Verbs Vs. Nouns

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:41 pm

Okay, so the snark may have failed, but the fact remains: Villager #6 may well be able to affect a magical creature hypothetically, but in actual gameplay having 70% odds of being able to defeat a ghost means that you have an ability that the villager does not, even if the villager has 1/64,000,000 odds of defeating the ghost by getting a natural 20 three times in a row while the ghost gets a natural 1 three times in a row. Being able to reliably defeat a monster that will murder you if you do not successfully defeat it is an ability separate from and far more useful than the ability to hypothetically defeat the monster at all.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:25 pm

Yes, but the discussion is still about whether "able to hit a ghost" is inherently magical. Frank said no, because anything that interacts with magic is also magic. I disagreed with that premise and offered a counterexample.

If your new argument is that a ghost is magical "because commoners can't reliably kill it," then that same argument says riding dogs are magic.

If instead your new argument is that any ability which you have and most villagers do not is magic, then "having platemail" is suddenly magic.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:27 pm

Chamomile wrote:Okay, so the snark may have failed, but the fact remains: Villager #6 may well be able to affect a magical creature hypothetically, but in actual gameplay having 70% odds of being able to defeat a ghost means that you have an ability that the villager does not, even if the villager has 1/64,000,000 odds of defeating the ghost by getting a natural 20 three times in a row while the ghost gets a natural 1 three times in a row. Being able to reliably defeat a monster that will murder you if you do not successfully defeat it is an ability separate from and far more useful than the ability to hypothetically defeat the monster at all.

So now you're saying "instead of having actually intangible ghosts, how about we give them a big AC bonus?" Hell, by that logic, we could just replace all actual abilities that are in any way interesting with bigger numbers. And then the stupid as fuck sword fighter archetype can live on, because we've replaced absolutely everything that is the slightest bit worth talking about in the entire fucking story and replaced it with slightly higher fucking numbers.

Or alternately: that is shitty and you should feel ashamed of yourself.

-Username17

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:15 pm

No. This conversation was never about what is or isn't magic. In fact, we have another thread for that now because this thread isn't about that. Kaelik and Frank are ranting about how using mundane verbs to affect magical nouns isn't actually mundane, but that's a semantic derail. The actual conversation is about the satisfaction that comes from punching a ghost, and whether or not meditating until your willpower is awesome enough to punch an incorporeal enemy or forging a sword with such a sharp edge that it can cut intangible objects or abstract concepts doesn't count as mundane has no bearing on the conversation whatsoever. The actual idea presented was fundamentally "punching a ghost is cooler than blasting it with particle effects." Everything else is noise.

The only argument that's been made that has managed to actually be on topic is that if a random NPC villager could do something, then that just raises the bar for capability for the entire setting rather than making the heroes actually exceptional, and therefore allowing mundane actions to affect magic is bad. But the assumption all of these are built on is that being hypothetically capable of succeeding if you rolled enough natural 20s is exactly the same as being capable of doing it reliably. Yes, anyone with the Craft skill trained could hypothetically make themselves a vorpal sword after an average of 64,000,000 attempts, but Hiro can do it in one or maybe two attempts. Or maybe it's a feat or a class feature because we don't want to model the exact failure rate, so we just tell the villager that since his odds of success or so abysmal he just can't even try, and tell Hiro that since his odds of success are pretty good and nothing fun will come out of making him try it again on the off-chance he fails, we'll just go ahead and let him succeed every time. The details don't matter. What matters is that Hiro forged a sword that is on fire and a regular villager could not do that and at no stage did anything start glowing with magical power.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:24 pm

Why do you think punching a ghost is in anyway cooler than punching random mook #234?
Because mundane stuff can't normally interact with ghosts I assume?

Whatever · Post by **Whatever** » Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:12 pm

We already had a whole thread on mundane flavored super powers, so I'll just address one specific point.

These people punch ghosts:

These people use particle effects:

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:11 am

ishy wrote:Why do you think punching a ghost is in anyway cooler than punching random mook #234?

Because the ghost is farther beyond the abilities of villager #6.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:30 am

Punching a ghost is cool because it says, "I'm so awesome (i.e., magical, skilled, important, or whatever) that my fists can hit things that are on other planes."

Stubbazubba · Post by **Stubbazubba** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:33 am

A game where all challenges are simply farther beyond the abilities of villager #6, extending away in one dimension, is an inherently smaller play space than one where spectrums of challenge extend in multiple dimensions away from villager #6.

That leaves us with two options:

1. To save the mundane we eliminate hard-stop GTFO abilities like incorporeality and reduce the game to that one dimension.

2. To maintain the play space we eliminate the strictly mundane by giving them non-explicitly-magical-but-technically-magical abilities like mystical mountain training or space-time-cutting swords who only activate for a worthy wielder, etc., so those classes are still doing the mundane verbs but targeting magical nouns.

I do believe this thread has largely been about option #2.

Does option #2 make all non-explicit caster classes nothing more than a villager with an item? No more than caster classes are nothing more than a villager with a spellbook. That argument - that characters who can only hit ghosts with magic stuff are uninteresting - is pants-on-head stupid: All characters fit that description. Wizards are only separated from Villager #6 by a spellbook and the ability to prepare and cast spells; similarly, Fighters are only separated from Villager #6 by a magic sword and the ability to activate it and stick it into ghosts.

sabs · Post by **sabs** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:42 am

The argument is this:
If you're relliant on magic stuff to fill your role. Can you actually fill your role, why can't someone who can do stuff AND can wear your magic stuff do both roles by themselves?

What does a fighter bring to the table.. other than as the mount for an intelligent sword?

Stubbazubba · Post by **Stubbazubba** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:09 am

What does the wizard bring to the table other than as the mount for a spellbook? The wizard is the only one who can use the spells, though, right?

The intelligent sword will only work if its wielder is a veteran of a thousand battles or a level 10+ Fighter, the same way a Wizard can only cast X spell if he is Y level or higher.

The argument that Wizards can do a Fighter's role better than Fighters in addition to other roles is true in 3.5, but need not be true when talking theory.

Besides, I mentioned more than just getting magic stuff; a better example would be a Fighter who continues to hone his warrior's spirit until any weapon he wields for a long enough period of time becomes magical in his hands. Or a Barbarian whose Rage is so pure it allows him to hit incorporeal Undead. An Assassin who is so enmeshed with death he can reach out and affect the other side on some limited basis.

Yes, these are all magical by definition, but they flow from the mundane power sources that the class' theme defines in the first place, that it's not a separate phlebotinum source, nor is it ever explicitly magical.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:32 am

"Theme" is what I think people are worried about. I vote that the conversation concentrate on preserving theme instead of focusing on why slapping [EX], mundane, whatever onto a character's ability instead of [SU], magic, whatever means that a character gets to be "mundane". I mean seriously mundane is relative when we are speaking about another realm, dimension, what have you. What is and isn't mundane is going to change when you're talking about a reality where 'magic' is the norm.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:41 pm

sabs wrote: What does a fighter bring to the table.. other than as the mount for an intelligent sword?

This question has been answered so many times already that it is obvious you are not arguing in good faith.

sabs · Post by **sabs** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:44 pm

Really? Answered by who? certainly not D&D, certainly not almost any Fantasy Heartbreaker I've ever seen. The fighter gets a bunch of +1 to hit or +1 to damage powers that don't mean much. Or He gets the ability to trip enemies, or bull rush them. RIght around the time everyone else gets gfto abilities.
Or earlier in.. this thread, someone made a fighter that everyone spooged over that was basically a fucking scientist with lots of crafting abilities that ALL bordered on the magical. And somehow, that's fucking okay. Even though the guy had no abilities to USE effectively any of the stuff he made.

I see a lot of whining about how maybe if I close my eyes really hard and wish my fighter will be able to cut rocks.. because he trained really hard, but that's not magic. That's just the power of rainbows and wishful thinking.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:02 pm

My god. Read the thread. I'm not explaining the discussion we already had to you, and I'm certainly not going to waste time hammering points into someone so obtuse as to point out that Fighters suck in D&D as though it were something that actually needs to be established at this point, especially when making Fighters not-suck at a conceptual level was the entire point of this thread.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 5:29 pm

Chamomile wrote:making Fighters not-suck at a conceptual level was the entire point of this thread.

Hey, that is totally not even remotely the point of this thread even a little bit.

You are so stupid.

Mistborn · Post by **Mistborn** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:22 pm

Chamomile wrote:making Fighters not-suck at a conceptual level was the entire point of this thread.

There is no way to make fighters not suck at the conceptual level. Sucking is the quality that defines fighters at a conceptual level.

Red_Rob · Post by **Red_Rob** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:39 pm

Lord Mistborn wrote:There is no way to make fighters not suck at the conceptual level. Sucking is the quality that defines fighters at a conceptual level.

Only because the D&D Fighter concept historically hasn't conformed to the required arc of a D&D character:

Level
1-5 Badass Normal
6-10 Greek Hero
11-15 Anime Hero
16-20 Superhero

The Fighter concept has traditionally been stuck in the first bracket (maybe second if you are lucky), but a new edition could have the Fighter ramp up appropriately. All it would take is a section with a frank discussion about power levels and a recommendation for an 'E6' style of play for people who want to play LOTR or Robin Hood and why that's a perfectly legitimate choice.

Mistborn · Post by **Mistborn** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:51 pm

Red_Rob wrote:herp derp

The fighter's defining charateristic is that he has no pletobium i.e. he sucks. You cannot compete past level 9-13 without pletobium. not unless you want to radically adjust the D&D magic paradigm.

There are seriously only three options for dealing with the fighter problem.

1) the fighter sucks (ex. 3e)

2) the fighter makes everyone else suck (ex. 4e)

3) the fighter learns how to use pletobium and thus not suck (ex ???)

There are no other option.

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:53 pm

Stubbazubba wrote:What does the wizard bring to the table other than as the mount for a spellbook? The wizard is the only one who can use the spells, though, right?

Wizard can create own spellbook, even through original research or invention. Fighter cannot make own magic sword, and that's the problem with that comparison. If you take the wizard's toys away, he can build more. Take away the fighter's and he stands there like the useless dumbass he is.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:55 pm

CapnTthePirateG wrote:Fighter cannot make own magic sword, and that's the problem with that comparison.

Except that there is no reason at all why the Fighter cannot forge his own magic sword, and in fact one of the examples given in the opening post of this thread was Hiro forging a sword out of Efreeti steel or something which made the sword on fire all the time.

sabs · Post by **sabs** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:04 pm

Okay so Hiro can forge a Magic Sword out of Efreeti steel. Why doesn't he sell it? If Village Bully #2 steals the sword and uses it, why would it not work? How does the ability to forge a magic sword make Hiro an adventurer instead of a craftsman?

Mistborn · Post by **Mistborn** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:05 pm

Chamomile wrote:Except that there is no reason at all why the Fighter cannot forge his own magic sword, and in fact one of the examples given in the opening post of this thread was Hiro forging a sword out of Efreeti steel or something which made the sword on fire all the time.

Full Bab Artificer is a much better class than Fighter because he has pletobium. However if you present people with an Artificer class you labled fighter there no going to buy it any more than if you lable and enlightend martial artist class fighter. People want to be Batman. (Spoiler you can not be Batman in D&D)

CapnTthePirateG · Post by **CapnTthePirateG** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:14 pm

And people can apparently not even stand mundanes being competent.

Seriously, people in that thread are complaining about a halfling taking down a dragon with a sling.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread ... red-dragon

So until all the grognards who demand realistic fighters within the realms of normal human ability who can totally fight alongside guys who can stop time, animate legions of the walking dead, and rain down fire go away, we're stuck here.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:20 pm

sabs wrote:Okay so Hiro can forge a Magic Sword out of Efreeti steel. Why doesn't he sell it? If Village Bully #2 steals the sword and uses it, why would it not work? How does the ability to forge a magic sword make Hiro an adventurer instead of a craftsman?

Because...

1) It's too heavy and village bully #2 can't lift it, or
2) It's too hot and village bully #2 will be burned to death by it, or
3) Efreeti steel is actually made out of a live efreet who has personally pledged to serve Hiro as the result of his great martial prowess, and village bully #2 is not nearly awesome enough to persuade the efreeti otherwise, or
4) The sword can't be wielded like a normal sword to very great effect, and to get the best use out of it you have to use a very different swordfighting style that village bully #2 doesn't know, or
5) Efreeti steel can only be wielded by those who have the spirit of a true warrior, and village bully #2 is just a bully who likes to pick on people weaker than he is rather than seeking a true challenge, or
6) Efreeti steel is primarily useful in killing things like frost giants and water elementals, and when used against town guards or orcs it's basically just a sword, and since village bully #2 stands no chance of survival against frost giants regardless of how much pimped out magical weaponry he steals, he just has no use for the sword in the first place, or
7) Village bully #2 is easily slaughtered by the superior skill of Hiro even if Hiro is using a sharpened stick against village bully #2's flaming sword, so stealing the sword from Hiro guarantees instant death the second he decides to actually use it.

If I really had to, I could probably come up with more. And advance note: I do not care if these do not work within the framework of D&D 3.X specifically, because this conversation is conceptual and not mechanical. Again, we have been discussing this the entire thread. It is firmly established that Hiro has multiple qualities that villager #6 does not, even when none of those qualities involve spells, enchantment, or runes.

Mistborn, your post is self-contradictory. You've literally said "people don't want to be a martial fighter who builds himself lots of cool gadgets, they want to be a martial fighter who builds himself lots of cool gadgets." Even if it weren't, fact stands that the premise of this thread was never even remotely about what "people" want, but rather what a specific subset of people here on the Den who like mundane flavor want.