Can the Fighter be Real and Equal to spellcasters?

[Simon Marks]

Certainly, it is impossible so long as spells can do things that can't be countered by mundane means.

Here is my main issue with Magic in current D&D. A number of spells, especially low level spells, are unbounded and absolute.

Knock is the best example of this, Spider Climb another. Both allow for a total removal of a skill (Open Locks and Climb Walls).

Spells like this (Silence, Invisibility and some others) which both allow for no save and no mundane force can prevent have to go before 'non-magical' characters can be considered 'balanced'.

Compare 'Find Traps ' spell to the 'Knock ' Spell. Both 2nd level. Work totally differently. The first doesn't replace a Rogue, however.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Here is my main issue with Magic in current D&D. A number of spells, especially low level spells, are unbounded and absolute.

Knock is the best example of this, Spider Climb another. Both allow for a total removal of a skill (Open Locks and Climb Walls).

Spells like this (Silence, Invisibility and some others) which both allow for no save and no mundane force can prevent have to go before 'non-magical' characters can be considered 'balanced'

Yeah. Either they need to have a mundane way of spotting them or hearing them or stopping a lock from being unlocked or other classes need to get the same abilities. Rogues need to get a class ability to turn invisible with no roll allowed against it. They need to be able to pick locks all the time automatically, etc.

 

[StarFyre]

john

JohnSNow:

The reason it's true is because there is no inherant law of balance.

If magic can exist, there is no rule stating it has to be balanced.

SOmethings hve inherant balance I am sure, but magic is really defined by the game system, writer, novel, movie, etc.

Due to that, it could be balanced, but there is no inherent reason why it should be or needs to be.

that's just my point.

Sanjay

 

[Derren]

its impossible for the fighter being equal to wizards unless WotC reduces magic to just combat spells.

Wizards are not (only) so powerful because of their combat spells but because of their noncombat spells.

 

[glass]

My question is, is it possible for Fighters to matain realism while still keeping up with spellcasters who can literally ignore the laws of physics?
Is it one or the other? Can the Fighter do both? If you have proof of this, please show me!

Can the fighter be 'realistic' as in limited to what is possible in the real world? Hell no. Realistically, D&D-style adventures would die early and often against threats far less dangerous that what you come up against in even a low-level D&D adventure.

Can the fighter be 'realistic' in the context of D&D worlds where dragons can fly without magic (or walk, for that matter). Yes, they can!

EDIT: Or, what Shilsen and Nifft said.


glass.

 

[Mentat55]

I personally don't want fighters "to be equal" to spellcasters. I just want fighters to be (1) tougher and nastier in close combat than any non-martial character, and (2) able to make choices in a fight that are as meaningful and interesting as those made by spellcasters. The problem is that 3.x clerics, druids, and wizards have abilities/spells that obviate the fighter's role in the party. In addition, each spell represented a different gimmick a spellcaster can pull out; even with the fighter's plethora of feats, it couldn't match this diversity, and rarely were the alternatives better than "5' step, flank, and full attack". I am not asking for a fighter that can warp reality or channel the divine will of the gods, I'd just like a class that can make interesting choices and do its thing (beating things in the face) without being overshadowed in that department.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

In 3.5, high level fighters do crazy damage. But compared to save or dies that's just not good enough. With those going away, a fighter's damage may be more significant to the fight.

In my experience a fighter's damage generally IS good enough in actual games. I have seen casters struggle with SR to a greater degree than melee types struggle with DR. I have seen high-level foes usually make their saving throws. I have seen a fighter's Shock Trooper Leap Attack as reliable for a TON of damage and possible cleaves. I have seen a high-level rogue's TWF Sneak Attack cuisinart, core-only, shred most foes. The primary core magic item that would have really thrown off the balance was the bead of karma, and I NEVER saw that in a single game. On CharOp boards or the Internet, sure, but not actual play.

Yes, a druid can destroy an army with Control Winds, and a wizard's Fireball is always useful against groups. But against a BBEG, the melee types usually do more damage IME.

Now, Complete Arcane would have wrecked this balance had it been widely used in the games I was in. Arcane Mastery would have made most SR irrelevant (combined with Spell Penetration, very little has SR more than CR+12), and there were too many no-SR spells in the book. CArc also made possible some really nasty no-save-you-die combinations, like Sudden Maximized Split Ray Enervation (this was used in one session of my 3.5 experience). Complete Arcane gave wizards a power boost they didn't need. I don't even know what no-save or no-SR spells are in Spell Compendium, PHBII, or Complete Mage.

 

[Simon Marks]

I think Forcecage wrecks the balance as well.

The spell allows for no mundane way to escape. It's essentially an Instakill. Because lasting 2 hours per level as it does by the time you cast it, it lasts over a day.

No save, no SR, no way to damage it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I have seen a fighter's Shock Trooper Leap Attack as reliable for a TON of damage and possible cleaves.

As you say, splats buff every class. One way to even up the imbalance somewhat (though it goes only partway) is to allow non-core options for fighters - Complete Warrior, PHB2, Bo9S - but not for wizards.

Sadly a lot of DMs don't seem to allow Bo9S because of teh anime.

Another option, which seems quite common, is to only play up to level 10 or so. This does a pretty good job of keeping the classes balanced. After that the Big Three (wizard, druid, cleric) take over the game.

 

[Shadeydm]

In my experience a fighter's damage generally IS good enough in actual games. I have seen casters struggle with SR to a greater degree than melee types struggle with DR. I have seen high-level foes usually make their saving throws. I have seen a fighter's Shock Trooper Leap Attack as reliable for a TON of damage and possible cleaves. I have seen a high-level rogue's TWF Sneak Attack cuisinart, core-only, shred most foes. The primary core magic item that would have really thrown off the balance was the bead of karma, and I NEVER saw that in a single game. On CharOp boards or the Internet, sure, but not actual play.

Yes, a druid can destroy an army with Control Winds, and a wizard's Fireball is always useful against groups. But against a BBEG, the melee types usually do more damage IME.

I agree for the most part but it looks like this isn't the kind of balance the designers were interested in. Seeing a Crusader in action in my current campaign I think have an idea what they want for melee classes and it seems like an order of power and abilities we have not seen in the game before the Bo9S. Combined with the sheer durability of such classes the balance of power might very well be shifted largely towards melee classes.