Why Shouldn't Martial Characters have powers?

[howandwhy99]

Yes, but it is easier to take something you don't like out of the game than to add ideas. Both have the potential to skew other aspects of the game you didn't contemplate. But the latter takes work. Even if you are creative and come up with new rules ideas that you enjoy, you have to admit it takes more effort than just saying no to something that someone else has already created.

Too many rules you don't enjoy? Then older editions of the game may be better for you. Or different systems entirely. As long as you can find players you're good to go. Otherwise you have to decide between learning to like a game that looks like something you won't enjoy or having no game. To each his own.

Right, being designed out of the D&D community. Not fun. I hope it never happens to you or anyone else.

D20 is a POS when it comes to changing what you don't like. Everything hangs together so intricately, if you change one thing you might have broken a dozen others.

And it isn't all about removal, altering, or adding. The easiest solution is simply to build a modular system with rules with multiple options you choose to use at your table based upon what works for the group. I'm suggesting flexibility rather than brittleness is better game design.

 

[Roland55]

Fair enough....it is an issue of can or must.

In a traditional D&D campaign warriors aren't ki/chi empowered martial artists they are warriors whose prowess comes from skill alone with their weapons. If there is a supplement that allows for a more asian or exotic flavor, that's cool but it shouldn't be the assumption regarding what your common everyday swordswinger is like. I prefer my core D&D western pseudo-medieval/dark ages and not a wierd hodge-podge that sucks the life out of any actual culture by blending everything together in a flavorless goo.

I am happy that the monk is going to be out of the first PHB for this very reason.

Something is lost when you can't just play a man who trusts his steel and his wits. Damn do I feel old.



Sundragon

Don't let it bug ya! I feel old every morning ... when I go to the mirror to shave.

But I get over it fast.

 

[Roland55]

If looking at the Book of Nine Swords stuff as an example, plenty of stuff in the White Raven and Iron Heart dsiciplines are darned effective, and very non-magical in description. It's cool to have a D&D fighter who can slug it out, or dodge around avoiding op-attacks, but how much more cool, and still well in-character, to have him strike a blade about to hit him out of the way with a veritable "Storm of Blades" from his unbelievable parry-work? (make an attack and use the total as your AC, instead of your actual AC, immediate action).

It's great to have him yell a battle cry and charge, but what if he can use his military mind and prowess to co-ordinate a simultaneous charge of a squad of 10 men to DEVASTATE an enemy's front line? (War Master's Charge?)

Even more dramatic are the maneuvers which use a foe's power against him - it's a staple of fantasy fighting moves to leave an opening in your defenses, and then finish the enemy with their overextended counter. Feigned opening does just that. Mighty Throw lets you pull the classic "grab an enemy, throw him off-balance, and toss him 10 feet prone". There's plenty of "western fighter" room in there, but it's just mechanics that give Warrior-types a taste of resource management, combined with the kinds of things that DMs normally work into the descriptions of finshing moves in good D&D games.

Agreed. I can live with this. I can even enjoy it. BTW, there is nothing 'fantasy' about the use of counters; counters are fundamental to many empty hands fighting styles.

Since D&D happens entirely in the mind ... it's important to establish the right 'mental landscape' for your game. I'm not surprised to see folks fighting to retain their accustomed game contexts -- and I expect the WOTC designers will accomodate this.

Nobody benefits from a niche game design. Well, nobody who cares about a company's viability, anyway.

 

[Roland55]

For the same reason that Batman doesn't fly without an airplane, and can't generally lift cars and throw them at people. And why not everyone in D&D is a magical elf....

If everyone has special, cool superhuman powers, then those powers... aren't special at all. Thanks, I played Earthdawn, and the fact that every single PC was highly magical with flagrant powers made all the powers mean less...

We need classes for those who don't want their characters to be magic-users in different clothing.

Whoa!!!

Hear, hear! That was extremely well-said. I'm with this guy!

 

[howandwhy99]

Whoa!!!

Hear, hear! That was extremely well-said. I'm with this guy!

I agree. I want more than two class choices. War Mages and Magic Warriors.

 

[Li Shenron]

At Heroic levels, the fighter should be mundane. This is the Conan level.

At Paragon levels, the fighter should exist in the grey area. This is the Beowulf level.

At Epic levels, the fighter should be mystical. This is the Chuculainn level.

I think this sounds a very good plan

I know I want to play "human-like" fighter-types and rogue-types when I play one... If this is not possible beyond a certain level, all I have to do is play below that level, and I certainly can live with that.

 

[Stalker0]

Originally Posted by Umbran
For the same reason that Batman doesn't fly without an airplane, and can't generally lift cars and throw them at people. And why not everyone in D&D is a magical elf....

If everyone has special, cool superhuman powers, then those powers... aren't special at all. Thanks, I played Earthdawn, and the fact that every single PC was highly magical with flagrant powers made all the powers mean less...

We need classes for those who don't want their characters to be magic-users in different clothing.

Problem with this mindset is, that batman is just as "magical" as any other superhero just in a different way....technology. Batman has the coolest gadgets, he has a lot of technology that compensates for the fact that he is a mere mortal.

In dnd, we have the same thing in form of magic items. And at high levels, you see fighters relying on magic items for things like flight, elemental protection, etc. Just because they don't have demon blood or cast an incantation, doesn't mean they aren't endowed with supernatural powers.

However, dnd has a problem the comic book world doesn't. Batman has technology because he's rich and he often develops much of it. In dnd, a party will acquire magic items over the many levels, and there's no "fighter only" sticker on them. Even your supernatural wizards will get magic items. So the tech advantage Batman has is gone, it would be the equivalent of having Superman with a utility belt.

 

[Nifft]

Problem with this mindset is, that batman is just as "magical" as any other superhero just in a different way....technology. Batman has the coolest gadgets, he has a lot of technology that compensates for the fact that he is a mere mortal.

Yup yup yup. Batman's powers are all his "wonderful toys". Without them, he's a competent martial artist, a good socializer, and rich. But otherwise mundane.

Taking away Batman's utility belt is like taking away a Wizard's spell component pouch, or dropping Superman in a kryptonite mine.

Batman's powers have a techie flavor, but they're no less super in terms of functional power than Spiderman's powers (which are half and half).

Cheers, -- N

 

[Archmage]

I agree. I want more than two class choices. War Mages and Magic Warriors.

But playing a fighter should not be a suboptimal choice, as it is now, as it was in 1e and 2e. I'm not saying that fighters should be able to do fighter-fireballs, but shouldn't they be something more than a flunky that buys time for the wizard to win the day? I recently played an armored melee character who was the toughest guy (hardest to kill) in the party in a high-level campaign, and do you know what his biggest individual contribution in a fight was after level 15? Being a dragon chew-toy (grappled by its bite attack and taking damage from it every round) while the rest of the party defeated several half dragon giants and routed an army (at which point I was finally released and had little impact on the fight). Yay, fun. Funny story afterwards but not fun during. (btw, don't cast aspersions on the way the DM played the dragon - there was a legitimate plot reason it focused on my character)

It's been mentioned several times in this thread how several of the disciplines from 9 Swords are not martial arts/wire fighting in nature. There's one for example, called appropriately enough finishing move, that simply deals more melee damage with a normal attack the closer your opponent is to death. There's a stance that lets you do extra damage on attacks at the cost of an armor class penalty. How is that making a fighter a magic warrior? It's just enhancing his melee ability so he can do more than stand around and take damage. Many of the 9 Swords maneuvers also encourage movement rather than standing in one spot just to get multiple attacks. If you want to that, there will probably be abilities to enhance that option, but if you don't want to you're not pigeonholed there.

Finally, let's say there are more mystical-type abilities than you'd like - just change the flavor text! If there's an ability that allows the fighter a version of the blink spell, instead describe it as a lightning-fast series of parries. Voila! Same effect, but now it's martial skill instead of mysticism.

*edit* Just noticed that my post is right after Nifft's. Opus is THE iconic penquin!

 

[TwinBahamut]

I really dislike the "if everyone is special, then no one is" argument as it pertains to this discussion.

In this case, it is arguing that fighters being special would somehow make wizards less special, which is a "bad thing". As such, it is arguing that fighters should not be special, so that wizards can still be special.

In other words, it is saying that fighters should only exist to make the wizards look better.

I don't agree with that idea at all. The PCs are the ones who should be special, and the NPCs should exist to make the PCs look better.

Besides, the whole argument is based on some quality of "specialness", which means nothing. I am not really sure if it is a "false dilemma" argument or not, but it is certainly related. You can have two different characters, who are both interesting, and yet are still both very different. The idea that there will just be "War Mages and Mage Warriors" is not based on anything logical or reasonable.