D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Micah Sweet]

Did you need an explanation for why Dire animals exist? What about Ghosts, did you need an explanation for why ghosts exist before you allowed them in your game? Or what about about Rocs, did you need someone to tell you that Rocs are all hit by gamma radiation and that's why they can grow larger than elephants?

See, because to me, you are conflating two things as the same thing. You want characters who can do amazing things without magic? I agree, because I like not having to be a spellcaster for every character. For me, magic and spells are the same thing.

You want them to be non-supernatural? What are you talking about? My champion fighter could be a tiefling, meaning they are a supernatural character. My Battlemaster can be a magical training robot. My Thief Rogue can literally be a deadman come back to life. These characters ARE supernatural. You mention the new berserker barbarian, I agree, the damage it can do in combat is great. Even better is the Primal Knowledge ability where they can channel the primal power coursing through them to improve their agility and senses. Because it lets all barbarians be more competent at skill checks. It is also, completely supernatural.

I'm not trying to tell people what to like or what not to like. I was never going to sit here and say "you can jump 100 feet because your fighter learned the Jump Good spell." but I am going to point out that there is plenty of media where jumping large distances is something that normal, non-magical humans do. You can say it is "superhero territory" and I'll tell you, so is dueling the Lord of Hell on a planetoid flying towards the mouth of a god-eating star monster. Every spellcaster gives reality and physics the middle-finger constantly, by high levels they can start on the process of making their own dimensions (Demiplane used to LITERALLY make another dimension) but we can't have fighters get too much like figures of myth and legend, they need to stay grounded through all 20 levels.... because we just ignore the places where that already isn't true, because the game never explicitly says "you are supernatural" even by level 20.

Supernatural and spell-like are different things in my view, and they always will be. A character can have no ability to cast spells and still have supernatural abilities. The barbarian and the monk are good examples of this.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's actually pedantry... only one "n".

Yes, you can roll Strength to break thens. "Breaking bonds" is an example in the PHB, page 176, first column, second bullet point.


Well, ogres can try to do it. If you actually use the rules of AC/HP for objects, the chance of an Ogre doing it (in a single action) would be pretty low, around 0.85% or 1 in 117 attemps or so.

If you want to go the Strength check route, it still isn't great. I mean, again, it depends on the DC you want to give it. I'd go at least DC 17 (using the AC value), which means the DM would have to roll 13+, or just 40% chance of success. Like I said, not great, but decent.


Perhaps you simply enjoy more violent entertainment than I do?


Yeah, I can agree I would love to have better rules for it, myself. FWIW, personally I have no issue with a fantasy fighter doing such things, but it would be around tier 3 for me (if you are talking about breaking through stone walls, etc.).


Well, it sort of does. I mean, Ogres do 2d8 with their Greatclub instead of 1d8 because it is a "Large" greatclub suitable for a Large creature. Likewise, a Huge Fire Giant does 6d6 with its "Huge" greatsword, not 2d6.

Otherwise, mentioning the desire for rules above, I would grant advantage to creatures based on size, etc. compared to the size of the object they are trying to break, etc. I know it isn't currently a rule, but it would be cool if it was IMO.


No, they do apply to PCs, but a PC would have to deal 27 points of damage to the stone wall to break through/destroy? it.

A high-enough level PC could deal that much damage on their turn, but it would probably be via multiple attacks, such as a Fighter with Extra Attack (2) and/or Action Surge, or a Monk via Flurry of Blows and Extra Attack maybe? Or perhaps a Paladin with a good Divine Smite?

Fighter 11th-level, STR 20, 2d6+5 (maul), 3 attacks via Extra Attack (2) at +9 vs. AC 17 has average damage 8.15 per attack, or 24.45 in the round, close(ish) to 27. It's nearly a 42% chance. Of course, if you Action Surge for another 3 attacks, it jumps up to over 91% (dealing an average of 48.9 dmg in the round).

Monk 11th-level, DEX 20, d8+5 unarmed damage, Flurry for 4 attacks at +9 vs. AC 17 has average damage 6.4 per attack, or 25.6 in the round, which is close to the 27 needed. It's roughly about 47% likely actually.

Of course, all this really just depends on the DM and the weapon. After all...
View attachment 361730
For myself, breaking through a stone wall would require bludgeoning damage (i.e. the maul or unarmed strikes), piercing or slashing just wouldn't cut it.

That Object quote is quite telling. "Use common sense".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, you could use a DC 17 if you want to be as close to the rules as they currently stand as possible. I'd still make it a strength check with proficiency though, simply because breaking stuff is something most monsters and adventurers are well-versed in. It isn't like breaking down doors isn't common as dirt.

More importantly, it would be possible to do, which would open up things for PCs to attempt to do.



I don't know, DMs use it pretty often. Maybe they are just more graphic than yours.



Tier 3 seems pretty solid to me. That's starting around level 9 if memory serves.



Most of the time I've seen it, it wasn't with a weapon. More of a shoulder charge, than a batter's swing.

But, sure, I'd be fine with creatures that are large, or count as large due to powerful build, having advantage on the check.



And for me, I want it to be a check specifically to avoid this. If a PC wants to flavor it as a punch, a flying kick, or a strike with their axe, I'm fine with it. I've seen those sorts of stunts so many times I have no problem with it. Besides, as I've pointed out before, an Axe or a Sword works with 100% efficiency on monsters made out of solid stone or solid steel. Worse you tend to get is resistance, unless the weapon is magical. I think it would be a little silly to tell a player they can cut the head off of a stone gargoyle, but that that same sword cannot cut through a stone wall or a stone pillar, because swords can't cut through stone.

My solution would be to make it much harder or impossible for that (nonmagical) sword to cut through the stone creature by removing some of that abstraction, not by adding more.

And tier 3 sounds just about the right place for fighters, rogues, and other non-supernatural characters to begin being supernatural.

 

[Chaosmancer]

tier 3 is 11th to 16th, i'm pretty sure.

Ah, that works to.