What should a mundane combatant be able to do?

[Talakeal]

I have seen a number of threads talking about where exactly the line should be drawn for a mundane character. How to power them up without turning them into re-fluffed casters* or shonen anime characters. What (in combat) abilities would you give your ideal fighter?

As an example; in my homebrew OSR game this is the current list of combat maneuvers. If you have a moment please look it over and tell me if it has anything missing or something that doesn't belong:

Spoiler

Show

All of these abilities are available to all martial characters. Each can be used without penalty once each round, and a character can perform multiple maneuvers in a given round a limited number of times per combat. Feats can be taken to improve any of these maneuvers, but they all perfectly viable without doing so, its a bonus not a requirement. Some moves require a certain weapon type or receive bonuses if a certain weapon is used.

Trade damage for increased accuracy.
Trade accuracy for Increased damage.
Trade movement for increased damage or accuracy.
Disarm enemy
Shove enemy
Stun enemy
Trip enemy
Sunder enemy's equipment
Sneak attack an unaware foe for increased damage or accuracy.
Called shot to a specific body part imposing ability penalties or status conditions based on the location.
Charge
Cheap Shot
Cleave though multiple enemies with one attack
Smash through an obstacle
Incur bleeding damage over time
Hold a helpless hostage
Feint
Strike at an enemies weapon as they attack with a longer reach
Attack multiple enemies at once
Defend against a particular maneuver on the opponent's part
Grapple
Gruesome Blow which intimidates enemies
Guard an ally
Weaken an enemy so that an ally can strike the weak spot
Spring Attack
Lunge for a temporary bonus to reach
Guard an area
Draw an enemy's attention
Form a Phalanx with allies
Pommel Strike
Trade AC for increased accuracy or damage
Parry for a temporary boost to AC
Shield Block for a temporary boost to DR
Throw Weapon
Volley with a bow
Struggle without any free limbs
Attack recklessly into a crowd

*: By this I mean giving them blatantly paranormal abilities or artificial meta-game limitations like semi-vancian abilities that come in levels and can be used once per day and are then forgotten.

[Morty]

It largely depends on the power level and realism the game is supposed to be shooting for. But in general, at least a few different ways of getting past enemy defences and prevent the enemy from doing the same are a minimum, for me. How the system accomplishes that is a different question altogether.

[Scow2]

Well... to me, there are two archetypes of Mundane Combatants: Fighters and rogues.

A fighter should be able to lock down a battlefield by engaging everyone at once, and punishing people who try to disengage (Who he doesn't want to disengage) Whether this is the sword+board fighter who holds the line against his foes, the two-handed brute always on the lookout to see who he can cut down next, or the battledancer that throws himself into the fray, gracefully dodging attacks that focus on him, and cutting down anyone who takes their eyes off of him. Or, the archer that covers the entire battlefield in arrows unless his foes take cover, raining death on anyone who dares to be in the center.

A fighter also needs more direct means of control - knocking people around, down, and interrupting actions (And forcing them to actually lose an action) A fighter also needs ways to "Just Say No" to spells and control effects. In some ways, he's also comparable to a cleric in this regard, by being able to increase party survivability of big threats.

A rogue, on the other hand, should be able to flit around a battlefield as a slippery, impossible-to-pin-down combatant... and also be good at control as well. However, instead of controlling the battlefield by knocking people around or engaging them, his control is in painfully punishing people for making mistakes and leaving themselves open... and those that do leave themselves open find themselves quickly dispatched. The rogue is supposed to be a force multiplier, like a more flexible but less raw power Wizard, able to pull out just the right wildcard on the enemies to screw them over when he needs it.

Not coincidentally, I find the 4e Fighter and 5e Rogue to both be excellent.

[Tengu_temp]

By "turning them into re-fluffed casters", do you mean "giving them ToB-style maneuvers"? Because that's both faulty terminology (there's nothing magical about maneuvers except the misconception that anything non-standard has to be magic) and honestly the best way to make sure warrior-types are fun to play if you ask me.

[Talakeal]

By "turning them into re-fluffed casters", do you mean "giving them ToB-style maneuvers"? Because that's both faulty terminology (there's nothing magical about maneuvers except the misconception that anything non-standard has to be magic) and honestly the best way to make sure warrior-types are fun to play if you ask me.

Its a continuum. War Blades and 4E fighters are certainly closer to magic users than previous melee characters, what with having multiple levels of powers that they forget after use, but they aren't magical.

Some of the ToB maneuvers are certainly "magical" such as teleporting conjuring fire, or healing people with bursts of holy energy, arguing that they are not magical because they are not defined as "spells" is purely arguing semantics. They are also called "Blade Magic" and (mostly) go away in an anti-magic field, so the author of the book seems to consider them magic.

One could certainly go further than ToB or 4E did, for example mimicking spells exactly and slightly changing the fluff; say giving a fighter the fireball spell and saying it is caused by him stomping his foot so hard it creates an explosion or allowing him to teleport by cutting a whole in the fabric of space, or even allowing him to shoot magic missiles and say he is channeling his Ki.


But what do you mean by "non-standard"?

If you mean supernatural abilities that blatantly violate known laws of physics or impose artificial meta game impositions on characters than it seems to me you are saying that the best way to make a mundane character fun is to make them no longer a mundane character that isn't really a helpful solution.

While playing such a character might be fun for you, I assure you it isn't fun for me, people have different tastes.
I have one friend who loves RPGs, but flat out refuses to play one where you can't be a wizard like Alternity or Aces and Eights because he can't wrap his head around a mundane character.
At the same time my father loves action movies, but won't watch super-hero movies or urban fantasy movies because "Its all a bunch of bull****."

[OverdrivePrime]

I totally agree with Tengu_temp and Scow2 regarding TOB and being able to 'just say no' to magic. Iron Heart SURGE - it's not just a maneuver, it's a way of life.

To extend the list:
Move quickly to interrupt an enemy's attack
Ignore pain in order to fight efficiently
Become nigh-impervious to pain and torture
Break through magical barriers with either strength, precision, or pure disdain
Shake off mind control
Shake off poison
Coordinate battlefield tactics
Inspire allies
Cow foes
Go berserk
Appraise weapons and armor
Repair weapons and armor
Care for battlefield animals
Look awesomely heroic while getting beaten down
Ignore death long enough for a last speech
Ignore death long enough for a retributive strike
Specialize in a signature technique
Create new fighting styles
Excel at combating certain kinds of foes
Recognize foes by their fighting style

Have something useful to contribute when the fighting's over

[Mr Beer]

"mundane" how? Realistic in a real world sense or over the top but just not "magical"?

[Thrudd]

I have seen a number of threads talking about where exactly the line should be drawn for a mundane character. How to power them up without turning them into re-fluffed casters or shonen anime characters. What (in combat) abilities would you give your ideal fighter?

As an example; in my homebrew OSR game this is the current list of combat maneuvers. If you have a moment please look it over and tell me if it has anything missing or something that doesn't belong:

Spoiler

Show

All of these abilities are available to all martial characters. Each can be used without penalty once each round, and a character can perform multiple maneuvers in a given round a limited number of times per combat. Feats can be taken to improve any of these maneuvers, but they all perfectly viable without doing so, its a bonus not a requirement. Some moves require a certain weapon type or receive bonuses if a certain weapon is used.

Trade damage for increased accuracy.
Trade accuracy for Increased damage.
Trade movement for increased damage or accuracy.
Disarm enemy
Shove enemy
Stun enemy
Trip enemy
Sunder enemy's equipment
Sneak attack an unaware foe for increased damage or accuracy.
Called shot to a specific body part imposing ability penalties or status conditions based on the location.
Charge
Cheap Shot
Cleave though multiple enemies with one attack
Smash through an obstacle
Incur bleeding damage over time
Hold a helpless hostage
Feint
Strike at an enemies weapon as they attack with a longer reach
Attack multiple enemies at once
Defend against a particular maneuver on the opponent's part
Grapple
Gruesome Blow which intimidates enemies
Guard an ally
Weaken an enemy so that an ally can strike the weak spot
Spring Attack
Lunge for a temporary bonus to reach
Guard an area
Draw an enemy's attention
Form a Phalanx with allies
Pommel Strike
Trade AC for increased accuracy or damage
Parry for a temporary boost to AC
Shield Block for a temporary boost to DR
Throw Weapon
Volley with a bow
Struggle without any free limbs
Attack recklessly into a crowd

Far too long of a list for an old school game, IMO, at least if you intend all these things to have specific mechanics associated with them. We're delving into 3e/4e territory with an entire book full of feats and abilities and combats which take hours to play out due to all the options and rules for specific actions. Also, the disassociated mechanic of specifying a limit on maneuvers per encounter and per round is not something you'd find in an OSR game.
Not that it is wrong to do this, but this feels more like a hybrid 3e/4e thing versus going back to AD&D and BECMI (which is what OSR is).

I can see the argument to give non-magical combatants more tactical options. It is certainly possible to do this on an OSR framework, but I feel like less is more in this case. Many of the things you describe are things that don't need mechanics to describe them (guarding an area, fighting in a phalanx, hold a hostage, draw an enemy's attention). Certainly have rules for knocking down/immobilizing opponents, pushing/forcing opponents to move where you want them, nonlethal combat, attacking gear/equipment, but they shouldn't be limited per encounter or per day. The only limit should be the actual physical ability of the character (and the number of actions you can make in a combat round per the game rules).

Another question to consider is also the scale and detail which you want the rules to handle. It wasn't until 3e that the game changed to assume that each roll of the dice represented a single movement or action of the character.

In AD&D and Basic, the combat round is meant to include many inconsequential feints and parries and springing and lunging and blocking activities during which one decisive action will occur. So to include martial maneuvers in an OSR game, you would want to describe them as a general goal the character is trying to achieve over the course of the combat round (which can be up to 1 minute long).
"Attack to do damage" is the default goal, and the roll of the die determines whether you're successful at it. We can add more to the list of actions/goals that will be keyed to the characters' fighting ability, like "push them back", "keep them from moving", "knock them down", "sunder the weapon", "disarm". There is already the "parry" action which lets you defend instead of attacking, and "do non-lethal damage (which could be pommel strike, flat of the blade, kicking and punching, whatever way you want to describe it).

Some other actions could be keyed to specific weapons or weapon types, and allow either additional types of actions or one-time use abilities. Already there is the ability to set a spear or polearm against a charge, giving you extra damage, as well as the polearm's extra reach and ability to attack first against a shorter weapon. Another might be the "spinter shield" rule we were talking about in another thread, where you can choose to sacrifice your shield to cancel a successful attack. You could even let a fighter use this ability on an ally that is close enough to them. We might be able to think of a few other weapon specific abilities or modifiers to combat, like extra damage in specific situations or the ability to break another weapon.

My goal would be to use no disassociated mechanics (per day/per encounter abilities, spending points or interacting with any meta-game constructs the characters themselves would not be aware of), while giving more tactical combat options that let fighters control the battle.

[erikun]

What should a character with a mundane sword be able to do? They should be able to kill an opponent within their weapon range with a single strike. They should be able to pin down an opponent's weapon and defense with the right maneuver. They should be able to, with enough skill and accuracy, fire a shot that that would ignore dodge and armor on an unaware opponent.

Of course, D&D tends to be a game where killing a target in one hit is frowned upon. Even if it would be reasonable.

As for the game, you probably want: move opponent, knockdown opponent, stun opponent, pin weapon/shield (or both). I'd also give them some method of repositioning (i.e. five foot step) as part of an attack, specifically so that spellcasting doesn't get the benefit from it. I'd be inclined to possibly allow the "spend a round aiming and ignore armor AC when attacking an unaware opponent" in some manner, which might make both Fighters and Thieves happy.

There might also be worth allowing the Fighter class to learn different weapon arts as part of their training. That is, while the Cleric can pick up a sword and swing/stab with it, the Fighter is actually skilled with using the weapon. Not sure if martial arts is something that you're interested in working out, though.

[Talakeal]

"mundane" how? Realistic in a real world sense or over the top but just not "magical"?

Someone who would classify under:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BadassNormal

Someone along the lines of Conan, Aragorn, King Arthur, Madmartigan; a pulp hero like James Bond or Indiana Jones, or a comic book character along the lines of Batman or Captain America (in their more down to Earth incarnations).

List of Good Stuff

I agree that all of those are necessary things for a mundane character to have, although not necessarily on the same character. Some of them scream monk, barbarian, or marshal rather than pure "fighter", and I don't think they are necessary for ALL melee combatants to have.

Far too long of a list for an old school game, IMO, at least if you intend all these things to have specific mechanics associated with them. We're delving into 3e/4e territory with an entire book full of feats and abilities and combats which take hours to play out due to all the options and rules for specific actions. Also, the disassociated mechanic of specifying a limit on maneuvers per encounter and per round is not something you'd find in an OSR game.
Not that it is wrong to do this, but this feels more like a hybrid 3e/4e thing versus going back to AD&D and BECMI (which is what OSR is).

OSR it hard to define. My system plays like a cross between 2E WHFRP and 1E Exalted. It is certainly has a pre millennial feel to it, and thus most people call it old school, but such a debate tends to sidetrack threads, so I just label it OSR and let it go for the time being.

[OverdrivePrime]

I agree that all of those are necessary things for a mundane character to have, although not necessarily on the same character. Some of them scream monk, barbarian, or marshal rather than pure "fighter", and I don't think they are necessary for ALL melee combatants to have.

Most definitely. No one should be able to do *all* of that. That would lead to terrible Chuck Norris jokes about one's character, and that is so very, very 2009.

But a mundane warrior should have the option to add those to his repertoire, either as a tree of abilities, or ala carte.

[Scow2]

Its a continuum. War Blades and 4E fighters are certainly closer to magic users than previous melee characters, what with having multiple levels of powers that they forget after use, but they aren't magical.

It's not that they "Forget" their powers after using them, as much as they can only get the ability off a few times in battle before either the trick can't be used to full effect again (4e), or they need to reset their stance and posture (ToB)


That said, I like D&D Next's old Expertise Die mechanic, which should have been expanded instead of scrapped.

[Ceiling_Squid]

Of course, D&D tends to be a game where killing a target in one hit is frowned upon. Even if it would be reasonable.

If that were true, "save or die" spells wouldn't be a thing. Wizards wouldn't be able to drastically alter or obviate combat within a very short series of actions.

The DnD double-standard says that killing in one hit with "non-magical" means is frowned upon.

It's not that they "Forget" their powers after using them, as much as they can only get the ability off a few times in battle before either the trick can't be used to full effect again (4e), or they need to reset their stance and posture (ToB)

I took a different track with my group (who like the tongue-in-cheek meta-narrative rather than "realism"). Why use your coolest move every single round? That would make it boring! Save it for when its dramatic!

Then again, we like pulpiness.

[Knaight]

Some of the ToB maneuvers are certainly "magical" such as teleporting conjuring fire, or healing people with bursts of holy energy, arguing that they are not magical because they are not defined as "spells" is purely arguing semantics. They are also called "Blade Magic" and (mostly) go away in an anti-magic field, so the author of the book seems to consider them magic.

It's probably best to restrict this to Warblade manuevers, plus the Crusader ones that aren't Devoted Spirit, as the Swordsage and Devoted Spirit ones are actually meant to be magical:

As for your list - it has guard an area on it. It doesn't have anything about being able to actively parry attacks aimed at allies. That seems relevant to the list.

I'd also recommend branching out a bit, and looking at some games you might not be familiar with. Burning Wheel's Fight! matrix is a thing of beauty, and worth looking into - as is how the rest of the system handles. It's also something that is pretty modular, in that it could be adapted (with a fair amount of adaptation) wholesale, which makes it a better resource to look into. The Riddle of Steel is also good, but acquiring it is an expensive pain in the rear while enough is available online to understand the Fight! matrix for free legally.

[Martin Greywolf]

One problem with this question is the lack of context. What should a fighter be able to do as compared to what? At what level? If you look at DnD, power levels are roughly divided like this:

1-5: Heroic fantasy (based on Tolkien, who based it on old sagas), things like LotR or Seven Samurai belong here. There are very few if any supernatural or superhuman abilities, swordplay is... well... realistic-looking to an untrained eye, any dude with a pointy stick is at least semi-serious threat

6-10: Epic myths, think Labors of Hercules, Rurouni Kenshin and so on. Here realism goes out of the window, things like rerouting a river BECAUSE MUSCLES and hitting a guy in 8 places at once (which is neither necessary nor practical in real life) can and do happen. Normal people are a threat only in large groups, such as mobs or armies.

11-15: Wuxia/Superhero (weaker ones): Avatar: The Last Airbender, Hero, Bleach (at first), Iron Man (movie version, one without nanobots). Here normal people cease to be a threat unless equipped with something special, be it martial arts training with an old master or a superpower.

16-20: High-powered Superhero: Superman, Flash, DBZ. Here you take reality and tell it to bend over. Normal people are only a threat if they posses your weakness (kryptonite, for one).

With that in mind, you can now start to sort of catalogue your expectations. Should Aragorn be able to fly? Probably not. Should someone in wuxia? Well, you probably saw Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

Should someone be able to make thrown things change direction mid-flight in wuxia? Yup, see House of Flying daggers, or Sokka and his shenanigans with boomerang in A:tLA. In myths, not so much, unless your characters' schtick is thrown weaponry.

Also, keep in mind that system and what you do with it are, or should be, two mostly unrelated things, kinda like a game engine and a game (look at how different Fallout: New Vegas an Skyrim look, yet they both use ESCK - which is actually a lot more than just an engine).

Using vancian slot system is, consequently, not a mistake in and of itself, no more than using it for magic is, although you can have more hand-waving with magic (why? because wizard did it).

Why you can use something only once per combat has an easy and reasonably realistic explanation - if you use the same trick twice on the same guy/in the same fight, he will be ready for it the next time. Found that one out the hard way by trying the left-handed stab on the same guy twice in a bout (I lost).

Best example of mechanic-fluff separation are systems like Window or Fate that use one mechanic plus description for everything, and i do mean everything, from social contests to ship-to-ship battles. One such system, Dračí Doupě (czech system, unfortunately untranslated), uses 2d6 + level (0-5), beat 9 or opponent for both, say, fire magic and sword-fights. Here the things you list a fighter should do, like attract attention to himself, etc. are all handled by you describing your action.

[Knaight]

With that in mind, you can now start to sort of catalogue your expectations. Should Aragorn be able to fly? Probably not. Should someone in wuxia? Well, you probably saw Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

Should someone be able to make thrown things change direction mid-flight in wuxia? Yup, see House of Flying daggers, or Sokka and his shenanigans with boomerang in A:tLA. In myths, not so much, unless your characters' schtick is thrown weaponry.

Nobody actually flies in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. There's a lot of jumping in which gravity appears to be consistent with a much less massive earth (or one with much higher radius), but no actual flight. It's one of those limits that tends to persist fairly well, and as such one ability that should probably be kept out of the hands of mundane characters* in almost any genre, with the notable exception of superheroes. That said, certain fantasy games could probably afford to dial it down for magic using characters as well.

*Things like "hot air balloons" and "airplanes" change this.

[Erberor]

I personally find that a purely martial character should be able to do some crazy stuff by virtue of sheer skill, power and determination. Stuff like, say, stopping a charging rhino is its tracks. That falls right into the place of appearing impossible by normal means, but not so much so that it breaks the image of the martial character.

A wizard reaches level 20, the peak of power (barring epic shenanigans) by thoroughly mastering the arcane arts, unlocking incomprehensible power.

A martial character reaches level 20 by ascending to a level of skill and physical might that simply boggles the mind. Their skill allows them to accomplish acts that almost surpass the bounds of reality.

[Waar]

I have seen a number of threads talking about where exactly the line should be drawn for a mundane character. How to power them up without turning them into re-fluffed casters* or shonen anime characters. What (in combat) abilities would you give your ideal fighter?


*: By this I mean giving them blatantly paranormal abilities or artificial meta-game limitations like semi-vancian abilities that come in levels and can be used once per day and are then forgotten.

My ideal fighter, the character in a group of equals most focused on combat, needs (some comination of): the ability to have most impact on comabt, to best survive combat and to look the most awesome during combat, (giving the top spot in all three to the same chracter might not be a good idea thou)

Are you willing to let a "mundane" character do any/all of these in a world with magic/supernatural powers? (this is where some fantasy games fail ) if so, great, but if not you might need to suplement your "mundane" character with more abilities such as:

Spoiler

Show

• flight
• super strength/speed
• dr
• Health regen
• magic resistance/immunity
• other high tech gadgets
• etc

One other option is to claim that pcs aren't mundane and just give them acces to superpowers/magic/whatever.

Finaly you could let "mundane" characters get/acquire gadgets/magic items/high tech stuff/relics as part of their mechanical character advancement.

In summary a combat focuse PC should be able to kick opponent *** mundane or not.

[TuggyNE]

Spoiler

Show

Trade damage for increased accuracy.
Trade accuracy for Increased damage.
Trade movement for increased damage or accuracy.
Disarm enemy
Shove enemy
Stun enemy
Trip enemy
Sunder enemy's equipment
Sneak attack an unaware foe for increased damage or accuracy.
Called shot to a specific body part imposing ability penalties or status conditions based on the location.
Charge
Cheap Shot
Cleave though multiple enemies with one attack
Smash through an obstacle
Incur bleeding damage over time
Hold a helpless hostage
Feint
Strike at an enemies weapon as they attack with a longer reach
Attack multiple enemies at once
Defend against a particular maneuver on the opponent's part
Grapple
Gruesome Blow which intimidates enemies
Guard an ally
Weaken an enemy so that an ally can strike the weak spot
Spring Attack
Lunge for a temporary bonus to reach
Guard an area
Draw an enemy's attention
Form a Phalanx with allies
Pommel Strike
Trade AC for increased accuracy or damage
Parry for a temporary boost to AC
Shield Block for a temporary boost to DR
Throw Weapon
Volley with a bow
Struggle without any free limbs
Attack recklessly into a crowd

Too long, didn't read. Could you reformat into an organized list instead of leaving flat? (I was going to do it myself but found it a little overwhelming )

Spoiler: Additional

Show

Move quickly to interrupt an enemy's attack
Ignore pain in order to fight efficiently
Become nigh-impervious to pain and torture
Break through magical barriers with either strength, precision, or pure disdain
Shake off mind control
Shake off poison
Coordinate battlefield tactics
Inspire allies
Cow foes
Go berserk
Appraise weapons and armor
Repair weapons and armor
Care for battlefield animals
Look awesomely heroic while getting beaten down
Ignore death long enough for a last speech
Ignore death long enough for a retributive strike
Specialize in a signature technique
Create new fighting styles
Excel at combating certain kinds of foes
Recognize foes by their fighting style

[Talakeal]

Too long, didn't read. Could you reformat into an organized list instead of leaving flat? (I was going to do it myself but found it a little overwhelming )

What exactly do you mean an organized list? Like grouping it by manuever type?

[TheCountAlucard]

Depends on the game, obviously, and what people want out of said game.

[Talakeal]

My ideal fighter, the character in a group of equals most focused on combat, needs (some comination of): the ability to have most impact on comabt, to best survive combat and to look the most awesome during combat, (giving the top spot in all three to the same chracter might not be a good idea thou)

Are you willing to let a "mundane" character do any/all of these in a world with magic/supernatural powers? (this is where some fantasy games fail ) if so, great, but if not you might need to suplement your "mundane" character with more abilities such as:

Spoiler

Show

• flight
• super strength/speed
• dr
• Health regen
• magic resistance/immunity
• other high tech gadgets
• etc

One other option is to claim that pcs aren't mundane and just give them acces to superpowers/magic/whatever.

Finaly you could let "mundane" characters get/acquire gadgets/magic items/high tech stuff/relics as part of their mechanical character advancement.

In summary a combat focuse PC should be able to kick opponent *** mundane or not.

In my system at least flight and super strength speed are not mundane abilities, although a non human warrior or one with access to artifacts or potions could achieve them. They are also not really necessary to overcoming obstacles as in combat flight is nowhere near as prevalent or useful as d&d.

DR is possible for a mundane character. Regeneration is not possible, but mundane healing skills are a lot better than d&d.

Magic resistance is easy. Magic immunity is possible, but doing so will cut off friendly magic as well.

High tech gadgets are a definite possibility, although most are rare and poorly understood as it is an apocalyptic setting.

[Seerow]

Someone who would classify under:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BadassNormal

Someone along the lines of Conan, Aragorn, King Arthur, Madmartigan; a pulp hero like James Bond or Indiana Jones, or a comic book character along the lines of Batman or Captain America (in their more down to Earth incarnations).

To represent basically anything along these lines, you need low grade reality warping. Whether it's James Bond "I have a gadget for that" or Indiana Jones improbably surviving something that should kill any normal person, you need something along the lines of Action Points, Edge, whatever, with Mages explicitly giving up access to that sort of thing for their magic. Let the Mundanes be exceedingly lucky and retroactively have that thing they didn't think of 5 sessions ago when you were in town.


Other things a mundane character in general should have in a world filled with magic:
-Extraordinary mobility. If you have levels, a high level character should be faster than a low level character. If you don't, then mobility should be something a character can invest in, with Magic actively working against that in some way.

-Extraordinary survivability. Mundane Heroes in fiction are the guys who shrug off the spells that kill mooks. Whatever your saving throw equivalent for ignoring spells is, a mundane character should be the highest. For all forms of it. In D&D terms if your base line "I'm a mundane action hero" doesn't have good AC, DR, HP, Saves, and Spell Resistance, he's probably not going to be cutting it without supernatural aid.

-Versatility. If you can stat up a high end mundane character in your system and think "I can do things this guy possibly can't", or "I know how to do more things than this guy", even if he is massively better than you at one thing, you've failed horribly. A Mundane warrior is not a dumb jock, but even if he was jocks frequently have charisma and have people skills. In fact, if you are separating the Warrior and Rogue archtype fundamentally, you are probably (not necessarily, but very likely) doing something wrong already.

[Jay R]

I prefer the old-school approach that a fighter above 10th level or so is now a Lord, with an army of fighters with him, and the advantages of a keep and lands supporting him.

The reason a general can do more than a private is that a general is leading an army.

[Seerow]

I prefer the old-school approach that a fighter above 10th level or so is now a Lord, with an army of fighters with him, and the advantages of a keep and lands supporting him.

The reason a general can do more than a private is that a general is leading an army.

This really doesn't translate well to a game designed around skirmishes for small teams (read: Nearly every RPG in existence).

Like you may as well say at level 10 retire, and switch to playing Warhammer or something.

[Mr Beer]

To represent basically anything along these lines,
<post explaining this>

Yep, this detail explains exactly why Mundane heroes like Conan can go toe-to-toe against wizards and other supernatural creatures.

[Vitruviansquid]

The problem with "mundane combatants" in games like DnD 3.5 is that they are thought of as "mundane." If you want games where characters have extraordinary magic, you need to think of the characters without that extraordinary magic as having an extraordinary something else.

Fighters should have extraordinary strength or extraordinary weapons expertise, rogues have extraordinary speed and skill, and so on. Those characters need to be capable of doing things that aren't possible for most, even all actual humans (though I'm constantly surprised by what actual humans can do). You are not going to be able to "power them up without turning them into re-fluffed casters or shonen anime characters" because that would make them weaker than those casters who have extraordinary abilities by definition.

To phrase this in another way, imagine that someone drops a big boulder on your party in an RPG. The wizard player might well say he wants to cast a fireball to blast the boulder away so it doesn't land on the party. The DM and other players sitting around would tend to permit that because they understand that a fireball is a forceful, explosive thing, but they don't have any magical fireball in real life to compare it to, so they'll acknowledge the potential of a fireball to knock the boulder away. In other words, the fireball is powerful because it is extraordinary - it is something the players have no real-life comparison to.

Now, let's say in this same situation, the monk player says he wants to leap up into the sky and kick the boulder away or the fighter says he wants to use his shield to knock the boulder away when it lands on the party. The DM and other players would tend not to permit that because, no matter how strong or high level those characters are, the players are comparing the characters to actual people - professional athletes, circus strongmen, and so on. When the fighter or monk player argues that their characters should be able to do something great, the accusation that they want to transform their character into a semi-magical or shonen anime character will then arise, and the DM will say "sorry, but you can't do that because it doesn't fit in with the campaign world because this isn't a superheros or shonen anime type game."

My point is, you can never meaningfully power up "mundane" characters until you acknowledge that they should be able to accomplish extraordinary, "unrealistic" feats because the fact that a feat is extraordinary and "unrealistic" is what makes it powerful in an RPG to begin with.

[neonchameleon]

I have seen a number of threads talking about where exactly the line should be drawn for a mundane character. How to power them up without turning them into re-fluffed casters* or shonen anime characters. What (in combat) abilities would you give your ideal fighter?

1: Able to kill any opponent that isn't about as skilled in six seconds or less with a sword, dagger, or arrow straight through the brain. D&D PCs in any edition don't wield swords, they wield nerf bats.

2: The ability to shrug off hostile magic and cut through spells by using cold iron. And the ability to wear normally magic repelling iron and steel. (This includes illusions.

3: The ability to use the "Fighter's counterspell" - if the wizard stops moving for long enough to cast a spell anywhere in clear line of sight of the fighter and the fighter isn't in melee, the spellcaster gets caught in the throat or eye with an arrow or thrown dagger before they are more than three words into their spell.

4: A wide range of very effective skills. The sort of range a modern professional soldier has.

If we're going to have genuinely mundane fighters in D&D (which would be a first time) then make them match up to real world warriors. Rather than flailing ineffectually at monsters the size of nine year olds for a minute or more (going by o/AD&D rules) before they can kill them.

The only reason wizards should survive on the battlefield without a wall of fighters in front of them is that the fighters are fictional/cinematic rather than mundane and lethal, and knowing they are walking into death ground whenever facing a spellcaster.

Failing that, we simply make every single attack by the fighter Save or Die - and make magic unable to affect the enemy unless you've first whittled their hit points and thus their magical protections away. After all, people don't survive swords through the brain. Magic just follows whatever rules the author decides.

[Talakeal]

My point is, you can never meaningfully power up "mundane" characters until you acknowledge that they should be able to accomplish extraordinary, "unrealistic" feats because the fact that a feat is extraordinary and "unrealistic" is what makes it powerful in an RPG to begin with.

I think that is an overly broad statement. While it may be true in some games like exalted or high level 3e d&d it is by no means universal.

In early editions of d&d i never noticed fighters or rogues falling behind for lack of super powers, mortals in shadowrun or world of darkness are not significantly left behind without paranormal abilities, alternity and aces and eights characters played fine with no extraordinary abilities at all. There are also games like warhammer, call of cthulhu, or dark heresy where characters with paranormal abilities are at an advantage, but have enough downsides that it is by no means an optimal character choice, let alone a necessity.

[Seerow]

I think that is an overly broad statement. While it may be true in some games like exalted or high level 3e d&d it is by no means universal.

In early editions of d&d i never noticed fighters or rogues falling behind for lack of super powers, mortals in shadowrun or world of darkness are not significantly left behind without paranormal abilities, alternity and aces and eights characters played fine with no extraordinary abilities at all. There are also games like warhammer, call of cthulhu, or dark heresy where characters with paranormal abilities are at an advantage, but have enough downsides that it is by no means an optimal character choice, let alone a necessity.

AD&D and earlier is a debatable point. I've seen arguments that AD&D was MORE caster focused than 3e. Sure magic had more drawbacks, but magic was also generally capable of more crazy stuff too. I don't necessarily have a horse in that race, but things weren't all sunshine and roses in AD&D, it was just easier to ignore because a lot of things that were codified in 3e were not in AD&D (wealth/magic items primary among them. Fighter too weak? He finds an artifact sword. What's the Wizard getting? Who cares he's the wizard, that's fighter loot!)

And I can say for certain that mundanes are overshadowed in Shadowrun, despite the more down to earth nature of casters relative to D&D, they still have a lot of advantages over mundanes (infinite growth potential, ease of picking up new tricks, cheap and VERY effective minions, and fewer necessary skills to operate are the big ones).