Author Topic: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.  (Read 38617 times)

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #60 on: January 28, 2012, 11:18:44 PM »
Or, you need a different metric.  The human fighter can slay the Thoth-Amon rather than knock the meteors out of the sky.  Both, let's posit, equally necessary to saving the world, etc. 

You don't need strict parity, not everyone needs to do everything that everyone else can, they just need to do equally important things.  And, in theory (say with Tome of Battle or the Tome Series), both killing Thoth-Amon and stopping the storm of meteors can be as challenging and require just as much system mastery (probably more, depending).
Hmm... that ONLY works, I would think if the Wizard was somehow incapable of killing Thoth-Amon, AND stopping the storm of meteors.
I agree that you don't need exact parity but "CONCEPTUALLY" the Human fighter a lot of bias against it from people, so making them magic in a magic world works... as long as its known and written like that from the start. There has to basically be no "everyman" running around fighting dragons, and beholders, and pcs... with no powers.  Even then people are going to want to play that and maybe they can but that class isn't "Fighter" but "Relic Hunter" because the only way that's reasonable by above rubric is by the guy getting Artifact swords, Power Gloves, and ironman suits, written into his class. I mean I'm spitballing there but thats my thoughts on it so far. . .
...
I've played in a few games where there was a Tob only NO base warrior classes... it works but again....
Unbeliever had it right, Its all about the metric being used. . . In my head I still think people are smart enough to think killing Thoth-Amon (cool reference) and swatting the 1,000 meteors out of the sky are equal accomplishments. Unless as a rule the planet tipper CAN'T beat thoth-amon.
tiers implemented ala 4th edition I think suddently was a good thing so everyone was on the same page.
I can only agree with the above.  It helps if the Wizard can't do everything obviously, or at least can't do everything at once.  So, he'd have to prioritize:  he can either try and kill Thoth-Amon (and maybe he's even weaker against that b/c he doesn't have as many resources to resist supernatural attacks as our stalwart warrior type) or he can stop meteors. 

The reason I'm posting, though, is just to underscore a particular point.  And, that is that the Fighter type -- by which a mean a fairly non-magical archetype character, he's a guy who uses a magic sword, but doesn't use that sword to slice open the planes or whatever, more Conan, less Wuxia, and so forth -- can totally be doing things that are just important from the perspective of the plot and the game without the Fighter type abandoning his concept and turning into something like a gish or Neo or whatever.

That is, the Fighter type doesn't need world-bending power to be on par, in the sense of an interesting a character, with the Wizard archetype -- he just needs to have really cool abilities, even if they have mundane descriptors.  And, they don't have to suck mechanically, either, e.g., White Raven Hammer is a truly powerful but totally mundanely flavored ability. 

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #61 on: January 28, 2012, 11:51:31 PM »
1) Frank & K's Tomes don't put Fighters or Samurais on par with Clerics or Wizards. To say they do is silly.

2) I'm not trying to say that to be effective all Fighters need to cast magic spells. What I am saying is, in a setting where magic does incredibly useful stuff that gives you new tactical options in the career of adventuring and is also easy enough to learn, Fighters, being adventurers, should be able to, and would be stupid not to, learn and use magic spells. It's the utility, not the raw power.

3) I am not against Tome of Battle style, Charles Atlas Superpowers. There's no reason Fighters can't have that stuff. But again, hitting the Starspawn so hard it implodes is still just hitting something. If magic is all over the place and can be used to do things like "hamper vision and movement" in an area by 5th level, or "bar extradimensional movement" by 7th level, then Charles Atlas Superpowers can't be used to replicate that stuff and almost certainly can't compete with it in terms of utility. If that stuff is easy to learn for some classes, then it shouldn't be impossible to learn for everyone else.

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #62 on: January 29, 2012, 07:23:42 AM »
Theres definitely a feedback against supernatural effects obtained by non-supernatural means(despite them being feats performed by heroes of actual legend, or in lesser cases, even physically possible). Extreme feats of competence offer particular types of supernatural effects(mostly melee attack type stuff, resistance to extreme amounts of damage is negligible, whatever the other feats are), beyond which you run into verisimilitude derived resistance.

Straight out limited magical effects don't suffer the same limitation. As long as you can ensure the magic augments a competency, and is less efficient compared to full-time magi, acceptance can be higher. This helps further if this requires supplication of external supernatural intervention. It is after all, a fairly common type of martial character who regularly asks the favor of the gods, especially if it works.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline Prime32

  • Over-Underling
  • Retired Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 2914
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #63 on: January 29, 2012, 09:15:59 AM »
The reason I'm posting, though, is just to underscore a particular point.  And, that is that the Fighter type -- by which a mean a fairly non-magical archetype character, he's a guy who uses a magic sword, but doesn't use that sword to slice open the planes or whatever, more Conan, less Wuxia, and so forth -- can totally be doing things that are just important from the perspective of the plot and the game without the Fighter type abandoning his concept and turning into something like a gish or Neo or whatever.
Sure, in E6. But someone with the same abilities as a normal human is by definition not a high-level character.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2012, 09:22:30 AM by Prime32 »

Offline Endarire

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
  • Smile! Jesus loves you!
    • View Profile
    • Greg Campbell's Portfolio
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #64 on: February 01, 2012, 06:53:11 AM »
"Fighters" are useful in areas where metaphysical effects don't function.  Antimagic field is a GM's switch which determines who shines!

(I'm not sure how I feel on this, though.)

Offline Wiggins

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • I love my country as much as I hate patriotism
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #65 on: February 01, 2012, 08:46:02 AM »
"Fighters" are useful in areas where metaphysical effects don't function.  Antimagic field is a GM's switch which determines who shines!

(I'm not sure how I feel on this, though.)

That sounds like the following;

Fighters should be as good in an antimagic field compared to mages, as Mages are good outside an antimagic field compared to fighters, and if there are an equal number of mages and fighters in a party, then they should spend half their time in antimagic fields.

Did anyone else read what Endarire said like that? I'm going to think about that for a while.

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #66 on: February 01, 2012, 01:02:30 PM »
I did.  Sorry endaire, but that's a bit of a stretch for balancing the two.  AM fields should not be a common feature in a campaign, and it definitely should not be the thing that lets mundanes shine.  Not only that, but currently, even mundanes take a hit in one, due to magic equipment being completely necessary.
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline linklord231

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3352
  • The dice are trying to kill me
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #67 on: February 01, 2012, 02:42:43 PM »
Well, if players spend half their time in AMFs, maybe magic weapons WOULDN'T be completely necessary.  Just playing devil's advocate, I don't actually think you could do away with magic items. 
I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I'm right.

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #68 on: February 01, 2012, 03:12:09 PM »
2) I'm not trying to say that to be effective all Fighters need to cast magic spells. What I am saying is, in a setting where magic does incredibly useful stuff that gives you new tactical options in the career of adventuring and is also easy enough to learn, Fighters, being adventurers, should be able to, and would be stupid not to, learn and use magic spells. It's the utility, not the raw power.

3) I am not against Tome of Battle style, Charles Atlas Superpowers. There's no reason Fighters can't have that stuff. But again, hitting the Starspawn so hard it implodes is still just hitting something. If magic is all over the place and can be used to do things like "hamper vision and movement" in an area by 5th level, or "bar extradimensional movement" by 7th level, then Charles Atlas Superpowers can't be used to replicate that stuff and almost certainly can't compete with it in terms of utility. If that stuff is easy to learn for some classes, then it shouldn't be impossible to learn for everyone else.

The OP reads: 
It struck me the other day. If a mundane warrior lived in a world in which the earth itself bleeds magic, millions (if we populate a whole Earth-sized world) of magic items are in use at any given time, and spells can be learned that increase physical strength and reaction, or make weapon attacks more effective, well, then that mundane warrior would be both a freak of nature and mentally handicapped to not pick up some magic throughout his career (not to mention, dead before long).


There is literally NO reason why a Fighter would even exist in such a magic infused world, let alone why a Fighter couldn't learn a couple spells like Burning Blade or Sonic Shield.

So, you can see what I was responding to in my posts.  Also, it sounds to me that you contradict yourself on point 2) in the first quote:  all Fighters shouldn't need to cast spells to be effective, but they'd be morons if they didn't. 

It seems, though, that the line Ziegander keeps pushing is essentially that there should be not much material difference between the classes.  If it's easy for a 7th level mage to do something (e.g., dimensional anchor spell) then it shouldn't be too difficult for anyone else.  This seems at odds with the whole D&D class mechanic -- in a lot of ways, the answer is "play a different game" b/c the deep level assumptions of class roles and the like are being abandoned.  Further, this once again has nothing to do with magic:  you can say the same thing about sneaking, picking locks ... err ... White Raven Tacticsing ...

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #69 on: February 01, 2012, 03:28:18 PM »
2) I'm not trying to say that to be effective all Fighters need to cast magic spells. What I am saying is, in a setting where magic does incredibly useful stuff that gives you new tactical options in the career of adventuring and is also easy enough to learn, Fighters, being adventurers, should be able to, and would be stupid not to, learn and use magic spells. It's the utility, not the raw power.

3) I am not against Tome of Battle style, Charles Atlas Superpowers. There's no reason Fighters can't have that stuff. But again, hitting the Starspawn so hard it implodes is still just hitting something. If magic is all over the place and can be used to do things like "hamper vision and movement" in an area by 5th level, or "bar extradimensional movement" by 7th level, then Charles Atlas Superpowers can't be used to replicate that stuff and almost certainly can't compete with it in terms of utility. If that stuff is easy to learn for some classes, then it shouldn't be impossible to learn for everyone else.

The OP reads: 
It struck me the other day. If a mundane warrior lived in a world in which the earth itself bleeds magic, millions (if we populate a whole Earth-sized world) of magic items are in use at any given time, and spells can be learned that increase physical strength and reaction, or make weapon attacks more effective, well, then that mundane warrior would be both a freak of nature and mentally handicapped to not pick up some magic throughout his career (not to mention, dead before long).


There is literally NO reason why a Fighter would even exist in such a magic infused world, let alone why a Fighter couldn't learn a couple spells like Burning Blade or Sonic Shield.

So, you can see what I was responding to in my posts.  Also, it sounds to me that you contradict yourself on point 2) in the first quote:  all Fighters shouldn't need to cast spells to be effective, but they'd be morons if they didn't.

There is a difference between being effective and being smart. There's also a difference between me saying that you don't need magic if you want to be effective and me saying that you'd be stupid to not pick up an ability that gives you a completely unique tactical option outside of your normal abilities if said ability is easy enough for you to pick up. Kind of a really big difference.

Quote
It seems, though, that the line Ziegander keeps pushing is essentially that there should be not much material difference between the classes.  If it's easy for a 7th level mage to do something (e.g., dimensional anchor spell) then it shouldn't be too difficult for anyone else.  This seems at odds with the whole D&D class mechanic -- in a lot of ways, the answer is "play a different game" b/c the deep level assumptions of class roles and the like are being abandoned.  Further, this once again has nothing to do with magic:  you can say the same thing about sneaking, picking locks ... err ... White Raven Tacticsing ...

No. That's not what I'm saying, and no, you can't say the same thing about sneaking, picking, locks, or White Raven Tactics. You know why? Because anyone CAN learn to do any of those things.

But anyway, I guess that brings us back around to fix multiclassing, make Arcane Study and Divine Right into feats (requiring Magical Aptitude and True Believer respectively) and boom, I guess that's as good as we can get in D&D. It's probably good enough.

Acquiring Magic Through Feats

Magical Aptitude
Prerequisites: Int 13, Cha 13, Knowledge (Arcane) 1 rank
Benefit: You have studied the magical arts more extensively than your fellows, and are rewarded with a +2 bonus to Spellcraft and Use Magic Device checks, as well as knowledge of a single 0-level arcane spell. More than that, you gain spell slots in which to prepare your spell, and any others you might learn (see below). Like a Wizard, you keep your known spells in a spellbook, you must prepare these spells before you can cast them, and you must rest for 8 hours to regain your spell slots. You have an arcane caster level equal to the combined total of your Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Duskblade, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard, and Wu Jen levels + 1/2 your levels in any other classes.

You do not automatically add spells to your spellbook and cannot independently research spells the way a Wizard can, but you can copy spells from other spellbooks or from scrolls into your spellbook.

To cast a spell you know you must have an Intelligence score of at least 10 + the spell's level. The saving throw DC of any spell you cast is 10 + spell level + your Charisma modifier.

Magical Aptitude Spell Slots
(click to show/hide)

Special: A Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Duskblade, Hexblade, Sorcerer, Wizard, or Wu Jen that takes this feat adds the spell slots gained to the spell slots they acquire through class levels. They do not necessarily need an Intelligence score to cast their spells, nor do they necessarily base the save DCs of their spells on Charisma, but rather cast spells learned from this feat in the same way as described in their class entries. Spells learned from this feat are, however, always recorded in a spellbook and must always be prepared like a Wizard's spells.

Arcane Study
Prerequisites: Int 13, Cha 13, Magical Aptitude
Benefit: Add any two arcane spells that you have a high enough caster level to cast to your spellbook.
Special: You may take this feat up to three times.

True Believer
Prerequisites: Wis 13, Cha 13, Knowledge (Religion) 1 rank, Must worship a deity
Benefit: You are a devout believer in the cause of the gods, and are blessed with a +2 bonus to Diplomacy checks, as well as knowledge of a single 0-level divine spell. You may also use a relic (Complete Divine, pg 88) of the deity you worship. More than that, you gain spell slots in which to prepare your spell, and any others you might learn (see below). Like a Cleric, you designate a time for prayer, you must prepare these spells before you can cast them, and you must pray to regain your spell slots. You have a divine caster level equal to the combined total of your Archivist, Cleric, Druid, Favored Soul, Shugenja, and Spirit Shaman levels + 1/2 your levels in any other classes.

You do not know every spell on your list like a Cleric or Druid does, nor do you gain the knowledge of new spells as you increase in level like a Favored Soul does, but you may learn new spells from an Archivist's prayerbook, or from divine scrolls in the same way that an Archivist does.

To cast a spell you know you must have a Wisdom score of at least 10 + the spell's level. The saving throw DC of any spell you cast is 10 + spell level + your Charisma modifier.

True Believer Spell Slots
(click to show/hide)

Special: An Archivist, Cleric, Druid, Favored Soul, Paladin, Ranger, Shugenja, or Spirit Shaman that takes this feat adds the spell slots gained to the spell slots they acquire through class levels. They do not necessarily need an Wisdom score to cast their spells, nor do they necessarily base the save DCs of their spells on Charisma, but rather cast spells learned from this feat in the same way as described in their class entries. Spells slots gained from this feat are, however only regained the way a Cleric regains her spell slots, and spells learned from this feat must always be prepared like a Cleric's spells.

Divine Right
Prerequisites: Wis 13, Cha 13, True Believer
Benefit: You learn any two divine spells that you have a high enough caster level to cast.
Special: You may take this feat up to three times.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 04:28:46 PM by Ziegander »

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #70 on: February 01, 2012, 04:08:49 PM »
No. That's not what I'm saying, and no, you can't say the same thing about sneaking, picking, locks, or White Raven Tactics. You know why? Because anyone CAN learn to do any of those things.
Can you actually explain what you mean by that besides just changing the font? 

I was responding to your point noting what a character of X level in Y class can do.  Are you trying to say that magic is different from, e.g., sneaking or White Raven Tactics just because those abilities can be picked up with feats?  I've already ceded that there is no good reason why magic should be any different from that stuff. 

I'd worry about how far to take this argument, and how it pretty much just leads to "get rid of classes."  What I mean to say is that shouldn't the same argument made with regards to sneaking, opening locks, White Raven Tactics, and now magic apply to a barbarian's rage or an animal companion or wild shape?  At what point are we just throwing out classes?  Although, in principle, I see no problem with making spells into feats like Martial Study.  Cast a spell of X level (scaling with character level) Y number of times per day or per encounter (also scaling) seems fine to me.  And, perhaps more satisfying than the current 3.5 workaround of getting magic items. 

P.S.:  No, I do not see a huge difference between "you need to do this to be effective" and "you'd be stupid not to pick this up."  In terms of a game -- and probably more generally -- the two are nigh identical.  Most barbarian builds need power attack to be effective.  Or, equivalently, you'd be stupid not to pick up power attack as a barbarian.  At most, it's a matter of degree, and even then it's a slight one, especially given that you've suggested that they'd be dead and buried without picking up a few spells. 

Offline Ziegander

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
  • bkdubs123 reborn
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #71 on: February 01, 2012, 04:37:02 PM »
Let me rephrase: In standard, core D&D, if you play monsters the way a PC would play them, and you use all of the resources they have at their disposal when you do, as you should, then all of the PCs need to be using spells to be effective. If that means that the Wizard/Cleric/Druid has to optimize and use spells on and for the other players, then that's what happens. The designers literally expected that to happen and designed most of the game with the assumption that "there are situations that the party can't overcome without a Wizard."

In that kind of environment, yes, if a Fighter doesn't use magic, not only is he stupid, but he is also not effective. In that kind of environment, magic spells are also, apparently, super-easy for some classes to learn and yet they impossible for other classes to learn. Not only is this bullshit, because it means those classes that can't learn magic spells simply cannot possibly be effective, but it also makes no sense from a narrative stand point. And yet we just handwave it as, "well Fighters don't care about magic anyway."

The environment doesn't have to be like that. That's what this whole thread has been about from the very beginning. The environment can change, which requires a lot of work on our part. OR we can change the fact that magic spells are impossible to learn for some classes, which is a whole fucking lot easier. That's why I started the thread. To talk about how we might change the fact that some classes can literally never cast spells (barring multiclassing).

From here you want to say that I want to abolish the class system and just make everyone the same. I don't know why you want to do it, other than to start a bullshit argument that nobody cares about, but I'll say it one last time and that's the last you'll hear about it from me: I'm not trying to get rid of classes. I don't think that the game needs to be classless to function properly. I like having different classes with different class features.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 05:10:12 PM by Ziegander »

Offline Wiggins

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • I love my country as much as I hate patriotism
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #72 on: February 01, 2012, 04:51:20 PM »
I really like those feats. Are they your own work?

Now if only you could get them published and licensed. Probably with the usual disclaimer "These feats are intended for use in a High Magic Setting" (equivalent to Hidden Talent Psionics)

I expect they'd need to be gone over with a fine tooth comb to check how they interact with Prestige Classes and other Feats etcetera, but then where better for that than right here?

Also typing errors (I noticed Knowledge Arcane rather than Arcana)

Offline Unbeliever

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2288
  • gentleman gamer
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #73 on: February 01, 2012, 04:54:49 PM »
...
In that kind of environment, yes, if a Fighter does use magic, not only is he stupid, but he is also not effective. In that kind of environment, magic spells are also, apparently, super-easy for some classes to learn and yet they impossible for other classes to learn. Not only is this bullshit, because it means those classes that can't learn magic spells simply cannot possibly be effective, but it also makes no sense from a narrative stand point. And yet we just handwave it as, "well Fighters don't care about magic anyway."

The environment doesn't have to be like that. That's what this whole thread has been about from the very beginning. The environment can change, which requires a lot of work on our part. OR we can change the fact that magic spells are impossible to learn from some classes, which is a whole fucking lot easier. That's why I started the thread. To talk about how we might change the fact that some spells can literally never cast spells (barring multiclassing).

From here you want to say that  want to abolish the class system and just make everyone the same. I don't know why you want to do it, other than to start a bullshit argument that nobody cares about, but I'll say it one last time and that's the last you'll hear about it from me: I'm not trying to get rid of classes. I don't think that the game needs to be classless to function properly. I like having different classes with different class features.
What makes magic spells different from any other class feature?  I can't learn how to Rage absent multiclassing.  Can't get an Animal Companion without mutliclassing, though I guess there are those Wild Cohort feats.  But, I'm sure there are many examples of class features that cannot be acquired via feats. 

EDIT:  And for the record, I'm not intentionally trying to piss you off.  Though actually responding to what you write in a critical, thoughtful way seems to have that effect.  Which is a risk you run by posting it.  I've only responded to what you've written, to wit, that a character without spells is a retard and corpse to be (paraphrasing liberties taken). 

As I've said at least 3 times, I'm not against the idea of opening up that kind of feats.  Magic items have been doing that for several editions now, so it's not a foreign concept.  I just dispute the motivating premises that (1) spellcasting and the ability to manipulate magic is a fruit ripe for the picking for anyone in the implied baseline setting of D&D, and (2) that they are necessary, or nearly so, for being an effective D&D character.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 05:04:29 PM by Unbeliever »

Offline Wiggins

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • I love my country as much as I hate patriotism
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #74 on: February 01, 2012, 04:59:53 PM »
They win games?

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #75 on: February 06, 2012, 12:14:27 AM »
For the matter of magic items, because as most of us know, warrior type characters are extremely cash strapped due to the way their required equipment is costed. Their primary weapon is possibly the most expensive enchantment, and then theres buffing up for their MAD....well, mechanically you're not going to be seeing the fighter with a golf bag of enchanted gear, since even two magical primary weapons is going to strain the bank.

One thing other than feats to gain spells though. The economy tipping spells.
Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Superior/Greater Resistance. These give casters a sizable wealth advantage. What if you could A) spend a swift action to gain their benefits for one round(on all your eligible gear) or B) take a 1 minute long ritual to cast them(at 10 minute/level duration), provided they only work for you?
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline FatR

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #76 on: February 07, 2012, 11:50:22 AM »
The main problem with fighters in DnD is not that Magic > You (although it is, almost without fail throughout all of the editions). It is High-End Monsters > You. There is just no way you can fight a middle-aged dragon or a purple worm and come on top without the plot coddling you, unless your fighting abilities are so incredible, that they are magic in all but name, or you are decked in magic items to the point where they contribute most of your fighting abilitiy. Even much tamer and lower-level monsters are an almost impossible challenge with mere human level of ability. Saw that trolls in LotR movies? These are maybe hill giant equivalents. If you actually have enough mojo to beat them fair and square, why pretend that you still are a nonmagical class? Just so you can be a boring one-trick pony?

Magic and  Monsters > You is also usually true for fantasy in general. Generally, the action hero main character works at a tremendous disadvantage  when confronted with them, just in books, and movies, and whatever, the main character actually IS coddled by the plot, so he invariably gets into that very small window of probability, that allow them to succeed. But this model does not work in tabletop. If probability says that you are likely to lose... you will likely lose. Particularly in the game where a large percentage of opponents is usually intent of flat-out murdering you, rather than intimidating, manipulating or otherwise giving you a chance to outwit them.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 11:52:14 AM by FatR »

Offline dman11235

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2571
  • Disclaimer: not at full capacity yet
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #77 on: February 07, 2012, 12:09:50 PM »
Again I ask: why is it such a bad thing that fighters gain pseudo-magical abilities (AKA Charles Atlas superpowers)?  This way they are still not magic, but superhuman.  They use a ridiculous level of strength and cunning to defeat opponents, not re-writing reality like the wizard.  Different mechanics, but equal power.  How hard is that?
My Sig's Handy Haversack  Need help?  Want to see what I've done?  Want to see what others have done well?  Check it out.

Avatar d20

Offline veekie

  • Spinner of Fortunes
  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5423
  • Chaos Dice
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #78 on: February 07, 2012, 12:25:12 PM »
Actually, you have a LOT of margin there as well, forget overt magic even.
A quick look:
Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Greater/Superior Resistance, Spell Resistance, Energy Resistance, Keen Edge, Death Ward, Freedom of Movement, True Strike, Haste, Stoneskin, Any of the +4 stat spells, Detect <foo> and Shield of Faith.

Without even looking it up, these are spells useful to warrior type characters with absolutely no visible effect, or overt magical effect that cannot be replicated by straight out prowess. You can give them out as constant effects easily. If a RL soldier prayed before battle and got the benefit of some of these, it wouldn't even go beyond expectation.

Others, meanwhile, tend to be more high-magic, and presumably require ritual effort. We're not talking about warriors hurling fireballs, or calling up tentacles, but rather buff-type, recovery-type, defensive-type and negational effects.
Everything is edible. Just that there are things only edible once per lifetime.
It's a god-eat-god world.

Procrastination is the thief of time; Year after year it steals, till all are fled,
And to the mercies of a moment leaves; The vast concerns of an eternal scene.

Offline FatR

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • I'm new!
    • View Profile
Re: The Warrior-Mage: Let's Discuss the Fighter in a High-Magic World.
« Reply #79 on: February 07, 2012, 12:53:04 PM »
Again I ask: why is it such a bad thing that fighters gain pseudo-magical abilities (AKA Charles Atlas superpowers)?  This way they are still not magic, but superhuman.
     Two reasons:

1)"Physical enhancement" is far thematically narrower than "rewriting reality", even if you give the fighter enough of the former to bring level-appropriate amounts of pain in combat. In fact, the main problem with warrior classes, notably, is not their (in)ability to deal damage, it is their inflexibility. Sure, it is possible to spin quite flexible and diverse arrays of superpowers out of physical enhancement, but this requires noticeably greater imagination and talent. Even in the settings where doing enough push-ups makes you clearly superhuman, most characters without explicit magic still have their powers boiling down to "punching stuff harder". That's before we remember the knee-jerk reaction many people have against supposedly non-magical powers that completely break the boundary of plausibility. It is better to just say outright "it is magic" than to deal with people whose suspension of disbelief can deal with a spell of Blindsight 60' Radius, but not with getting 60'-blindsight by turning your voice into echolocator or hairs into invisible, intangible feelers. No, I don't know why this is so, but I've encountered such people.

2)DnD long since evolved past the point where the concept of "fighter" was beneficial. In fact, fighters faced this threat ever since other warrior-type classes started to appear. But it really hit them in 3.0, which codified the assumption that every class should be able to pull a level-appropriate weight in combat. If everyone is supposed to be competent enough at fighting - while also doing something else - a class who can only fight gets stuck in a very unenviable niche, where whatever you try to do with it hurts the game either for that class (because everyone else can do fighter's work+something else), or for everyone else (because you're forced to gimp combat ability of other classes to the point where having fighters in party is mandatory). While it is possible to redefine fighter in a way that makes it a team player again, do you feel like going against all the thought inertia?