're good rather than evil doesn't mean they are good, it just means they have no clue what their alignment really is.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I don't understand what you are trying to say. I'm pretty sure the parameters of the spell were clear as far as casting time, range and area of effect. Now if the spell was interrupted before its intended target then it detonated regardless of who gets caught in the blast radius.

The issue is not the parameters of the spell: it is that wizards are assumed to be able to cast the spell with pinpoint accuracy in such a way that enemies get hit but friendlies in melee with them don’t.

Let me put it slightly differently. Go out to your backyard or other open space. Imagine that somewhere ahead of you your friend is swordfighting an orc. A little way to the left of the orc and your friend, but some ways further back, a second orc is fighting your second friend.

How confident are you that without moving or the benefit of reference points, you can identify a spot that the two orcs are exactly within 20’ of, but your friends in melee with them are not? Bear in mind that you have to do this within 6 seconds, and your friends lives are at stake.

 

[R_J_K75]

The issue is not the parameters of the spell: it is that wizards are assumed to be able to cast the spell with pinpoint accuracy in such a way that enemies get hit but friendlies in melee with them don’t.

Let me put it slightly differently. Go out to your backyard or other open space. Imagine that somewhere ahead of you your friend is swordfighting an orc. A little way to the left of the orc and your friend, but some ways further back, a second orc is fighting your second friend.

How confident are you that without moving or the benefit of reference points, you can identify a spot that the two orcs are exactly within 20’ of, but your friends in melee with them are not? Bear in mind that you have to do this within 6 seconds, and your friends lives are at stake.

Now I get after the first paragraph. Dont think any of the posts before mentioned friendly fire. If they did I missed it.

 

[Horwath]

The issue is not the parameters of the spell: it is that wizards are assumed to be able to cast the spell with pinpoint accuracy in such a way that enemies get hit but friendlies in melee with them don’t.

Let me put it slightly differently. Go out to your backyard or other open space. Imagine that somewhere ahead of you your friend is swordfighting an orc. A little way to the left of the orc and your friend, but some ways further back, a second orc is fighting your second friend.

How confident are you that without moving or the benefit of reference points, you can identify a spot that the two orcs are exactly within 20’ of, but your friends in melee with them are not? Bear in mind that you have to do this within 6 seconds, and your friends lives are at stake.

you can just hand wave it as "it's magic" so it works EXACTLY as I meant to it.

or maybe you have this kind of aiming device projected while you are casting fireball.
Can be anything...

same way you know if you are 155 feet away from your target, so you need to make 2 steps to avoid disadvantage on your longbow shot.

 

[tomBitonti]

Couldn't the persistent of ebony skinned drow be simply due to drow preferences?

That is, assuming that the inheritability of characteristics works the same in a fantasy world as it does in reality.

That beauty can overcome a fitness advantage is a talked about possibility.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Dioltach]

Re fireballs: wizards are supposed to be highly intelligent, so maybe they can judge the distances correctly. Sorcerers, though ... maybe they rely on their high CHA to apologise to their friends?

 

[Horwath]

Couldn't the persistent of ebony skinned drow be simply due to drow preferences?

That is, assuming that the inheritability of characteristics works the same in a fantasy world as it does in reality.

That beauty can overcome a fitness advantage is a talked about possibility.

Thx!
TomB

sure.

they could even take Corellons curse as their defining feature.

And they do cull the weak from their ranks.

"you skin is one shade lighter than jet-black?"
"off to the dryder factory with you!"

 

[Doc_Klueless]

Unless you can find a reference, I kind of doubt it.

Yeah, it's a very hazy memory. Probably from an old Dragon or some such? As with all old memories, it's probably only about 30% true! LOL.

I just have a very distinct memory of reading it and a light going off in my head followed by an "of course!"