D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Minigiant]

No, giants can't throw the boulder I described the distance I described (at least not any edition of D&D I am aware of and definitely not 5e where the weakest giant (hill) starts at 21)

So I will make it simple:

Commoner: max strength 16; max strength with training 18

Strength needed to throw a 10 ton boulder 1 mile: 50

What level does a PC need to be to get a strength 50?

PCs cannot get STR 50

 

[dave2008]

Does it? He was stronger than other men, but does that mean he was supernatural? The story is just like "Beowulf was incredibly strong!"

Yes being incredibly strong = extraordinary.

They didn't need any explanation for it. That was just how he was.

I didn't say they did. The old english were telling stories, not playing a RPG. Different audiences have different needs. I am, and have been, only talking about RPG specific jargon. What need to understand what is happen with respect to our reality.

Most greek heroes DIDN'T have extraordinary strength, and sure, their heroes had god blood. So did their kings. So did their politicians. So did a lot of people. The constantly had people who claimed lineage with great heroes, who had lineage with the gods, so that they could have lineage with the gods. Why? Because it gave them authority. Anyone important had god blood, because if they didn't have god blood or a god's blessing... they wouldn't be important.

I never said it was limited to strength. I was just talking about made them heroes. However, many did have extraordinary strength and/or equipment.

 

[dave2008]

I would question where the heck a portal came from! After stepping through an impossible gateway to another world, and seeing people bounding two stories into the air, the next thing I would do is try and jump and see if I could do the same.

If I couldn't... clearly these people on the other side of this impossible portal in a land that isn't Earth... aren't like me!

Agreed! That is my point!

 

[dave2008]

PCs cannot get STR 50

Why not? This is a fantasy game after all

 

[dave2008]

No. Your setting is your setting, and if you are having fun you're good.

That said, the game describes itself as a fantasy roleplaying game. If you want real world expectations, going to game book with the fire giant on the cover, 8 non-human races in the table of contents, and rules for divine intervention, and 90 pgs of spellcasting is a weird choice.

So is Lord of the Rings fantasy? Is Game of Thrones fantasy? Who decides what is fantasy. A lot of fantasy, if not most fantasy, stories use the RL as base assumption. Often to show how extraordinary the heroes of the story or other parts of the fantast world are. I don't think that is an odd perspective at all.

 

[Minigiant]

Why not? This is a fantasy game after all

50 Strength is the range of the divine. Demigods and gods.

 

[FrogReaver]

I find that if what makes something mundane/magical/supernatural/extraordinary/ x-factor/incredibly special/or whatever term we want to throw at it (the term doesn’t make a difference anyways)…

I find that if that is determined by the fantasy setting then I’d be perfectly happy with that.

But that then begs the question what is d&d’s base fantasy setting like or at least intended to be like - and it seems fairly clear that it’s modeled mostly after our real world with some exceptions. I don’t think there’s a way to get around that.

I’m all for other settings for y’all that want them, but it’s still going to be a chore to reconcile the basic d&d rules to any such setting - to such an extent I don’t think it’s feasible.

 

[Gammadoodler]

So is Lord of the Rings fantasy? Is Game of Thrones fantasy? Who decides what is fantasy. A lot of fantasy, if not most fantasy, stories use the RL as base assumption. Often to show how extraordinary the heroes of the story or other parts of the fantast world are. I don't think that is an odd perspective at all.

I don't see how this is responsive to my point. Which is this..if reality is what you are expecting, the fantasy genre is a weird place to go looking.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't see how this is responsive to my point. Which is this..if reality is what you are expecting, the fantasy genre is a weird place to go looking.

I don’t think so. Most fantasy settings are fairly real world adjacent. Not all, but most.

 

[dave2008]

Sooo. Not synonymous, but basically synonymous.

There is nuance in things. Ideally I would like to see a clear game jargon the defined different terms. I thought minigiant had a good start.

Let's circle back to the owlbears.. you said it's iffy..

Sure

Why?

Because things are complex.

They don't exist in the real world.

As far was we know

How can they be anything other than "magical/extraordinary/supernatural"?

In the context of our world it is hard to see them evolving naturally, but without a more thorough understanding of their biology that would be hard to say. That is basically the same for other worlds in our universe too.

However, they don't defy an physical laws. The are roughly like bears and bears exist in our world. Nothing extraordinary about that really. The only thing that is unusual it the specific expression of the bear morphology. If that can't be explained by evolution, in a fantasy world it could have been made with magic or genetic engineering in a sci-fi world.

Now, once created, the owlbear is otherwise a natural animal, like I said nothing extraordinary about it. So it comes down to how you want to define the creature: by what it is or how it is made. For me, I prefer what it is.

So, I would call an owlbear an ordinary creature manifest through extraordinary means.

Does it make sense why I said "iffy" instead of going through that whole explanation previously?