So, I didn't really know where else to put this other than general...
There's a section in the 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide that talks about the various "flavors of fantasy" you can play with D&D. But as things have gone on, and clearly as we move into the 2024 books, it's becoming clear that the designers have clearly leaned in to the "High Fantasy" aesthetic. Sure, you can play swashbuckling campaigns, or embrace horror or dark fantasy vibe, but at the end of the day, D&D has become a game of "superhero fantasy." And nowhere is that clearer than in the plethora of magical powers being baked in to to the new class and ancestry options.
The game has just become overly reliant on magic. Everything is magic, everyone gets magic.
It all just feels like the designers are telling those of us who want less "over-the-top fantasy" in our settings to just go play something else.
To be honest, the major thing that 5e does well versus other game systems I've played is combat, and the standout part of that is the magic. D&D is known (outside of the hobby) for magic. It's part of its identity. I think it's found it's niche, I doubt it will be vacating it any time soon.
I do think D&D would be improved by upping it's game on other things. The social pillar could be much better. But I don't think magic is going anywhere anytime soon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It does feel like everything relies too heavily on magic at times, yeah. The biggest standout for me is the barbarian subclasses. The barbarian is THE class for "non-magical meat-head" characters, yet only a couple of its (2014) subclasses don't rely on some kind of magic or spirits. And two of those were absolute crap in the 2014 version (berserker and battle rager), so the selection was just about nil.
It's always been a high fantasy so I feel like not wanting it in your game makes it hard to enjoy game. There plenty other more low fantasy systems to try
I mean, there's no shell game being played in the DMG, it's very upfront in Flavor's of Fantasy, (bold, mine)
Heroic fantasy is the baseline assumed by the D&D rules. The Player’s Handbook describes this baseline: a multitude of humanoid races coexist with humans in fantastic worlds. Adventurers bring magical powers to bear against the monstrous threats they face. These characters typically come from ordinary backgrounds, but something impels them into an adventuring life. The adventurers are the “heroes” of the campaign, but they might not be truly heroic, instead pursuing this life for selfish reasons. Technology and society are based on medieval norms, though the culture isn’t necessarily European. Campaigns often revolve around delving into ancient dungeons in search of treasure or in an effort to destroy monsters or villains.
This genre is also common in fantasy fiction. Most novels set in the Forgotten Realms are best described as heroic fantasy, following in the footsteps of many of the authors listed in the Appendices of the Player’s Handbook.
So the game _presumes_ heroic fantasy. In the rest of the Flavors Chapter, you're not really given much guidance on how to accomplish the other flavors, with the exception of reskinning weapons for Wuxia and some guidance in the Workshop for "Crossing the Streams." Everything else points to products from prior edition or fiction, much of it outside of WotC.
That said, I'd say WotC didn't entirely abandon the notion of flavors in followup products. Ravensloft definitely gave some good guidance on running a wide range of Dark Fantasy. You get your mythic effort in Theros. Strixhaven was definitely something. They eventually do their own Dragonlance, though the adaptation to "epic fantasy" was pretty minimal. Ravenica, arguably Eberon etc., (and Strixhaven to an extend) gave you intrigue. I should say none of that support was promised in the DMG, but I think it's cool those efforts were made.
Am I bothered by any of this? Having read what the book actually says, no. It's pretty clear what sort of fantasy D&D's default support will be for. Would it have been cool to have more robust supports for the other flavors, sure. But I think a lot of third party presses may have beaten them to the punch as 5e's designers tried to figure out the best trajectory for the product line.
I am curious about Greyhawk being the default or demo setting provided in the DMG. Greyhawk never struck me as the Heroic Fantasy setting that say Forgotten Realms provided. There was powerful magic, but it wasn't as common as magic has evolved on Faerun. But I've yet to read the Vecna book, so I have no idea what, if anything, 5e Greyhawk looks like yet.
As MidnightPlat stated, the game is very up front in telling you that D&D assumes Heroic Fantasy. Do you have to go play something else if you don't want that? Of course not, and the DMG itself says so, but it also says you'll probably have to roll up your sleeves and put some work in on your own if you don't want that. They have to aim the game at something, trying to capture every flavor of fantasy right in the core product would be immensely foolish of them to try.
As MidnightPlat also stated, other settings exist to help you try to realize the other flavors. We got Dark Fantasy and Horror vibes in Ravenloft, Pulp Fantasy/Magepunk in Eberron, Fantasy War in Dragonlance, and we'll probably one day get Sword & Sorcery vibes from Dark Sun or Wuxia if we ever end up back at Rokugan or Kara-Tur. But even those products can't build an entirely new fantasy for you from scratch, you need to put some work in to ban game elements or encourage others to hit your desired theme/flavor well.
I mean, there's no shell game being played in the DMG, it's very upfront in Flavor's of Fantasy, (bold, mine)
Heroic fantasy is the baseline assumed by the D&D rules. The Player’s Handbook describes this baseline: a multitude of humanoid races coexist with humans in fantastic worlds. Adventurers bring magical powers to bear against the monstrous threats they face. These characters typically come from ordinary backgrounds, but something impels them into an adventuring life. The adventurers are the “heroes” of the campaign, but they might not be truly heroic, instead pursuing this life for selfish reasons. Technology and society are based on medieval norms, though the culture isn’t necessarily European. Campaigns often revolve around delving into ancient dungeons in search of treasure or in an effort to destroy monsters or villains.
This genre is also common in fantasy fiction. Most novels set in the Forgotten Realms are best described as heroic fantasy, following in the footsteps of many of the authors listed in the Appendices of the Player’s Handbook.
So the game _presumes_ heroic fantasy. In the rest of the Flavors Chapter, you're not really given much guidance on how to accomplish the other flavors, with the exception of reskinning weapons for Wuxia and some guidance in the Workshop for "Crossing the Streams." Everything else points to products from prior edition or fiction, much of it outside of WotC.
I don't think there's a shell game being played by WotC, but their definition of "Heroic Fantasy" contains one very particular line which is where I disagree, and it's this one: Adventurers bring magical powers to bear against the monstrous threats they face.
Take out that one line, which I concede I either missed or overlooked, and Heroic Fantasy is 100% my jam. I don't think every class needs to have magical superpowers. I would personally call that "Superheroic Fantasy" - but your mileage may vary.
Am I the only one who doesn't see "Heroic" as automatically meaning "(nearly) all characters possess overt magical powers?" That certainly wasn't the Heroic Fantasy I grew up with.
Magical powers don't have to be innate, items can confer magical power too and D&D expects you to get them (see "Tiers of Play," DMG 37.) Champion Fighter and Thief Rogue don't possess magical powers, but they're expected to get magic items eventually.
It does feel like everything relies too heavily on magic at times, yeah. The biggest standout for me is the barbarian subclasses. The barbarian is THE class for "non-magical meat-head" characters, yet only a couple of its (2014) subclasses don't rely on some kind of magic or spirits. And two of those were absolute crap in the 2014 version (berserker and battle rager), so the selection was just about nil.
Yeah. Seeing a magical barbarian made the grognard in me twitch. In 1e, barbarians got xp for destroying magic items, by golly. (Spoiler: I got over it.) But on topic, no, I don’t mind the aesthetic. This has always been a modular game you can make into anything. Low magic has always been a challenge. It’s more of one now than in some earlier editions, but it doesn’t bother me.
Take out that one line, which I concede I either missed or overlooked, and Heroic Fantasy is 100% my jam. I don't think every class needs to have magical superpowers. I would personally call that "Superheroic Fantasy" - but your mileage may vary.
Whether or not it's really part of "heroic fantasy," "everything is a little magic" is a very natural consequence of the utter dominance of spellcasting, the ultra-flexible spell list, and the magic-using classes that has existed in D&D across several editions (and very clearly exists in 5e). Honestly, it's nice to see the rulebooks not only acknowledge this, but design for it.
I don't think heroic fantasy has to have all characters be magical. On the other hand, most of the time it does. Even LotR, which isn't all that heroic etc but is quite low magic, most of the main characters have some kind of magic, even if low key (and perhaps not even really seen in the story itself).
The Barbarian in particular, seems to have changed. In 5e, the archetype covers an awful lot of ground in terms of concepts covered - a lot of which inherently includes magic. I can see how that conflicts with how posters on this thread present older edition ideas of the class (which is how I used to see the class), but I'd argue that the Barbarian, to function how they want it to in 5e, needs at least some Subclasses to utilise magic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
So, I didn't really know where else to put this other than general...
There's a section in the 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide that talks about the various "flavors of fantasy" you can play with D&D. But as things have gone on, and clearly as we move into the 2024 books, it's becoming clear that the designers have clearly leaned in to the "High Fantasy" aesthetic. Sure, you can play swashbuckling campaigns, or embrace horror or dark fantasy vibe, but at the end of the day, D&D has become a game of "superhero fantasy." And nowhere is that clearer than in the plethora of magical powers being baked in to to the new class and ancestry options.
The game has just become overly reliant on magic. Everything is magic, everyone gets magic.
It all just feels like the designers are telling those of us who want less "over-the-top fantasy" in our settings to just go play something else.
Is it just me?
I think you may do yourself a disservice and distort how you will receive and interpret all the responses here if you start the conversation with the assumption that WotC is trying to hurt you or get rid of you.
Take out that one line, which I concede I either missed or overlooked, and Heroic Fantasy is 100% my jam. I don't think every class needs to have magical superpowers. I would personally call that "Superheroic Fantasy" - but your mileage may vary.
Whether or not it's really part of "heroic fantasy," "everything is a little magic" is a very natural consequence of the utter dominance of spellcasting, the ultra-flexible spell list, and the magic-using classes that has existed in D&D across several editions (and very clearly exists in 5e). Honestly, it's nice to see the rulebooks not only acknowledge this, but design for it.
This right here. I think there are two main issues at work here:
Game balance. At level 1, a wizard is zapping with cantrips and a barbarian is swinging his axe. At level 20, a wizard is raining down a storm of meteors over entire towns and the barbarian is... swinging his axe two times. You gotta give martials enough to not be complete wastes of time at high levels, and that means moving beyond the bounds of regular human physical limits. If you're mad about it, blame spellcasters.
Game design. 5e really likes modular solutions. Instead of making a spell called Speak to Animals and then giving a nature-themed barbarian a class feature that descrbies how they can speak to animals, they just say the barbarian gets a spell. It's just cleaner and easier design. As a player, I have never described these kinds of things as spells at the table. They are just a bundle of rules that were more convenient to present in a particular way. I'm not saying this is the best way, just that it makes sense from the standpoint of a game designer.
I also think it's just a consequence of the industry becoming more crowded. D&D has picked the niche they are best at and doubled down on it. Other systems do low magic better - including past versions of D&D - if that's what you want.
It has been a large part of the game for 50 years, if you are surprised by this you didn't do your due diligence. You are welcome to leave out and/or add anything you like at your table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
At level 20, a wizard is raining down a storm of meteors over entire towns and the barbarian is... swinging his axe two times.
I can't speak to your level 20 Barbarians, but mine have done things like:
Forcing enemies to fight each other
Being literally impossible to kill
Growing to Huge size and wrestling dragons
Flying up to enemies to grapple them in midair
Giving the entire party Dodge
And all that is (a) before magic items/feats and (b) is the old Barbarian which is even worse than the one we're getting in a couple months that can do things like teleport. Yeah, calling down meteors is impressive... but if I wanted to do that, I wouldn't be playing a martial class anyway.
Game design. 5e really likes modular solutions. Instead of making a spell called Speak to Animals and then giving a nature-themed barbarian a class feature that descrbies how they can speak to animals, they just say the barbarian gets a spell. It's just cleaner and easier design.
I agree with this, but I don't see what's so bad about calling a spade a spade either. Yes, Totem Warrior Barbarians can cast a (riitual) spell. So can a Champion Fighter with Ritual Caster or Magic Initiate. There's no reason for me to pretend they're doing something else.
I also think it's just a consequence of the industry becoming more crowded. D&D has picked the niche they are best at and doubled down on it. Other systems do low magic better - including past versions of D&D - if that's what you want.
Past versions do high-magic better too. 5e has absolutely nothing on 3e when it comes to magic dominating everything, and 4e is only equal because everyone just straight up becomes gods if they play long enough.
Whether it's the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk its the same flavor of magic high fantasy only deference is Greyhawk elves are shorter by about 1 foot compared to Realms elves unless your talking about Greyhawks Valley Elves
It's always been a high fantasy so I feel like not wanting it in your game makes it hard to enjoy game. There plenty other more low fantasy systems to try
This. Right from 0e, this. Both aspects of it (that D&D is and always has been built for high fantasy and that other systems are better for low fantasy).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I didn't really know where else to put this other than general...
There's a section in the 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide that talks about the various "flavors of fantasy" you can play with D&D. But as things have gone on, and clearly as we move into the 2024 books, it's becoming clear that the designers have clearly leaned in to the "High Fantasy" aesthetic. Sure, you can play swashbuckling campaigns, or embrace horror or dark fantasy vibe, but at the end of the day, D&D has become a game of "superhero fantasy." And nowhere is that clearer than in the plethora of magical powers being baked in to to the new class and ancestry options.
The game has just become overly reliant on magic. Everything is magic, everyone gets magic.
It all just feels like the designers are telling those of us who want less "over-the-top fantasy" in our settings to just go play something else.
Is it just me?
To be honest, the major thing that 5e does well versus other game systems I've played is combat, and the standout part of that is the magic. D&D is known (outside of the hobby) for magic. It's part of its identity. I think it's found it's niche, I doubt it will be vacating it any time soon.
I do think D&D would be improved by upping it's game on other things. The social pillar could be much better. But I don't think magic is going anywhere anytime soon.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It does feel like everything relies too heavily on magic at times, yeah. The biggest standout for me is the barbarian subclasses. The barbarian is THE class for "non-magical meat-head" characters, yet only a couple of its (2014) subclasses don't rely on some kind of magic or spirits. And two of those were absolute crap in the 2014 version (berserker and battle rager), so the selection was just about nil.
It's always been a high fantasy so I feel like not wanting it in your game makes it hard to enjoy game. There plenty other more low fantasy systems to try
I mean, there's no shell game being played in the DMG, it's very upfront in Flavor's of Fantasy, (bold, mine)
So the game _presumes_ heroic fantasy. In the rest of the Flavors Chapter, you're not really given much guidance on how to accomplish the other flavors, with the exception of reskinning weapons for Wuxia and some guidance in the Workshop for "Crossing the Streams." Everything else points to products from prior edition or fiction, much of it outside of WotC.
That said, I'd say WotC didn't entirely abandon the notion of flavors in followup products. Ravensloft definitely gave some good guidance on running a wide range of Dark Fantasy. You get your mythic effort in Theros. Strixhaven was definitely something. They eventually do their own Dragonlance, though the adaptation to "epic fantasy" was pretty minimal. Ravenica, arguably Eberon etc., (and Strixhaven to an extend) gave you intrigue. I should say none of that support was promised in the DMG, but I think it's cool those efforts were made.
Am I bothered by any of this? Having read what the book actually says, no. It's pretty clear what sort of fantasy D&D's default support will be for. Would it have been cool to have more robust supports for the other flavors, sure. But I think a lot of third party presses may have beaten them to the punch as 5e's designers tried to figure out the best trajectory for the product line.
I am curious about Greyhawk being the default or demo setting provided in the DMG. Greyhawk never struck me as the Heroic Fantasy setting that say Forgotten Realms provided. There was powerful magic, but it wasn't as common as magic has evolved on Faerun. But I've yet to read the Vecna book, so I have no idea what, if anything, 5e Greyhawk looks like yet.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
As MidnightPlat stated, the game is very up front in telling you that D&D assumes Heroic Fantasy. Do you have to go play something else if you don't want that? Of course not, and the DMG itself says so, but it also says you'll probably have to roll up your sleeves and put some work in on your own if you don't want that. They have to aim the game at something, trying to capture every flavor of fantasy right in the core product would be immensely foolish of them to try.
As MidnightPlat also stated, other settings exist to help you try to realize the other flavors. We got Dark Fantasy and Horror vibes in Ravenloft, Pulp Fantasy/Magepunk in Eberron, Fantasy War in Dragonlance, and we'll probably one day get Sword & Sorcery vibes from Dark Sun or Wuxia if we ever end up back at Rokugan or Kara-Tur. But even those products can't build an entirely new fantasy for you from scratch, you need to put some work in to ban game elements or encourage others to hit your desired theme/flavor well.
I don't think there's a shell game being played by WotC, but their definition of "Heroic Fantasy" contains one very particular line which is where I disagree, and it's this one: Adventurers bring magical powers to bear against the monstrous threats they face.
Take out that one line, which I concede I either missed or overlooked, and Heroic Fantasy is 100% my jam. I don't think every class needs to have magical superpowers. I would personally call that "Superheroic Fantasy" - but your mileage may vary.
Am I the only one who doesn't see "Heroic" as automatically meaning "(nearly) all characters possess overt magical powers?" That certainly wasn't the Heroic Fantasy I grew up with.
Is it just me?
I like the high fantasy and am hopeful we will finally get good crafting rules from the new DMG.
TO DEFEND: THIS IS THE PACT.
BUT WHEN LIFE LOSES ITS VALUE,
AND IS TAKEN FOR NAUGHT-
THEN THE PACT IS, TO AVENGE.
Magical powers don't have to be innate, items can confer magical power too and D&D expects you to get them (see "Tiers of Play," DMG 37.) Champion Fighter and Thief Rogue don't possess magical powers, but they're expected to get magic items eventually.
Yeah. Seeing a magical barbarian made the grognard in me twitch. In 1e, barbarians got xp for destroying magic items, by golly. (Spoiler: I got over it.)
But on topic, no, I don’t mind the aesthetic. This has always been a modular game you can make into anything. Low magic has always been a challenge. It’s more of one now than in some earlier editions, but it doesn’t bother me.
Whether or not it's really part of "heroic fantasy," "everything is a little magic" is a very natural consequence of the utter dominance of spellcasting, the ultra-flexible spell list, and the magic-using classes that has existed in D&D across several editions (and very clearly exists in 5e). Honestly, it's nice to see the rulebooks not only acknowledge this, but design for it.
I don't think heroic fantasy has to have all characters be magical. On the other hand, most of the time it does. Even LotR, which isn't all that heroic etc but is quite low magic, most of the main characters have some kind of magic, even if low key (and perhaps not even really seen in the story itself).
The Barbarian in particular, seems to have changed. In 5e, the archetype covers an awful lot of ground in terms of concepts covered - a lot of which inherently includes magic. I can see how that conflicts with how posters on this thread present older edition ideas of the class (which is how I used to see the class), but I'd argue that the Barbarian, to function how they want it to in 5e, needs at least some Subclasses to utilise magic.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think you may do yourself a disservice and distort how you will receive and interpret all the responses here if you start the conversation with the assumption that WotC is trying to hurt you or get rid of you.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Agree with OP... Everything is too reliant on magic. Multiclassing everything 50 different ways and meta gaming is also ruining DnD.
This right here. I think there are two main issues at work here:
I also think it's just a consequence of the industry becoming more crowded. D&D has picked the niche they are best at and doubled down on it. Other systems do low magic better - including past versions of D&D - if that's what you want.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
i enjoy a high fantasy game alot and its what DnD was built around tho i think DnD can also work really well as a low fantasy game too
It has been a large part of the game for 50 years, if you are surprised by this you didn't do your due diligence. You are welcome to leave out and/or add anything you like at your table.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
I can't speak to your level 20 Barbarians, but mine have done things like:
And all that is (a) before magic items/feats and (b) is the old Barbarian which is even worse than the one we're getting in a couple months that can do things like teleport. Yeah, calling down meteors is impressive... but if I wanted to do that, I wouldn't be playing a martial class anyway.
I agree with this, but I don't see what's so bad about calling a spade a spade either. Yes, Totem Warrior Barbarians can cast a (riitual) spell. So can a Champion Fighter with Ritual Caster or Magic Initiate. There's no reason for me to pretend they're doing something else.
Past versions do high-magic better too. 5e has absolutely nothing on 3e when it comes to magic dominating everything, and 4e is only equal because everyone just straight up becomes gods if they play long enough.
Whether it's the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk its the same flavor of magic high fantasy only deference is Greyhawk elves are shorter by about 1 foot compared to Realms elves unless your talking about Greyhawks Valley Elves
This. Right from 0e, this. Both aspects of it (that D&D is and always has been built for high fantasy and that other systems are better for low fantasy).