Do you know what humans did when they wanted to hunt megafauna (rhinos, lions, tigers, elephants, etc)?

Did they:

1. Fight it upfront in a head-on battle
2. Lay traps, bleed it out, generally avoid direct conflict where possible

No 2. is how humans have hunted elephants, mammoths, and other megafauna during our time on Earth. No 1. is suicide and anyone who did it would soon perish. An elephant would kill medieval knights, let alone Paleolithic hunter-gatherers.

And yet DND and other games in its vein have you fight dragons and other creatures who could easily kill any real-world megafauna (even blue-whale sized Sauropods) in No 1. style. Confusingly, they also say that martials- the people expected to walk up to and kill these monsters by essentially whacking them and withstanding getting whacked until one dies- are normal humans who couldn't lift a ton without magical gear.

This is implausible. Either you are a normal human, and so have to resort to indirect means to kill a dragon (for instance, poisoning their food, making pit traps that collapse into a bed of spikes when they land, using magic to weaken them, staying far away and so on) or you can kill a dragon in an upfront battle, in which case you are superhuman. Generally, the bigger and nastier relative to real-world animals the monsters are, the more unbelievable that normal humans can do anything to them. It would make for a boring RPG if done poorly.

'You encounter a dragon.'

'I attack!' *rolls die*

'Your sword bounces off its steel-hard scales and is bent to uselessness. It squashes you and the rest of your party with one stomp.'

Even if the fighter had a supernatural sword- unless it has some sort of ability that ignores physical size and strength (poison that always works, sending people to other dimensions, being able to cut through anything) they'll be limited by their normal human strength.

This could work in a game where you're expected to either run away or talk things out most of the time or other underhanded methods...this is not the game DND and its derivatives are. The solution (in my eyes) is to basically recognize the consequences of superhuman strength (or durability, or speed), and build your challenges around those constraints. Dungeons should be built for people who can withstand being smacked around by an Ankylosaurus, who can punch through stone walls (as a result of having the strength to cut up megafauna).

This gets worse if the giant monsters can make a modern military exert effort to take them down, btw. If Orcus can force a country like say, France, to use missiles, tanks, and planes- or even NUKES, either the party has to trick Orcus somehow or make his strengths not apply in some other way, or they are ridiculously superhuman and can fight him on even terms.

You mentioned dragons when describing megafauna. You do know that dragons are fantastical beasts right? Also, high level adventurers are far from normal humans. We are dealing with a fantasy game. In case you forgot what fantasy means go look it up and get back to us.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on September 29, 2023, 07:54:59 PM
You mentioned dragons when describing megafauna. You do know that dragons are fantastical beasts right? Also, high level adventurers are far from normal humans. We are dealing with a fantasy game. In case you forgot what fantasy means go look it up and get back to us.

mega = large

fauna = animals

dragons = large animals

I don't see why they're not megafauna. Fantastical megafauna, but still megafauna.

And I know that martials aren't normal humans. The problem is that they are superhuman in one field only - killing huge monsters. They cannot, say, use the same strength that their main sthick needs in order to pick up a rock and send it flying through a row of 300 soldiers. Or leap 200 meters in the air to knock down an airship. Or break down the gates of a castle. Pretty standard mythology stuff. Lancelot, for instance, could easily pick up a boulder that 10 men struggled to even move off the ground.

I have two different responses. Feel free to skip to the second one as being more useful. 

The first one is: if you're writing fairy tales, don't quibble about talking teddy bears. (That's a [mis]quote.)

The second one is: in our homebrew, one option you can take for your character is "act on large scale". Most characters are "small scale". Acting on Large Scale lets you do kaiju-sized movement and kaiju-strength attacks.

Quote from: Tod13 on September 29, 2023, 08:16:30 PM
I have two different responses. Feel free to skip to the second one as being more useful. 

The first one is: if you're writing fairy tales, don't quibble about talking teddy bears. (That's a [mis]quote.)

The second one is: in our homebrew, one option you can take for your character is "act on large scale". Most characters are "small scale". Acting on Large Scale lets you do kaiju-sized movement and kaiju-strength attacks.

my first response is that this is totally fair. i wouldn't bring this up in a casual conversation. but for people that care about the consistency of their worlds like I do (not implying that this is either good or bad), it might be useful for them.

the second response is that I want to see your homebrew, I'm curious. DM me please.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 07:23:07 PMAn elephant would kill medieval knights, let alone Paleolithic hunter-gatherers.

Medieval knights didn't get an extra 1d10 hit points each level. They also didn't have rings of invisibility of potions of healing.

Have you ever played D&D? Read Beowulf, or heard of Sigurd?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on September 29, 2023, 09:27:17 PM

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 07:23:07 PMAn elephant would kill medieval knights, let alone Paleolithic hunter-gatherers.

Medieval knights didn't get an extra 1d10 hit points each level. They also didn't have rings of invisibility of potions of healing.

Have you ever played D&D? Read Beowulf, or heard of Sigurd?

So, in other words, you agree with me that DND mid-to-high level martials are superhuman. The problem I have is that this superhuman ability applies to one narrow field- taking and receiving damage- and no others. A monk with the leg strength to do anything to an elephant with a kick could also kick right through walls, wooden or even stone, or leap over 50 foot walls in one go. Using a specific build in a specific edition (5th edition), one Polearm Master fighter who could cleave through an elephant in one hit with 120 damage could also entirely derail historic battles like the Battle of Hastings or the battle of Alesia.

Essentially, what I'm saying boils down to 'Apply this superhuman strength elsewhere, then make challenges around that' if you care about consistency. DND fails this because it pretends its characters are 'human+' who would worry about things like nonmagical stone walls in their way.

Maybe I haven't been playing AD&D2e the last 3+ years then, we encountered a Dragon, talked with it and didn't fight.

Right now we struck a deal with Storm Giants to help them get a McGuffin in exchange for their help with dealing with a Lich.

Yes, we're 10/11th level characters (I'm the wizard), but humans (and humanoids) greatest weapòn has always been their mind.

Unless I plan on leveling the whole city not destroying the walls that protect it seems like a good idea to me.

So we infiltrate without destruction saving our strenght for when it is needed and will help on accomplishing our goals.

Now, granted I have never played 5e (and don't plan to), but I think your problem is more with noob GMs/Players than the game itself.

As for a Monk that could hurt and elephant with one kick... Maybe it's just me but I would totally let him hit a wall and see what the dice say. Thing is a smart player won't do that unless it's a desperate thing, because there's always the chance of breaking your leg, at least in good games with good GMs, no idea about 5e.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 29, 2023, 10:25:09 PM
Maybe I haven't been playing AD&D2e the last 3+ years then, we encountered a Dragon, talked with it and didn't fight.

Right now we struck a deal with Storm Giants to help them get a McGuffin in exchange for their help with dealing with a Lich.

Yes, we're 10/11th level characters (I'm the wizard), but humans (and humanoids) greatest weapòn has always been their mind.

Unless I plan on leveling the whole city not destroying the walls that protect it seems like a good idea to me.

So we infiltrate without destruction saving our strenght for when it is needed and will help on accomplishing our goals.

Now, granted I have never played 5e (and don't plan to), but I think your problem is more with noob GMs/Players than the game itself.

As for a Monk that could hurt and elephant with one kick... Maybe it's just me but I would totally let him hit a wall and see what the dice say. Thing is a smart player won't do that unless it's a desperate thing, because there's always the chance of breaking your leg, at least in good games with good GMs, no idea about 5e.

Considering the nature of a TTRPG, it is perfectly acceptable to have differing opinions on how grounded the world is. You tend to side on the more fantastical side, that's fine. Breaking your leg doesn't make sense from a physics perspective, but from a game and world perspective, it can work. All that matters is that the superhuman strength is at least accounted for in fields where it should apply. If you want to play a DND campaign where people talk or run their way through scenarios that would be lethal to 99% of humanity because they're at a normal human level at level 20, sure, you do you, but you should try to alter the rules in accordance with that.

I brought this up because the people here tend to talk about how 'wokeness' makes a game world not make sense. I thought- what about other things not as politically heated?

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 10:30:04 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 29, 2023, 10:25:09 PM
Maybe I haven't been playing AD&D2e the last 3+ years then, we encountered a Dragon, talked with it and didn't fight.

Right now we struck a deal with Storm Giants to help them get a McGuffin in exchange for their help with dealing with a Lich.

Yes, we're 10/11th level characters (I'm the wizard), but humans (and humanoids) greatest weapòn has always been their mind.

Unless I plan on leveling the whole city not destroying the walls that protect it seems like a good idea to me.

So we infiltrate without destruction saving our strenght for when it is needed and will help on accomplishing our goals.

Now, granted I have never played 5e (and don't plan to), but I think your problem is more with noob GMs/Players than the game itself.

As for a Monk that could hurt and elephant with one kick... Maybe it's just me but I would totally let him hit a wall and see what the dice say. Thing is a smart player won't do that unless it's a desperate thing, because there's always the chance of breaking your leg, at least in good games with good GMs, no idea about 5e.

Considering the nature of a TTRPG, it is perfectly acceptable to have differing opinions on how grounded the world is. You tend to side on the more fantastical side, that's fine. Breaking your leg doesn't make sense from a physics perspective, but from a game and world perspective, it can work. All that matters is that the superhuman strength is at least accounted for in fields where it should apply. If you want to play a DND campaign where people talk or run their way through scenarios that would be lethal to 99% of humanity because they're at a normal human level at level 20, sure, you do you, but you should try to alter the rules in accordance with that.

I brought this up because the people here tend to talk about how 'wokeness' makes a game world not make sense. I thought- what about other things not as politically heated?

But is it strenght in the case of the Monk? I always thought it was Ki, something the PC needs to expend wisely.

Now, if there's a class where IT IS strength then yes, the PC should be able to use that strenght in ways not related to figthing. If I were the GM it would be a nobrainer to have Clark Kent be able to open the pickle jar because his strenght is the same regardles.

I've heard much about how 5e is ridiculously OP and you end up playing supers, which is actually true on all RPGs (almost, there's exceptions) on high levels. Which is why WBFMAG ten level cap is something I like, except when I WANT to play supers, but then D&D isn't my system of choice for that.

There's also the tried method of sending your PCs to other planes so they aren't so OP.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 29, 2023, 10:53:34 PM

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 10:30:04 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on September 29, 2023, 10:25:09 PM
Maybe I haven't been playing AD&D2e the last 3+ years then, we encountered a Dragon, talked with it and didn't fight.

Right now we struck a deal with Storm Giants to help them get a McGuffin in exchange for their help with dealing with a Lich.

Yes, we're 10/11th level characters (I'm the wizard), but humans (and humanoids) greatest weapòn has always been their mind.

Unless I plan on leveling the whole city not destroying the walls that protect it seems like a good idea to me.

So we infiltrate without destruction saving our strenght for when it is needed and will help on accomplishing our goals.

Now, granted I have never played 5e (and don't plan to), but I think your problem is more with noob GMs/Players than the game itself.

As for a Monk that could hurt and elephant with one kick... Maybe it's just me but I would totally let him hit a wall and see what the dice say. Thing is a smart player won't do that unless it's a desperate thing, because there's always the chance of breaking your leg, at least in good games with good GMs, no idea about 5e.

Considering the nature of a TTRPG, it is perfectly acceptable to have differing opinions on how grounded the world is. You tend to side on the more fantastical side, that's fine. Breaking your leg doesn't make sense from a physics perspective, but from a game and world perspective, it can work. All that matters is that the superhuman strength is at least accounted for in fields where it should apply. If you want to play a DND campaign where people talk or run their way through scenarios that would be lethal to 99% of humanity because they're at a normal human level at level 20, sure, you do you, but you should try to alter the rules in accordance with that.

I brought this up because the people here tend to talk about how 'wokeness' makes a game world not make sense. I thought- what about other things not as politically heated?

But is it strenght in the case of the Monk? I always thought it was Ki, something the PC needs to expend wisely.

Now, if there's a class where IT IS strength then yes, the PC should be able to use that strenght in ways not related to figthing. If I were the GM it would be a nobrainer to have Clark Kent be able to open the pickle jar because his strenght is the same regardles.

I've heard much about how 5e is ridiculously OP and you end up playing supers, which is actually true on all RPGs (almost, there's exceptions) on high levels. Which is why WBFMAG ten level cap is something I like, except when I WANT to play supers, but then D&D isn't my system of choice for that.

There's also the tried method of sending your PCs to other planes so they aren't so OP.

Yeah, that's something we agree on. I would say that Monk strength being raw strength or Ki depends on the GM, but then again I haven't looked too deeply into Monk lore to say anything with confidence.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 07:23:07 PM
Do you know what humans did when they wanted to hunt megafauna (rhinos, lions, tigers, elephants, etc)?

Did they:

1. Fight it upfront in a head-on battle
2. Lay traps, bleed it out, generally avoid direct conflict where possible

No 2. is how humans have hunted elephants, mammoths, and other megafauna during our time on Earth. No 1. is suicide and anyone who did it would soon perish. An elephant would kill medieval knights, let alone Paleolithic hunter-gatherers.

And yet DND and other games in its vein have you fight dragons and other creatures who could easily kill any real-world megafauna (even blue-whale sized Sauropods) in No 1. style.

Eh. The wording seems crafted to force your point.

From what I understand, the fossil evidence does indicate that hunters did inflict severe wounds to megafauna with weapons. I mean, technically that fits within #2 since you've worded it as a catch-all with "generally" and "where possible." But if I eliminate your framing, the bottom line is hunting megafauna still involved striking with and hurling weapons in an attempt to hit and cause damage. And so as a plain matter of fact, it meshes perfectly well with how most RPGs work.

QuoteConfusingly, they also say that martials- the people expected to walk up to and kill these monsters by essentially whacking them and withstanding getting whacked until one dies- are normal humans who couldn't lift a ton without magical gear.

This is implausible. Either you are a normal human, and so have to resort to indirect means to kill a dragon (for instance, poisoning their food, making pit traps that collapse into a bed of spikes when they land, using magic to weaken them, staying far away and so on) or you can kill a dragon in an upfront battle, in which case you are superhuman. Generally, the bigger and nastier relative to real-world animals the monsters are, the more unbelievable that normal humans can do anything to them. It would make for a boring RPG if done poorly.

I look at the mammoth stats in the original monster manual, which gets 5 attacks per round, each very likely to one-hit-kill a normal human, and I can't see clear where anyone would expect normal humans to withstand getting whacked. I mean I'm sure someone somewhere does. Weirdos gonna weirdo. But that's not an expectation the RPG sets.

An 8th level fighter, which the game literally considers a "superhero," with the magical accouterments one might expect for such a character, might be able to pull it off.

As for dragons, I'm inclined to think the situation is reversed. Dragons really do need to be played tactically to fully appreciate how powerful they really are. It's the dragon that doesn't want a straight-on fight.

Quote from: Lunamancer on September 30, 2023, 01:17:39 AM

Quote from: MeganovaStella on September 29, 2023, 07:23:07 PM
Do you know what humans did when they wanted to hunt megafauna (rhinos, lions, tigers, elephants, etc)?

Did they:

1. Fight it upfront in a head-on battle
2. Lay traps, bleed it out, generally avoid direct conflict where possible

No 2. is how humans have hunted elephants, mammoths, and other megafauna during our time on Earth. No 1. is suicide and anyone who did it would soon perish. An elephant would kill medieval knights, let alone Paleolithic hunter-gatherers.

And yet DND and other games in its vein have you fight dragons and other creatures who could easily kill any real-world megafauna (even blue-whale sized Sauropods) in No 1. style.

Eh. The wording seems crafted to force your point.

From what I understand, the fossil evidence does indicate that hunters did inflict severe wounds to megafauna with weapons. I mean, technically that fits within #2 since you've worded it as a catch-all with "generally" and "where possible." But if I eliminate your framing, the bottom line is hunting megafauna still involved striking with and hurling weapons in an attempt to hit and cause damage. And so as a plain matter of fact, it meshes perfectly well with how most RPGs work.

QuoteConfusingly, they also say that martials- the people expected to walk up to and kill these monsters by essentially whacking them and withstanding getting whacked until one dies- are normal humans who couldn't lift a ton without magical gear.

This is implausible. Either you are a normal human, and so have to resort to indirect means to kill a dragon (for instance, poisoning their food, making pit traps that collapse into a bed of spikes when they land, using magic to weaken them, staying far away and so on) or you can kill a dragon in an upfront battle, in which case you are superhuman. Generally, the bigger and nastier relative to real-world animals the monsters are, the more unbelievable that normal humans can do anything to them. It would make for a boring RPG if done poorly.

I look at the mammoth stats in the original monster manual, which gets 5 attacks per round, each very likely to one-hit-kill a normal human, and I can't see clear where anyone would expect normal humans to withstand getting whacked. I mean I'm sure someone somewhere does. Weirdos gonna weirdo. But that's not an expectation the RPG sets.

An 8th-level fighter, which the game literally considers a "superhero," with the magical accouterments one might expect for such a character, might be able to pull it off.

As for dragons, I'm inclined to think the situation is reversed. Dragons really do need to be played tactically to fully appreciate how powerful they really are. It's the dragon that doesn't want a straight-on fight.

Fair enough. You are far more experienced in older editions of DND than I am, so I defer to you in that respect. I will mention that the bigger the animal is, the farther normal humans stay away from it and the more they use traps, according to https://www.earthdate.org/episodes/mammoth-traps

There's also a video on Youtube of Africans spearing young elephants. I don't think it's safe to share here.

MeganovaStella, you should look into a system like Chaosium's Rune Quest/Basic Role Playing, where characters have the same amount of hit points throughout their life.  What got better was their ability to block and dodge attacks. 

With bravery and ingenuity humans can still overcome large creatures.  Just like Roman Legions overcame Cartheginian elephant cavalry by forming channels for the elephants to run through while the legionaries attacked the sides and flanks of the elephants.

A single hero would have to lure a creature like a dragon into a trap, sort of like how Luke Skywalker dropped a portcullis onto the Rancor's head in Return of the Jedi, or how Sigurd of the Volsungs hid himself in a pit and waited for the dragon Fafnir to slither overhead then thrust his sword in between its scales from below. 

Beowulf was a superhero who could rip the arm off of a troll and wrestle with whales, so maybe he did actually step up to face a dragon to-to-toe.  He still died though.

Then there's magic and technology.  A sword or spear might not do much to a fifty foot long dragon, but a bolt of lightning, or a ballista might take it down.