Can the Fighter be Real and Equal to spellcasters?

[Cryptos]

Eh... Dumbledore's actual cause of death was falling off of a building. Merlin got waylaid by some fine Lady of the Lake booty. Gandalf took a dive with a Balrog before coming back with an "I can wear white after Labor Day" sensibility.

Seems like most of the iconic spellcasters don't have to worry so much about their spellslinging rivals, but other forms of being killed or taken out of commission. Sharp, pointy objects should be just as much of a threat to them as anyone else. It's just that if they see them coming, they whip out some magic to defend themselves. But they can still screw up, or that magic might not be enough.

As for fighters, why not? Throughout history, weapons have changed the fate of nations and the world. A single bullet can start a world war, if it hit the right (or is that wrong?) person. Archduke Ferdinand, anyone? Physical violence can be powerful.

I really am hoping they forgo the anime-style swordsman, but there are plenty of of examples of over-the-top combatants outside of anime. Look at what someone in a movie like Beowulf or Gladiator or The 300 can do. Or (barring bullet time and super-leaping) a Morpheus or a Trinity.

I don't think it has to be all "Super-Pikachu Fire Blast Punch!!!!" or whatever other ridiculous purple emo-coiffed battle maneuver that begins and ends with an overdramatic pose and pouty lips might be out there (hopefully we won't be seeing the purple emotive hairstyle power source or lipless hermaphrodite with ridiculously large eyes combat role), for melee types to compete with wizards.

(Can you tell I'm not an anime fan?)

Anyway, a single blow of a sword can bring down a kingdom and a single bullet can change the world. Martial types should absolutely be able to stay competitive with magic without getting magic-lite powers. To compete in a fantasy world, they might have to do some very improbable things, as in action-adventure or fantasy movies, but that doesn't mean glowing fists and anorexics with blue hair or a super-rage fiery halfling sunstrike is necessary.

Realistic is not fantasy, and in that respect, you're right that some degree of realism must go out the window so that Beowulf can fight Grendel naked, leap across the room and still manage to have a candlestick conveniently placed to cover his privates while he rips the beast's arms off. But it doesn't mean that we have to have magic-like abilities for the fighter to compete.

 

[mach1.9pants]

In the past, only the magic-using classes were able to increase in power enough to match the fantastic monsters of high-level play. Fighters could only survive by relying on the power of magic-users. Fighters were realistic at low level, but did not shed realism when the game warranted it, and tried to be realistic in the face of total absurdity. That needs to change.

That is one of the most clear and intelligent statements on one of the major conundrums of DnD I have had the pleasure to read, I esp like the bit I have made bold.
I used to play with a real push towards realism/simulationism, and had not really thought it through- until a player convinced me to include '9 swords. Now my non spellcaster players don't mind playing above level 8 or 10!
I would like the fun and power spread more - I really hope 4E provides

 

[JohnSnow]

Garbage defenses? Say what?

I think that being invisible, flying, and able to teleport (the wizard's *default* status in any sane player's hands) are plenty boffo defenses. Plus there's that pesky calling-spell issue to deal with; is a 17th-level fighter ready to take on a CR 22 solar? Dunno.

Don't forget "Protection from arrows." Talk about an overpowered 2nd-level spell. This is the spell that lets wizards face down an army. Not to mention that at higher levels, there's windwall, iron body, and a whole bunch of others.

Wizards certainly aren't actually as "squishy" as people usually claim.

 

[PeterWeller]

I think 2E made a decent stab at this by giving Fighters and their ilk followers. There seemed to be a sense that if Wizards could destroy kingdoms, Fighters could build them. There were a lot of problems with this set up, but it is one of the avenues with which you can balance the Fighter and Wizard's overall world affecting power.

4E looks like it's trying to balance the Fighter and Wizard's per encounter effectiveness by giving Fighters powers and limiting the scope of what Wizards can do in a fight.

The middle ground requires tinkering with the Wizard's toolbox and giving the Fighter one. The first isn't too difficult; start by taking away the stuff that allows them to do stuff that should be another class's forte. The second requires pinning down what a fighter does when he isn't fighting and carving a niche around it. This would be a lot easier if it weren't for the Warlord. That class seems like it's going to take the tactical planning and general military acumen angle. One angle you could carve out for fighters would be the practical side of combat. Fighters know weapons and could know the ins and outs of big weapons, siege weapons. They could also know how to prepare a position. This could create a great synergy between the Fighter and the Warlord; the former sets up the fortifications; the latter leads from them. The problem is this still isn't as "cool" as being able to teleport, transmute matter, or summon forth magical guardians.

 

[Hussar]

You know, sometimes I think this allmighty "balance" between classes that are actually suppose to be and do different things is a pipe dream. I mean balance means equal and the only way I see that is with something like...where every attack or defense uses the same mechanics or does/defends the same amount of damage and you just describe it different. I mean can a true balance in a class based game be achieved without the classes being so similar in end result that really their the same with just a change of painting. Just rambling and thinking...sorry.

((Bold mine))

That's not really accurate. Balance does not mean equal. Balance means that two things have valid options at the same time.

Fighters at high levels in 3e can only keep up with casters if they carry around loads of magic items. And, even then, they're still sucking hind most of the time. At 10th level, the wizard is blasting multiple foes per round with 10d6 damage attacks. The fighter can probably do that kind of damage to a single target, but, beyond that, he's far and away less effective.

The balancing mechanic would then be to nerf down the wizard some and bring up the fighter some. Perhaps make something like Whirlwind attack actually not suck. A feat that allows the fighter to make a rushing attack where he can get extra attacks and move at the same time. The Dervish PrC went some ways in this direction. PHB 2 and Bo9S also made efforts to do the same.

I don't believe that balance means that all classes must be able to do exactly the same thing every time. That's one kind of balance, but, not the only one.

I think 2E made a decent stab at this by giving Fighters and their ilk followers. There seemed to be a sense that if Wizards could destroy kingdoms, Fighters could build them. There were a lot of problems with this set up, but it is one of the avenues with which you can balance the Fighter and Wizard's overall world affecting power.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, didn't wizards get followers too? I know they did in 1e.

 

[Robert Ranting]

The idea of giving powers to the fighter, rogue, ranger, and barbarian is not a bad one. I have no problem with a fighter slamming the ground with a hammer so hard it knocks everyone in a radius prone around him, or firing a volley of a half dozen arrows with a single shot, or even picking up the halfling rogue and serving up a fastball special against the BBEG who stands beyond a horde of minions. While extreme and perhaps unrealistic these are all physical acts, borne of supreme power, determination and skill, which are at the heart of a martial character.

What I don't want is for Fighters and other Martial characters to project visible crackling fire, electricity and windgusts without magic items that specifically generate those effects.
I don't want every one of these powers to have a three word name that includes references to colors, animals, or other random unrelated nouns and adjectives. This is unnecessary fluff that would be easy enough to add if you wanted it for your game's cinematic effect. For me, it is wasted word-count which could be used to give me a few more powers, feats, or DM tools.

As for spellcasting, I think that Wizards really need to be penalized in terms of time and effort, and it should generally be flashy and impressive. For example, teleportation should not be something you do willy-nilly. It should take time and materials to perform a ritual that can move people safely across vast distances, perhaps an hour of work and materials costing in excess of the horses, feed, and supplies necessary to make the journey overland. Once completed, teleportation effects would take the form of semi-permanent geographically anchored two-way door between one location and another, usually a bright shiny portal that causes a loud, sucking, howling wind that any being with a sense of sight or hearing could detect.

Instead of silently teleporting into the Dragon's sleeping lair and delivering a coup de grace, such a teleport spell would require that the PCs create a portal near the lair, but far enough away so as not to wake the dragon, and then sneak in the old fashioned way. Once they defeated the dragon, they would then have to return to the portal before it closes at the end of it's duration, which gives them a time limit and a sense of urgency (otherwise, they will have to perform the ritual all over again). Furthermore, there is a risk that something else stumbled across their portal and used it in the meantime, meaning that there could be a monster back in their base, or one of their NPC allies might have wandered through to the dragon's territory, which provides a hook for further adventures.

Examples of other likely teleport spells and their limitations:

*Dimension Door creating either a shiny portal which shows a view of the other side (allowing a canny creature to notice where the caster is going) or else is accompanied by a puff of smoke on both sides (like the Cape of the Mountebank does), and then denying the caster any other action for that round.

*A portal ritual which can, for a cost, allow the caster to set a password that will open and shut the portal, preventing unwanted persons from passing through without it.

*A variation on the permanent portal which only allows certain people to come through, requiring the blood or truenames of anyone who is going to use it, effectively keying the spell to only those persons, and doing damage/knocking prone anyone else who tries.

*A one-way teleport ritual wherein everyone who is going must stand in the ritual circle with the caster, and all suffer some sort of status effect or delayed reaction while on the other side.

*A quick and dirty teleportation spell that has a chance of putting you into a wall, dropping you from a great height, placing you at the bottom of a body of water, etc.

*A spell that allows you to stabilize a portal between two locales, often made into a magic item in the form of a ring of metal, standing stones, or even plantlife, thus making it a permanent doorway.

As to Fly, I think that it should be a slow and ponderous flight, not unlike levitation except with self-propulsion, at least until very high levels, where the idea of epic characters zooming around like Superman is the least of our worries regarding "realism". Also, enough of this "lowering softly to the ground" bull. If you get hit with a dispel magic that ends your fly spell, you plummet and take the falling damage. Even creatures with Perfect flight still drop like a stone when they stall-out. I also prefer that this spell be personal or single target, or else be 1/encounter so that we do not have the situation where all the players are flying all the time.

Invisibility really is pretty balanced if you consider the fact that Listen checks and the Scent ability can pierce it, and so long as we are talking the lesser versions where it drops upon taking a hostile action. Making it a full-round action to cast would also prevent some of the more egregious abuses of it. Combining it with etherealness, so that you are visible on another plane full of potential hostiles (Ring Wraiths anyone?) could also mitigate permanent invisibility's uses.

As for instant death effects, I think it is pretty safe to remove them. I have been playing with Arcana Evolved's magic system for three years now, and from that experience, I can tell you that spells which render you helpless so that the fighter and rogue can coup de grace the bad guy are both better for involving the whole party in a villain's defeat, and also far more brutal and just as anticlimactic as fizzling him out of existance with a Disintegrate.

I say all of this to illustrate the point that magic in D&D is too easy, it has no costs, and the benefits it provides are far in excess of what they need to be. Teleport should let you cut down on travel time, Fly should help the wizard scale a cliff or scout above the trees, Invisibility should help you sneak by people. These spells should not, however, allow you to instantaneously appear in the guarded bedroom of the BBEG and stab him in the heart while floating invisibly in the air above him, nor should they invalidate a rogue or fighter's athletic ability to get past mundane obstacles like walls and pits.

The one exception I wil extend is that perhaps the current power of D&D magic over level 10 should be moved up into Epic Play. Even so, there should still be a bit of challenge to taking on Asmodeus beyond figuring out which spells you need to cast in what order to kill him in one round (not because you need to kill him that quickly, but because you can brag about it later.) While I admit that I am biased against magic users, and since I have an English degree, my focus is mostly on telling a story, this is not just playstyle issue. Most games, from Chess to Final Fantasy # do not just let you teleport to the BBEG and kill him in his sleep without a fight, so why should D&D? Honestly, I view D&D as being very much like Tetris, a game which has no real "ending" except when you decide to stop playing it or have to start over. It is the act of playing the game, of making the enjoyment last as long as possible that matters, and the "I Win Button" effect of magic just makes it impossible to do that for anyone but the spellcaster pressing it, IMHO.

Robert "Sorry I Rambled A Bit" Ranting

 

[PeterWeller]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, didn't wizards get followers too? I know they did in 1e.

You're correct, but IIRC it was a handful of apprentices versus hundreds of armed men or multiple squads of elite cohorts. I'm pretty sure everyone got followers of some sort or another, and these followers, while an imperfect attempt at balance, were still an attempt at balance.

 

[JLXC]

I think making Fighters and Wizards and every single class exactly as powerful as possible, is a silly and useless idea contrary to the entire point of the game. All the classes shine at doing what they do, I don't see the problem. Fighters are FAR more common in every world, Wizards usually much more scarce requiring a lot of training. Wizards are very weak at first, but eventually they are very powerful, while fighters/rogues/rangers/etc. always are useful, and always get better as well. As soon as wizards can teleport and such, Fighters cannot possibly be made to be "equal" it's not possible AT ALL.

Still, I have yet to have a campaign where there wasn't a warrior of some type, and they always had their awesome moments. The wizard can run out of spells (unless your DM allows the cast/hide/study/cast routine) and a fighter never runs out of fighting. It's all in the DM, not the rules as much. I'm not saying there shoulnd't be any attempt at balance, that's silly. But if the idea is "Why should wizards get to do cool things fighters can't?" Then that's so rediculous I can't fathom why you play D&D at all.

If 4.0 makes it so Wizards Heal, Clerics Blast, Fighters use magic, and Rogues summon Bears, then why have classes at all? Also, why play D&D? Go play another game without classes already, there's lots of them, why destroy D&D?

 

[Counterspin]

Power level parity amongst PCs is very important to me, because part of the game is tactical, and all of my players deserve to be effective in combat. The current situation, where many of the classes are vastly inferior to the others, contradicts my wish to have people be on equal footing. After all, isn't that what level is, a rubric of power? I don't see why any level based system wouldn't strive to have people at a set level roughly the same powerise, because that's the point of levels.

 

[IceFractal]

It's entirely possible to have the classes be balanced as PCs while unbalanced in the setting. For instance, let's say that in a given setting, warriors were limited to normal human capabilities, and mages had virtually no limits.

A level X Fighter and a level X Wizard should still be the same power level. But as part of the setting, there are only warrior NPCs up to 5th level, but there are mage NPCs up to 15th level. So the reason mages run things is because they're higher level, simple as that. If a player has a Fighter PC beyond the normal level limit, they're not part of the normal order of things anymore - they're some kind of mythic hero, which is why they transcend the normal limits.

The key is that level represents your overall power, not how powerful you are compared to other people with the same type of skills. If an "apprentice" character of a given class is highly powerful, then they should be high level, regardless of their "apprentice" status.