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

[Cadence]

I don't have a problem with some classes or subclasses having supernatural or magical abilities.

There are just times I want to play Conan, Fafhrd, the Gray Mouser, Gimli or Legolas. If my PC is based on one of those and incites someone to fight, I want it to make sense in the context of RP.

I was actually picturing Fafhrd and the Mouser. It felt like they could start a brawl to me if needed, no magic required.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I think the OP is referring to arguments about design aesthetics that seem "gamey" to some people. It pops up from time to time in the martial/caster balance discussions. There will occasionally be people arguing that, for example, you can't give martial classes abilities that reset on a long rest or short rest or whatever, because it's not "realistic" to have abilities with limited uses.

Somewhat off-topic, but my personal objection to abilities that reset on timers has nothing to do with realism. It's that the "game" becomes guessing when the best time to use the ability is. "Is this the boss fight? Are we resting soon? I don't think we are going to lose this fight so I'll save it...oops day ended and I never used my favorite ability." And the information I'm basing that guess on is almost pure metagame thinking. ("It's almost 9:00...yeah, this must be the boss fight.")

I just don't find that mode of play fun. It's basically Vancian casting for martials (for the record I don't like playing D&D casters for exactly this reason.)

I would much rather make tactical decisions in the moment. "If I use my Whirlwind I will hit four mooks, but I have a 50% chance of drawing an opportunity attack..." (Or whatever...just made that one up.)

EDIT: It's also the reason why my World of Warcraft characters always had bags full of potions. "Better save this for a more important occasion!" And don't get me started on Inspiration.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't have a problem with some classes or subclasses having supernatural or magical abilities.

There are just times I want to play Conan, Fafhrd, the Gray Mouser, Gimli or Legolas. If my PC is based on one of those and incites someone to fight, I want it to make sense in the context of RP.

Nor do I. I do have a problem if the supernatural abilities aren't called out as such.

 

[Azzy]

Except it's not "perfectly realistic" with no other assumptions because it's supernatural. There is no way I, as a normal mundane person, can do this. No one can. Being supernatural doesn't make it wrong, a lot of things in D&D are. It's only a problem if you describe it as something a person without supernatural abilities can accomplish.

Wait. You're saying that taunting hostile opponents to the point that they want to attack you is unrealistic and supernatural. That's an interesting take.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Wait. You're saying that taunting hostile opponents to the point that they want to attack you is unrealistic and supernatural. That's an interesting take.

To the point where they have no choice but to attack you, regardless of circumstance, yes.

 

[Azzy]

To the point where they have no choice but to attack you, regardless of circumstance, yes.

That's where the Wisdom save comes in. The saving throw simulates whether the opponents can collect themselves to maintain their rationality or whether they let their anger cloud their better judgement and move to attack. To say that that's "supernatural" or unrealistic is bizarre and untrue.

 

[Umbran]

Except it's not "perfectly realistic" with no other assumptions because it's supernatural. There is no way I, as a normal mundane person, can do this. No one can. Being supernatural doesn't make it wrong, a lot of things in D&D are. It's only a problem if you describe it as something a person without supernatural abilities can accomplish.

Worrying about whether "a person without supernatural abilities can accomplish it" is to me, trying to make a fantasy game fixed on the real world, instead of the fantasy genre.

Fafhrd could do this. Inigo Montoya could do this. Zorro could do this (and isn't even a fantasy hero!). Galavant could do this. Locke Lamora could do this. None of these characgters "use magic" in any overt sense. But, they live in worlds that are larger than life. It is genre appropriate for them to be able to do this.

The measure of magic is not the real world, but the genre you are aiming for. IMHO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Worrying about whether "a person without supernatural abilities can accomplish it" is to me, trying to make a fantasy game fixed on the real world, instead of the fantasy genre.

Fafhrd could do this. Inigo Montoya could do this. Zorro could do this (and isn't even a fantasy hero!). Galavant could do this. Locke Lamora could do this. None of these characgters "use magic" in any overt sense. But, they live in worlds that are larger than life. It is genre appropriate for them to be able to do this.

The measure of magic is not the real world, but the genre you are aiming for. IMHO.

I mostly want a fantasy game fixed on the real world, where the breaks from reality are clearly so and not simply a matter or narrative convention.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I find it ironic that a game purposely built to address all these issues is getting skewered for all the things it's done to minimize the gamism...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I find it ironic that a game purposely built to address all these issues is getting skewered for all the things it's done to minimize the gamism...

What has PF 2E done to minimize gamism?