D&D 5E Can mundane classes have a resource which powers abilities?

[EnglishLanguage]

Not true.

True.

Certainly not at those low levels where the fighter class is still good and can't prestige yet. In the right playstyle those spellcasters might be able to catch up when the game hits double-digit levels, but assuming that you had to play the game from level 1 it's hard to say they're ever better choices.

As I've said, Clerics and Druids can, at the very least, match the Fighter's effectiveness in combat at level 1

Probably because two crappy fighters aren't as good as one good one.

Misleading argument, the animal companion's at least as good as the Fighter, so's the Druid once he's Wildshaped. And that's before he starts casting buffs on himself and his companion with a single spell thanks to Share Spells.

However, dealing damage is still generally the best choice on average.

When there's better options at the same level that let you ignore hit points and completely remove an enemy from the fight, it's really not. There's a reason Evocation Wizards are the weakest of the Wizard schools.

Again, I don't think it's terribly controversial to say that Magic Missile is the best first level spell (along with CLW on the divine side) due to its reliable effectiveness.

I had to reread this to see if you were being serious or not. Magic Missle is fine on a scroll or wand or something, but Wizards should be preparing Save-or-Suck/Lose spells instead of damage, or buffs at the very least. Plinking an enemy with Magic Missile is far worse an option than simply removing them and their nearby friends from the fight altogether.

CLW is fine, but Clerics should never actually prepare it since they can convert spells to Cure X Wounds spells.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Burst of Stamina: You may spend a hit dice to make one extra melee attack on your turn, however the attack is made with disadvantage. You must take a rest before you can use this action again.

Fighter's Stamina (Fighter ability): when you use the 'Burst of Stamina' action, you do not suffer disadvantage on the attack.

???

That kind of approach would make sense with the current 5e language.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

As I've said, Clerics and Druids can, at the very least, match the Fighter's effectiveness in combat at level 1

Misleading argument, the animal companion's at least as good as the Fighter, so's the Druid once he's Wildshaped. And that's before he starts casting buffs on himself and his companion with a single spell thanks to Share Spells.

When there's better options at the same level that let you ignore hit points and completely remove an enemy from the fight, it's really not. There's a reason Evocation Wizards are the weakest of the Wizard schools.

So much of this depends on the DM and the playstyle of the campaign that such statements cannot be universally accurate. It's entirely possible for one table to experience fighters as perfectly competent, while another table has them completely overshadowed by spellcasters. You might notice certain trends if you gather enough data, that suggests one outcome is more or less likely than the other, but that doesn't invalidate the experience that someone else may have actually had.

 

[Obryn]

And your solution to this supposed problem is what exactly? Adding in a nonmagical resource so that said fighter runs out of trips? Going from no resource tracking to resource tracking makes the character worse.

It's adding a resource so he can do better stuff than tripping people, I'd say. Blinding, stunning, dazing. Heck, add terrifying and beheading to that list, if you will.

It's weird how a cleric can point and something dies, ignoring hit points, whereas a Fighter needs to chew through HP before sticking their sword through a harpy's heart or beheading an ogre.

 

[Arduin's]

It's weird how a cleric can point and something dies, ignoring hit points, whereas a Fighter needs to chew through HP before sticking their sword through a harpy's heart or beheading an ogre.

Why is it "weird" that magic is different from mundane? That would be like asking, Why does a Dig spell move all that dirt at once while using a shovel only moves a shovel full at a time?

 

[The Human Target]

Why is it "weird" that magic is different from mundane?

Its a made up game.

Anything can be anything.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It's adding a resource so he can do better stuff than tripping people, I'd say. Blinding, stunning, dazing. Heck, add terrifying and beheading to that list, if you will.

Those two things are completely unrelated. A resource does not in and of itself change the spread of available actions and outcomes, and adding new rules for actions and their outcomes does not require that some resource is necessary to power them (or even suggest that said resource would be useful).

It's weird how a cleric can point and something dies, ignoring hit points, whereas a Fighter needs to chew through HP before sticking their sword through a harpy's heart or beheading an ogre.

Yes, it is. Which would suggest changes to the health system, not the spread of abilities for each individual class.

 

[Obryn]

Those two things are completely unrelated. A resource does not in and of itself change the spread of available actions and outcomes, and adding new rules for actions and their outcomes does not require that some resource is necessary to power them (or even suggest that said resource would be useful).

Eh? They're completely related.

Why do you think powerful spells are typically a daily resource? If you can unload the Big Guns at will, your guns can't get all that big.

Yes, it is. Which would suggest changes to the health system, not the spread of abilities for each individual class.

Okay, but we have hit points. So...

Why is it "weird" that magic is different from mundane?

Beheading isn't magic.

 

[Arduin's]

Beheading isn't magic.

As a newbie D&D player you should become familiar with a Vorpal sword...

 

[Wulfgar76]

It's adding a resource so he can do better stuff than tripping people, I'd say. Blinding, stunning, dazing. Heck, add terrifying and beheading to that list, if you will.

I actually agree with you in principle. But please let's not go back to having non-casters being able to daze and stun whenever they want. Keeping debilitating status effects confined to the spell pen just saves so much time and misery for the DM. This isn't so much as a call for realism as it is a plea for mercy - mercy in the form monsters that get to do their thing and don't get immediately crippled by status effects by every character class, thus again turning combat into a tedious easymode grind.

If we are going to let Fighters blind, stun and behead things, lets keep it in the realm of improvised actions where the DM can adjudicate it on a case-by-case basis, prevent it from being spammed and disallow it on creatures he deems immune.

That said, 'beheading strike' as a high level fighter ability has merit.