Shitty character concepts need to die

[Verisimilitudinous]

So, I'm curious - what about the Bo9S classes? Are they all explicitly magical?

Depends on who you ask. Most of the abilities are Extraordinary, and thus not magical. Or rely upon things like training beyond normal human limits through self-discipline. Blazing Phoenix and Shadow Hand are the exceptions.

By 3.X mechanics, most of the abilities are not magical because they don't have the Supernatural or Spell-like descriptors.

However, the detractors call it "Weeaboo Fightan Magic" because the system is similar to the Vancian slots, or allows noncasters to replicate extra-normal abilities.

The BO9S did not go far enough, but it's a very useful model for giving noncasters nice things, and I hope that the writers of D&D Next incorporate its ideas for the martial classes. They should definitely extend it to non-combat utility actions as well.

Yeah, I guess that was my point. Not everything that plays havoc with the laws of physics is magic, though it is definitely supernatural. The problem arises from 3E's definition of supernatural as a tag.

I just really hate the idea that if it's supernatural it must be magic, because it's pointlessly limiting. Sure, if you want a campaign where the only way to be powerful is to dip into magic that's great. But insisting that that is the only possibility is disingenuous. Like your example about psionics; they're quite literally not magic but they're very supernatural.

[Username17]

It matters a great deal because gamers have an inconsistent definition, and alternatively use contradictory definitions.

I agree with you on having characters having "extra-normal powers" by your definition. But assuming that your definition is the only relevant one won't add to the discussion when other gamers see your definition as their own.

Actually, it totally can. See, there's the real definition of the term, where Magical means absolutely everything that's Supernatural, and there's a literally infinite number of fucked up definitions that don't make any sense. For fuck's sakes, Veri is spamming this board insisting that we have ossified imaginations because we don't accept his definition of "having magical powers because of your magical blood" as being a non-magical state of affairs. That doesn't even words.

A community cannot have a productive discussion if everyone's arguing over the semantics of a word. And I'm not just talking about The Gaming Den

I agree. That is why we need to put people like Veri on ignore and go back to talking about things that make sense.

We use the actual definitions of words, and not stupid ones that don't make sense. And when we use game terms, we mark them as such and give them their in-game definitions separately. And when we don't call out specific game terms, we fucking well use the actual definitions of actual English words. And when we're talking about making new games, we really should mostly be talking in natural English unless we are making comparisons to specific games. and when we are making comparisons to specific games, we should fucking well use those games' game terms and not come up with our own personal bullshit language.

-Username17

[K]

MTP is not balanced. It just isn't, regardless of how little or how much you allow in the game.

MTP is however, completely necessary. If you have an ability that makes the ground next to you count as difficult ground because you're interfering with people moving through it (like Mearls' poorly written 3.5 Knight), then you have gained no new MTP options. If you have an ability that makes the ground next to you count as difficult ground because jagged rocks rise out of the ground, then you could put a chair on it and have someone climb that chair so that they could reach a higher shelf.

MTP is not necessary even in the situation you've described.

You can just say that those jagged rocks are crumbly and can't support weight or be used for anything useful. That's called a "rule," and it's how you make balanced "games." You can make a rule where all powers that make difficult terrain have to do so by making stuff that can be climbed on whether it's webs or ice or foliage or shards of rock, thereby balancing it with a "rule." You can make a "rule" where climbing things is just such an easy action that getting one extra foot of height from rock shards doesn't help climbing in an meaningful way.

Locking down MTP nonsense with "rules" has a proud and long tradition. Wall of Iron has a GP cost because some DM somewhere decided that the PCs MPTing up iron-based schemes was stupid. Diplomacy got rules based on the skill system because just pure MTPing it up didn't ever work (though it needs a revision). Someone got tired of MPTing up ships and so wrote up ship rules.

That's how the game progresses. You run into a situation that can only be resolved with MTP, and you make a new rule for it so it's not MTP any more, or you redesign an existing rule to eliminate the need for MTP. Good design keeps your number of rules as low as possible by using elegant solutions.

If you don't, you've given up on the G of RPG. It's not a game if you think that MTP has to be an inescapable part of your design, and lots of people want a game because they deliberately choose options in the game that avoid the MTP entirely. They have perfectly fine and enjoyable RPGs sessions with their friends entirely without MTPing any significant part of the game.

[Verisimilitudinous]

Actually, it totally can. See, there's the real definition of the term, where Magical means absolutely everything that's Supernatural, and there's a literally infinite number of fucked up definitions that don't make any sense.

Okay, uh, I'm wondering how you get "absolutely everything that's supernatural" out of:

mag·ic (mjk)

adj.
1. Of, relating to, or invoking the supernatural: "stubborn unlaid ghost/That breaks his magic chains at curfew time" (John Milton).

Since I'm pretty sure neither "relating to" or "invoking" mean "absolutely everything that's supernatural."

We use the actual definitions of words, and not stupid ones that don't make sense. And when we use game terms, we mark them as such and give them their in-game definitions separately. And when we don't call out specific game terms, we fucking well use the actual definitions of actual English words. And when we're talking about making new games, we really should mostly be talking in natural English unless we are making comparisons to specific games. and when we are making comparisons to specific games, we should fucking well use those games' game terms and not come up with our own personal bullshit language.

I'm wondering when you've used the actual definition of magic, since you keep insisting that it is the same as supernatural and, yet, when confronted with real, academically accepted definitions you say that either they're wrong or that they say things that're nowhere in the actual definition.

Is this how you solve every argument? By responding to anyone pointing out that you're intellectually dishonest by going YEAH WELL I'M GONNA IGNORE YOU?

[Stinktopus]

So, I'm curious - what about the Bo9S classes? Are they all explicitly magical?

Yes. Also...

Anything God does is magic.
Anything you do by invoking God is magic.
Anything you can do because a demon and a dragon Eiffel Towered your grandmother is magic.

Essentially, anything unscientific is magic. A 20th level Barbarian being able to survive a fall from the lower atmosphere is magic, because D&D gives people magical plotanium armor in the form of Hit Points. So, EVERYONE has some kind of magic by the nature of the game, but not everyone has voodoo that means squat in the face of really impressive challenges.

Now, Mr. Darwinism, would you stop shit-posting on your home thread with this endless semantics argument and find something funny, like Tarnowski and Benoist calling for "narrative ability" internment camps?

P.S. 3.5 does not perfectly recreate Tolkien, European Myths, or any particular novel. It is also not a perfect physic recreation engine. Anyone claiming the above is an idiot. Now get over your "everyone who didn't switch from 3.5 to 4E is a 'tard because, OMG, 4E is also a game with the same name!" shit, because it's an unfunny waste of space.

[Username17]

MTP is not necessary even in the situation you've described.

You can just say that those jagged rocks are crumbly and can't support weight or be used for anything useful.

That would still be MTP. Hell, just the fact that the rocks are crumbly means that you could shovel them up and use them as ballast if you needed a weight for some leverage system. Shit, you've actually used the fact that things transformed by cantrip are crumbly and useless to great effect. I've watched you do it.

Trying to go all 4e and shit on creativity by making abilities as one dimensional and uninteresting as possible is not the way forward. For anything.

-Username17

[Verisimilitudinous]

So, I'm curious - what about the Bo9S classes? Are they all explicitly magical?

Yes. Also...

Anything God does is magic.
Anything you do by invoking God is magic.
Anything you can do because a demon and a dragon Eiffel Towered your grandmother is magic.

Essentially, anything unscientific is magic. A 20th level Barbarian being able to survive a fall from the lower atmosphere is magic, because D&D gives people magical plotanium armor in the form of Hit Points. So, EVERYONE has some kind of magic by the nature of the game, but not everyone has voodoo that means squat in the face of really impressive challenges.

Now, Mr. Darwinism, would you stop shit-posting on your home thread with this endless semantics argument and find something funny, like Tarnowski and Benoist calling for "narrative ability" internment camps?

P.S. 3.5 does not perfectly recreate Tolkien, European Myths, or any particular novel. It is also not a perfect physic recreation engine. Anyone claiming the above is an idiot. Now get over your "everyone who didn't switch from 3.5 to 4E is a 'tard because, OMG, 4E is also a game with the same name!" shit, because it's an unfunny waste of space.

Yeah, this is pretty good Trollman satire right here.

But semantics are extremely important to the topic at hand. If you define magic as everything supernatural you are going to have a really hard time coming up with any sort of mythic hero that doesn't use D&D-type magic to ascend to those levels, and that leads to some really, really closed thinking.

[Verisimilitudinous]

Trying to go all 4e and shit on creativity by making abilities as one dimensional and uninteresting as possible is not the way forward. For anything.

Man, you really are super mad at 4E still aren't you? You can't even go two pages in a thread that's not even about the game without bringing it up.

I mean, I know you actually know nothing about it but why do you have this disturbing obsession with the game?

As an interesting mental exercise I would like it if you could tell me how 4E stifles creativity in a way that 3E does not.

[Korwin]

If you define magic as everything supernatural you are going to have a really hard time coming up with any sort of mythic hero that doesn't use D&D-type magic to ascend to those levels

Why the fuck is this a problem? The grognards who fap about their non-magical fighters wont accept your non-magical but supernatural fighter anyway. So why dont we use the common definition of supernatural = something magical non-mundan.

[Verisimilitudinous]

If you define magic as everything supernatural you are going to have a really hard time coming up with any sort of mythic hero that doesn't use D&D-type magic to ascend to those levels

Why the fuck is this a problem? The grognards who fap about their non-magical fighters wont accept your non-magical but supernatural fighter anyway. So why dont we use the common definition of supernatural = something magical non-mundan.

Because, as I've said, it's pointlessly limiting and has no real benefit overall. If what you want is for a campaign where magic is the only way to power, awesome, do it! But that shouldn't be the only option in the same way that Wizard shouldn't be the only casting class.

[Korwin]

If you define magic as everything supernatural you are going to have a really hard time coming up with any sort of mythic hero that doesn't use D&D-type magic to ascend to those levels

Why the fuck is this a problem? The grognards who fap about their non-magical fighters wont accept your non-magical but supernatural fighter anyway. So why dont we use the common definition of supernatural = something magical non-mundan.

Because, as I've said, it's pointlessly limiting and has no real benefit overall. If what you want is for a campaign where magic is the only way to power, awesome, do it! But that shouldn't be the only option in the same way that Wizard shouldn't be the only casting class.

What difference would it make if your termonology was used?
Besides confusing the termonology?

What game would be possible, thats not possible if we call supernatural = magical?

[Mistborn]

Why the fuck is this a problem? The grognards who fap about their non-magical fighters wont accept your non-magical but supernatural fighter anyway. So why dont we use the common definition of supernatural = something magical non-mundan.

This is wrong and you are an Idiot D&D has had magicy fighters from day 1. That's basically what a Paladin is a fighter with divinely granted superpowers.

[Stinktopus]

Yeah, this is pretty good Trollman satire right here.

But semantics are extremely important to the topic at hand. If you define magic as everything supernatural you are going to have a really hard time coming up with any sort of mythic hero that doesn't use D&D-type magic to ascend to those levels, and that leads to some really, really closed thinking.

You are the only person making the claim that "D&D style magic" is necessary to whatever narrative you're trying to... play? insinuate? imagine?

So, let's say you want to play "guy who trains so damn hard with a sword that he can slash open a dimensional portal." Okay, so he achieves a "supernatural" effect via discipline and study... he's a Wizard with a sword.

Guy who "thinks really hard" or just "believes he can" do "supernatural effect" X... is called a Psion.

Guy who prays really hard and "supernatural" happens... is a Cleric.

[Archmage]

I don't understand how having multiple flavors of superpowers with different names is relevant.

Seriously, if you don't like "magic" as a catch-all term for superpowers in fantasy, just call them superpowers. And until we are discussing a specific game instead of theory arguments about flavor text are pointless.

[Stinktopus]

Why the fuck is this a problem? The grognards who fap about their non-magical fighters wont accept your non-magical but supernatural fighter anyway. So why dont we use the common definition of supernatural = something magical non-mundan.

This is wrong and you are an Idiot D&D has had magicy fighters from day 1. That's basically what a Paladin is a fighter with divinely granted superpowers.

Paladins are not a "day 1" feature of D&D. If you wanted to be a guy with magic and a sword, you had to be an Elf, because elves are magic.

[Kaelik]

I don't even know where to begin with this. You are taking a line that says that magic relates to the supernatural and then stating that a relation means that they mean the same thing! How do you even do that? You're related to an awful lot of things, does that mean that you're the same as them, or does it mean you're related?

Okay retard. Try to follow this line of conversation for like two whole sentences:

1) The definition of magic is "of or relating to the supernatural"

2) Things that are supernatural are of or relating to themselves.

3) Therefore, all possible supernatural things fall within the definition of magic, and are therefore fucking magic.

Now, you can either:

1) Admit that all supernatural things are magic.

2) Find me a single counterexample, anything that is supernatural, but is not of or relating to the supernatural.

3) Dispute the definition of Magic given by Merriam Webster.

But you can't just keep fucking whining about how things that are related are different. They can be, or they can not be. And the definition of magic is such that they are not. All supernatural things are magic. According to the actual goddam definition.

[Verisimilitudinous]

I don't even know where to begin with this. You are taking a line that says that magic relates to the supernatural and then stating that a relation means that they mean the same thing! How do you even do that? You're related to an awful lot of things, does that mean that you're the same as them, or does it mean you're related?

Okay retard. Try to follow this line of conversation for like two whole sentences:

1) The definition of magic is "of or relating to the supernatural"

2) Things that are supernatural are of or relating to themselves.

3) Therefore, all possible supernatural things fall within the definition of magic, and are therefore fucking magic.

Is this your idea of logic? Because it's horribly flawed.

"A relates to B, and B relates to B, therefor all B is A," is not logic. It is pretty much the direct opposite of logic.

Now, you can either:

1) Admit that all supernatural things are magic.

2) Find me a single counterexample, anything that is supernatural, but is not of or relating to the supernatural.

3) Dispute the definition of Magic given by Merriam Webster.

But you can't just keep fucking whining about how things that are related are different. They can be, or they can not be. And the definition of magic is such that they are not. All supernatural things are magic. According to the actual goddam definition.

All magic things are supernatural, but not all magical things are supernatural. The actual definition of supernatural has nothing to do with magic because magic is a single facet of the supernatural.

How are you still arguing this?


Terminology is pretty important because, especially in D&D, magic means a very specific thing. Even the great and wondrous 3E has definitions of powers that exclude 'magic' so I'm not sure how railing against different terminology for supernatural abilities is anything but ignorance.

[Username17]

I don't understand how having multiple flavors of superpowers with different names is relevant.

It's relevant to the original thread subject, which was getting people to swallow the bitter pill that their sword wielding barbarian is not a high level concept and they have to step it up a notch. Basically, the Conan types need to get some fucking magic, but they've also been adventuring with an actual Wizard the whole time up to this point. So you have to have different flavors of magic, so that you can give the Conan Clone something that is different in some way from what the Wizard in the party has.

Because if you say "You're Paragon now, you need to get some wizardry", you're going to get a lot of pushback. The player is going to want to know why the Wizard player doesn't need to get swording if he needs to pick up some wizardry.

And until we are discussing a specific game instead of theory arguments about flavor text are pointless.

Disagree. The actual discussion is about what flavor text people will accept. And the observation that there has to be an arbitrary distinction between whatever the Marshal gets when he gets magical superpowers from becoming an Angelic Guardian versus what the Wizard gets when becomes an Archmage is both interesting and relevant.

I know that Veri is a stupid weasel and I put him on ignore, but think about the level of butthurt he is able to manifest over the idea that the mundane characters have to get something "like what the wizards have". That's really interesting. And I think that there are probably lots of people who are less retarded than he is but still on that continuum. And placating them by telling them that their magic superpowers are "Psionics" or "Dragon Marks" or something rather than "Sorcery" is probably a reasonable thing to do. And since it absolutely doesn't matter from a game balance point of view, "giving in" on this issue seems relatively harmless.

-Username17

[Korwin]

All magic things are supernatural, but not all magical things are supernatural. The actual definition of supernatural has nothing to do with magic because magic is a single facet of the supernatural.

Besides the point, Supernatural is still not natural.
And it was you* who claimed an mundane char. is viable at high levels.
Or are you now claiming Supernatural is natural/mundane?

*It was you, right?

[Verisimilitudinous]

Oh yeah by the way Frank:

No. That's a flippant answer. It's not easy. You can't describe an action that Conan or Beowulf could take that would allow him to attack an enemy that was in another universe that would cause an impartial audience to conclude that he hadn't used any magic.

"Conan rips through the very fabric of reality, his overwhelming determination forcing him through the planes and towards his foe."

Man that only took a couple seconds and no magic is used. What's up with that?

[K]

MTP is not necessary even in the situation you've described.

You can just say that those jagged rocks are crumbly and can't support weight or be used for anything useful.

That would still be MTP. Hell, just the fact that the rocks are crumbly means that you could shovel them up and use them as ballast if you needed a weight for some leverage system. Shit, you've actually used the fact that things transformed by cantrip are crumbly and useless to great effect. I've watched you do it.

Trying to go all 4e and shit on creativity by making abilities as one dimensional and uninteresting as possible is not the way forward. For anything.

-Username17

It's not MTP to use the rules in an unexpected ways. It's the rules.

Balancing those rules makes a better game. Powers that create ballast, something that is useless in 99.999% of all situations, is well balanced against powers that don't create ballast with doing anything further because of the rarity of the use. It's not perfectly balanced, but perfection is only an ideal and not an attainable goal.

That's why the rule about making the rocks crumbly is a balancing rule. Making good rocks at will is going to do a lot of things in the rules, but making super-shitty magic-construct rocks won't do much in a rules except for one or two wildly rare things.

As for 4e, you missed the point: 4e depends heavily on MTP. It's MTP whether doors can be harmed by radiant damage. It's MTP when you use the skill system. Hell, it's MTP when the DM decides that you can even open a door in 4e.

Shit, the very first 4e playtests had the PCs using ice powers to freeze pools of water in a dragon lair in an entirely MTP way. They could have had rules for the amount of cold damage it takes to freeze a volume of water and the game effects of ice, but they MTPed instead.

MTP isn't creative... it's a sign of bad system. You can just write rules for situations that come up and then balance those uses, but MTP is the stuff where your powers have arbitrary uses and limits depending on how the DM feels that day.

[Verisimilitudinous]

Besides the point, Supernatural is still not natural.
And it was you* who claimed an mundane char. is viable at high levels.
Or are you now claiming Supernatural is natural/mundane?

*It was you, right?

Honestly, any originally mundane character should be viable at high levels, because high levels should mean that you're not mundane anymore. Unless you can come up with a compelling reason why a level 20 Fighter should only be attacking five times while a level 20 Wizard is getting Wishes and stopping time and travelling the planes with ridiculous ease.

[Korwin]

Besides the point, Supernatural is still not natural.
And it was you* who claimed an mundane char. is viable at high levels.
Or are you now claiming Supernatural is natural/mundane?

*It was you, right?

Honestly, any originally mundane character should be viable at high levels, because high levels should mean that you're not mundane anymore. Unless you can come up with a compelling reason why a level 20 Fighter should only be attacking five times while a level 20 Wizard is getting Wishes and stopping time and travelling the planes with ridiculous ease.

So you agree with Frank, that High Level Chars. should get magic supernatural powers?

[Mistborn]

"Conan rips through the very fabric of reality, his overwhelming determination forcing him through the planes and towards his foe."

You are then no longer Conan your fucking Baron Munchausen so go eat a dick we've already been over this.

[Dr_Noface]

Yeah that was a pretty hilarious "example".