D&D General Why the resistance to D&D being a game?

[ECMO3]

So is Lord of the Rings. Literature is full of both physical and mystical might and cunning stronger than either.

Lord of the Rings is arguably the most popular fantasy literary work in history and I provided literature examples from the 40s, 70s, 90s and 2010s above including literature examples specific to D&D.

The martial that runs around and doing things physically equivalent to magic-users can do with spells is not common in fantasy literature.

There was even a thread on here about a year ago that talked about how there were no great examples of super awesome fighters in D&D literature doing super things. The general conclusion from the thread was that Huma Dragonbane was the closest and the only one really. The points I made about Drizzt, Kelemvor and Caramon Majere were largely dismissed.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Magic is supreme, physics breaking and magical.

That's literally circular logic, okay. It's also not a "theme".

I think it is generally true in just about all of those.

It isn't.

It's obviously and patently wrong to make that claim. It's baseless and equivalent to saying "The sky is green!".

It is generally mechanically true in video games and generaly thematically true in most movies and literature.

Absolutely not.

You name the videogames where it's true - I asked first! It's not true in World of Warcraft. It's not true in Elden Ring. It's not true in God of War. It's not true in most Final Fantasy games - games where a mortal man suplexes a train, for example!

The only one I can think of where is both true in the lore and mechanics of the game is Dragon Age: Origins (and no other Dragon Age games).

It's not true in a lot of anime/manga - qi/breath is not magic, to be clear, in Japanese culture. Magic is a separate thing. Everyone has qi/breath, and it's just a matter of how well they use it. Not everyone can cast spells, and in most lore, you don't use your qi/breath.

Can you provide a single example in movies or literature where martials can do things rivialing casters of equal level without using magic themselves? Even one example from fiction?

Yes?

Like, pretty much everything that happens in most anime/manga? World of Warcraft in general? Magicians are incredibly powerful, but so are warriors. A magician might slowly destroy a city but they absolutely get slaughtered one-on-one by a mighty warrior - this reflects Sword and Sorcery treatments in general. You don't need to be a wizard to stand against a god - that's a practically a theme of Warcraft. Much of Final Fantasy.

I think what you're not able to process is that wizards in these media are fantastically vulnerable and stoppable, unless they're demons or gods. The equivalent of a PC is far weaker, one-on-one than a D&D wizard - that's consistently true in the vast majority of fantasy media.

Gandalf and Saruman are more powerful than any of the martials in that adventure.

Neither of them is a wizard, they're angels, both of them. So comparing to PCs in a game is completely to misunderstand Tolkien's lore. I guess you've never read LotR?

So that's a negative example for you there.

I have no idea who "Gromph" and "Pickel" are, unless you mean the D&D characters? In which case your argument is circular and thus invalid. That's just hilarious if that's who you're talking about.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The martial that runs around and doing things physically equivalent to magic-users can do with spells is not common in fantasy literature.

But what you don't understand, I suspect through not reading much fantasy or watching fantasy or playing fantasy games, is that magic-users often cannot do basic stuff that D&D spellcasters can trivially do. You need to accept that. Ironically the most baseline-capable casters are generally in games where the martials are incredible and superheroic.

 

[Incenjucar]

Lord of the Rings is arguably the most popular fantasy literary work in history and I provided literature examples from the 40s, 70s, 90s and 2010s above including literature examples specific to D&D.

The martial that runs around and doing things physically equivalent to magic-users can do with spells is not common in fantasy literature.

Naruto is also popular. shrug

The literature you read and prefer is about quadratic wizards, and that's fine, but that says nothing except you have a preference.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The literature you read and prefer is about quadratic wizards, and that's fine, but that says nothing except you have a preference.

It's not even though.

It's about quadratic ANGELS. Gandalf isn't a wizard in a D&D or RPG sense, no matter how many times he's called that - he's an ultra-powerful servant of the gods who cannot be permanently killed.

 

[Incenjucar]

It's not even though.

It's about quadratic ANGELS. Gandalf isn't a wizard in a D&D or RPG sense, no matter how many times he's called that - he's an ultra-powerful servant of the gods who cannot be permanently killed.

True. And Aragon's powers aren't from being a ranger, etc.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

True. And Aragon's powers aren't from being a ranger, etc.

Indeed. It's also hilarious to claim this theme:

Magic is supreme, physics breaking and magical.

In the context of LotR.

LotR explicitly shows that magic is not supreme. The most powerful magic on the planet is destroyed and defeated by the friendship, kindness, and er... jealousy of three halflings, something that people like Gandalf, Galadriel, and so on could not, by their own admission, do.

@ECMO3 - if your takeaway from LotR was that "magic is supreme", you didn't understand LotR on the most basic level.

 

[MockingBird]

It's not even though.

It's about quadratic ANGELS. Gandalf isn't a wizard in a D&D or RPG sense, no matter how many times he's called that - he's an ultra-powerful servant of the gods who cannot be permanently killed.

This is true. That's why I'll always take Gandalf in the debate who would win, Dumbledore or Gandalf.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But what you don't understand, I suspect through not reading much fantasy or watching fantasy or playing fantasy games, is that magic-users often cannot do basic stuff that D&D spellcasters can trivially do. You need to accept that. Ironically the most baseline-capable casters are generally in games where the martials are incredible and superheroic.

If only D&D spellcasters were as limited in basic stuff as the one in the stories you mention. They kind of are in older D&D, but the modern game went off the rails on that issue back in 3e.

 

[mamba]

Thematically, martial abilities should be limited and weak compared to magic

why should they be weak? isn’t that just the realism you said you do not care about?