D&D (2024) Martial vs Caster: Removing the "Magical Dependencies" of high level.

[Gammadoodler]

I have already said I agree with this 100%. You can have your fighter. Non-magical? Heck yea! I'd be the first to try it out.

But, in reality, we know that's not what will happen. There will be a power struggle. A small handful of players will complain about their damage per round compared to X, or their lack of movement compared to X, or their lack of skills compared to X. That will happen until they get what they want. Then that has the possibility to make the other fighters obsolete.

If it was built and tempered everyone would be on board.

At that point though the question will be:

Is the obsolescence of the other fighters an actual problem?

Obsolescence happens to a lot of things, mostly because something better comes along. As long as it's still balanced at an overall level within the game, if we arrive at something better, what is the harm?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Meanwhile, what was actually said:

"This is going to break the game and not be fun for anybody, least of all the DM who has to juggle a cruddy design whose only purpose to exist is to enable the rest of the broken parts of the game to go on existing while a highly niche subset of people get one shiny new toy that may or may not even be what they actually want."

Which isn't really any better.

Instead of being mad at something ruining your fun, you have, instead, appointed yourself as spokesperson for everyone (certainly no one elected you) and then got mad on our behalf.

I appreciate your passion at least.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

Meanwhile, what was actually said:

"This is going to break the game and not be fun for anybody, least of all the DM who has to juggle a cruddy design whose only purpose to exist is to enable the rest of the broken parts of the game to go on existing while a highly niche subset of people get one shiny new toy that may or may not even be what they actually want."

I've said I agree with you that high level casters are not good design. I've also said assume they remain for this exercise.

Since today people can (and do) play all caster parties at higher levels, no one has explained however how adding a mythic martial that is no more powerful or versatile (and likely a little less) than the current Wizard will create more juggling or brokenness on a design level.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Meanwhile, what was actually said:

"This is going to break the game and not be fun for anybody, least of all the DM who has to juggle a cruddy design whose only purpose to exist is to enable the rest of the broken parts of the game to go on existing while a highly niche subset of people get one shiny new toy that may or may not even be what they actually want."

Why are we assuming the design would be cruddy? Because  WotC isn't doing it?

I don't think so.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If I can find numerous ways to make non-magic martials competitive in the Utility game, people who get paid to design games can too.

And thats without even getting into nerfing magic so you have less work to do and more room to design with.

This isn't about nerfing magic. Already off the table for this discussion.

I'd love to hear your ideas about making non-martials competitive in the Utility game though, if you're willing to hear criticism about them like the rest of us.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

If I can find numerous ways to make non-magic martials competitive in the Utility game, people who get paid to design games can too.

And thats without even getting into nerfing magic so you have less work to do and more room to design with.

If you can do this at the design level not the table norms level then please post them. I would like to use them in my games.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've said I agree with you that high level casters are not good design. I've also said assume they remain for this exercise.

Since today people can (and do) play all caster parties at higher levels, no one has explained however how adding a mythic martial that is no more powerful or versatile (and likely a little less) than the current Wizard will create more juggling or brokenness on a design level.

Likely it would be a little less versatile, since to give it the same versatility as a full caster would likely make it hard to distinguish from a full caster.

 

[Emberashh]

At that point though the question will be:

Is the obsolescence of the other fighters an actual problem?

Obsolescence happens to a lot of things, mostly because something better comes along. As long as it's still balanced at an overall level within the game, if we arrive at something better, what is the harm?

A redditor put it rather succinctly:

They’re trying really hard to fix the martial caster disparity here but I think it might be worth taking a step back and asking themselves “what is fun?” instead of what is balanced. And the folks complaining about it may not represent the sum total of actual player experience (eg if they’re just DMs that would notice those things). We had a super balanced game in 4e and it was widely panned as a result.

and Ill also quote a response:

“What is fun” would be meaningful nerfs to Casters’ combat abilities. Any problems with the Martial buffs are caused by the people who cry about nerfs. “No Nerfs, Only Balance” has never been a valid argument unless you’re trying to protect things that actively break the game.

And a follow up response to the idea that "worse" casters doesn't equal funner Martials:

Honestly, I just disagree.

One of the most boring things about playing a Martial is waiting for Casters. Casters are always trying to squeeze out as much power as they can by choosing the best saving throw to target, or placing their AOEs to hit the optimal number of enemies (often at the cost of allies). Then the DM has to roll all the saving throws (DM can try to roll one for all targets but you know the Casters will complain about that). Or god forbid you play with a Summoner, then you get to watch while they do your same action, but 5-10 times per round.

Best case scenario, the Caster finally decides and it’s something that can help their party members. Buffs, Debuffs, CC, or some damage so you’re all actually working towards the same goal.

Worst case scenario? They destroy the entire wave with their AOE or Summons. Or they disable the strongest enemies with Polymorph, Suggestion, Banishment, Wall of Force, etc and you get to clean up the scraps. OR they just win the encounter with Hypnotic Pattern.

This thread is complaining about Martial abilities taking a long time and being too strong, but they’re just trying to scale up to casters. Hear me out: If scaling up Martials to be like Casters is a problem….then Casters are already a problem.

Instead of being mad at something ruining your fun, you have, instead, appointed yourself as spokesperson for everyone

Yes, because pointing out an easily predictable consequence is "speaking for everyone".

Since today people can (and do) play all casters at higher levels, no one has explained

It has been explained, and it was handwaved away as a non-issue by people who don't like people telling them their problems don't exist.

All caster parties are extremely hard to DM for, and the game is not going to be made better by turning that on all the time.

Because  WotC isn't doing it

Let me fix that:

"Because WOTC is doing it."

If you can do this at the design level not the table norms level then please post them. I would like to use them in my games.

My post on LNO is still there, and is very close to being graced by my first go at a Mage, in fact.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

I started with 5e, so I don't know 4e or 2e or 1e or 3e or 2.5. I have a little Pathfinder 1e knowladge.

They’re trying really hard to fix the martial caster disparity here but I think it might be worth taking a step back and asking themselves “what is fun?” instead of what is balanced. And the folks complaining about it may not represent the sum total of actual player experience (eg if they’re just DMs that would notice those things). We had a super balanced game in 4e and it was widely panned as a result.

I have however never heard except on this website that 4e was widely panned. So I don't know what made it balanced, but all I am asking for is cool bells and whistles, things I can do with my fighter... I gave an example of a 12th level house ruled warrior.

 

[Scott Christian]

just because you were forced to improvise an alternate solution doesn't make that solution inherently better than the existing ones that already exist and are proven to work, the fighter being forced to attempt to screw in a screw with their bare hands or clamped in a pair of pliers isn't superior to the wizard who has and chooses to use a screwdriver to accomplish the same task.

I never said it was better. I am refuting the statement that people who play fighters are old grognards that don't want to think. But, in my experience, these imaginative ideas are not equivalent to trying to screw in a screw with their bare hands. It is "out of the box." Meaning it is more than I try to do what a wizard's explicit text says I can do.

You are proving my point exactly. You can't even imagine a fighter coming up with an imaginative solution to a problem that doesn't involve the screw.