D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Minigiant]

Why you need to hit the giant’s head?

D&D assumes monsters drop to 0 HP and are dead or in an incapacitated dying state.

This requires warriors to be able to strike monsters in their vital organs which cause quick death.

If warriors are simply stabbing at a giant's legs and causing them to fall down at zero the warrior still would be able to fight while sitting on the floor.

"The only hit point that matters is the last one" in every telling of hit point abstraction requires clean blows to vital organs.

So a medium size warrior would have to be able to reach an additional 5 ft cleanly in combat to wound the vital organs an armored giant or dragon or demon or devil.

Their heart is 12 feet up. Their brain is 18 feet up.

And that's before you get into special attacks that temporarily stun or blind.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's a seriously good thing we are not, nor have never been dealing with IRL humans, but humans in a fantasy context where we don't have to even pretend to care how it works in real life.

Agreed

 

[Chaosmancer]

Human limits are not a necessary concept in a fantasy setting, or at least the real world versions of them aren't.

Agreed.

However, that does still mean that we are exceeding real world human limits in a fantasy setting. Even if the limits are just different limits. This is the confusion of the language that I think many people get caught up on.

 

[Chaosmancer]

In the nerf the wizard thread Silvery barbs came up and that reminded me why I dislike that spell - in the end its using a reaction to distract a target (within 60 ft) and having yourself or any ally use that distraction for advantage, why can’t a Fighter do that too?

Not saying these are good reasons but...

1) Because that is a battlemaster ability

2) Because then everyone could do it (technically true with the help action anyways)

That is part of the problem with the fighter/rogue set up, and especially the fighter, because they are the "simple" class and the class that "represents the everyman" anything they can do must be something that can be achievable by any person. So many abilities end up being things that are then argued that should apply to every single character, because the thing these people say defines the fighter is being completely ordinary.

 

[Gammadoodler]

No one needs 'anything goes' fantasy either. Need has no real value in this discussion. It's just personal preference.

Sure.. then I think we're agreed.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sure, and I want those fantasy to be consistent, and specifically that any action not possible by our understanding of Earth physics be called as supernatural or magical, unless the fact of it is blatantly obvious (like dragon flight). Called out in the game material, mind you, not in the setting where what's normal and what isn't will likely vary widely from the real world. Because no matter what your opinion is on what counts as fantasy, all of us players live in the same real world, subject to the same rules. That's what I'm advocating for.

The fact that I also don't want the game to run on narrative physics is a separate issue.

You are contradicting yourself again. You want any action not possible by the understanding of Earth physics to be called out as supernatural or magical UNLESS the fact of that action is blatantly obvious... well... a man punching through a steel wall because he is inhumanly strong is blatantly obvious, just like dragon flight, so it doesn't need to be called out, right?

The problem is, you think dragon flight is blatantly obvious, but actually to most people... it isn't. Most people are not familiar with the square-cube law either. People often see characters in movies jump of bridges to land safely in water that is a hundred feet below them, not realizing that that is wildly impossible, as hitting the water from that height would seriously injury you. Most people don't need these things spelled out, because they either accept them, or realize "oh, it is a fantasy game."

And seriously? You want me to believe all you are advocating for is that we call the supernatural supernatural? We have. You then insist we justify WHY we can call it that, because the fighter doesn't have a supernatural bone in its body according to you, despite that being proven false again and again. Or you turn around and say "But those people don't want it to be supernatural!" when we finally say "fine, let's rewrite the fighter then". You are advocating for anything that grinds this conversation to a halt.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Not that it really changes the discussion; however, there is plenty of fiction where magic items are not made by casters. I don't think any of the famous Norse mythological magic items are made by casters for example.

Very true. However, those people who advocate for this route would demand to know how a non-magical person could possibly make a magical ring, because non-magical people are only capable of making non-magical rings, just like in real life.

I find this argument to be dumb, but it is exactly what would happen.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

All your examples read as supernatural to me. If you prefer the term extraordinary that's fine with me, but I can separate magical (spell stuff) and supernatural (everything else that goes beyond reality) just fine. The latter can't be dispelled.

I am very specifically avoiding that term, although I have seen you use it before.
Supernatural also had a fairly specific definition in earlier editions of D&D, different to the way that you are using it. (It was explicitly magical, and would not work in anti-magic, although it could not be dispelled I believe.)
A good chunk of this forum probably played those earlier editions. Hence why I chose to use the Extraordinary term, which isn't magical, just the way that the world can work in the fantasy and action genres that D&D operates in.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Beowulf had supernatural abilities.

Where does it state that? Where does it say in the story that Beowulf is magical/supernatural?

And I would prefer extending that difficulty in swimming to other kinds of clothing as well.

And the designers of the game, and the majority of players, would prefer to keep things exactly as they are.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Agreed.

However, that does still mean that we are exceeding real world human limits in a fantasy setting. Even if the limits are just different limits. This is the confusion of the language that I think many people get caught up on.

I just don't see how that matters.

If you go to a swimming pool, you don't question why the people in that pool are wet when you are dry.

And you don't expect that some people in that pool might be dry, despite being immersed in water.