D&D 5E 5th Edition -- Caster Rule, Martials Drool?

[Dausuul]

Are martial classes still the poor cousins to casting classes when it comes to power level in 5th Edition? I mean in actual table play, not in theory.

My experience as a caster player is that when I cut loose, I dominate, but I can't cut loose very often. Most of the time I ration my spells carefully, and as a result the noncasters tend to outperform me--not by huge margins, but enough to notice. Spell slots are really tightly constrained now.

So, from what I've seen, casters rule in short, spectacular bursts. The rest of the time, they don't drool, but they dribble a bit. Noncasters just keep chugging along. It evens out pretty well.

Now, this is based on experience with the playtest and a short amount of playing Basic at a fairly high level (12th). With the PHB, there is potential for things to change in multiple ways; casters have a much wider array of spells to work with, but noncasters also have more options for limited nova power. I don't yet know how all that shakes out in practice.

 

[Tormyr]

So even with a lenient reading, the rogue will only be able to use its sneak attack twice a round. Once as part of a successful attack on its turn, and once on a successful opportunity attack on a reaction.

 

[Dausuul]

So even with a lenient reading, the rogue will only be able to use its sneak attack twice a round. Once as part of a successful attack on its turn, and once on a successful opportunity attack on a reaction.

Yes, though I wouldn't use the word "only." Sneak attack once a round is quite solid. Twice a round is scary.

 

[Agamon]

Remember, an opportunity attack isn't something a PC can generate. If the foe is smart, he probably realises that turning his back on the nimble rogue is a bad idea. If the foe is dumb, it will probably just want to eat the rogue.

This twice a round thing, while possible, isn't going to happen a whole lot.

 

[Dausuul]

Remember, an opportunity attack isn't something a PC can generate. If the foe is smart, he probably realises that turning his back on the nimble rogue is a bad idea. If the foe is dumb, it will probably just want to eat the rogue.

This twice a round thing, while possible, isn't going to happen a whole lot.

A battlemaster fighter can grant the rogue up to four off-turn attacks per short rest.

 

[Rod Staffwand]

I am very leery of the potential martial/caster gap in 5e. The gap looks like it will be much smaller than in 3e but it does look like it will be present. Spells are still required to bypass a lot of challenges, especially at high level. Martials just don't have enough utility.

The limited casting resources vs. all-day martial resources demands very specific adventure design to make work. DMs are forced to constantly come up for reasons why the party can't rest or shouldn't rest just to keep pressure on the casters. Some DMs have figured out how to do it, but guidelines and advice for it has never appeared in a D&D book, leaving a lot of groups struggling with the problem.

Also, all-day martial resources are mythical. They still run on hp, making long adventuring days problematic for them too. It doesn't matter if the fighter can still hit hard if they're down to 5hp with no HD or recovery abilities left. Granted, 5e has indeed added HD, second wind and other mechanics to partially address this issue.

The magic item sub-system will likely patch a lot of the issues (like it has in past editions). A fighter with boots of flying has far more utility than one that doesn't, for example. But magic items aren't class abilities are require the DM to see the problem and proactively place treasure to take care of it. Class abilities are guaranteed. Casters can also take advantage of magic items thus potentially expanding the gap instead of closing it.

Finally, I don't understand the reality of high-level play at all--in virtually any edition of D&D (including 5e). High-level characters are bound by realism in some regards and not in others, in a seemingly arbitrary manner. A 20th level fighter can fall 4000ft onto solid stone and walk away, but can't leap 40ft? The same fighter can fight a 100ft long dragon head-on, but can't throw a boulder at it? Not my cuppa.I

'll probably end up doing some version of E6 play with 5e. It's just unfortunate that I have to.

 

[Uchawi]

I agree it is utility, or non-attack/damage ability, where the caster/hybrid make be cool and the pure martial class may drool. This is compounded by caster/hybrid ability to expand their tool box with spells, so they can adapt to more situations and/or settings. Casters can do it on a daily basis with the right spells.

 

[Joe Liker]

I just want to point out that there's only one class in the game that doesn't have access to spells.

I'm not drawing (or attempting to lead anyone to) any conclusions. I'm just stating a fact.

 

[Uller]

My players have realized it's a team effort. At 7th level they had almost no magic weapons...most of the monsters were resistant to nonmagic weapons. So...the cleric and wizard quickly learned to cast magic weapon on the martial types. What's a better use of a spell? Magic Missile or ensuring the assassin can stab the hell out of stuff?

 

[Uchawi]

I am not sure the team concept is relevant to the discussion, except for how each class may contribute or what roles they can fill. On top of the pyramid are casters, then hybrids, and finally pure martials as they are the most limited on how they may contribute. Sure everyone can contribute and D&D is a team game. And there are areas anyone may contribute regardless of class, i.e. tactics, roleplaying, creativeness, etc. Those are things any player or DM can do. So all that left to discuss are rules and mechanics. And there are mechanics or items that any player or class may use, so what is left is what makes a class unique.