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

[Hayato]

Reading all 46 pages of this topic I came to the conclusion that the game would be much better if D&D design team remove all utility spells, leaving only the damage spells. Thus, any actions out of combat or aimed at utility would be resolved with skill checks. Well, I'm going to test this rule on the next table I'm going to run.

 

[Yaarel]

I am referring primarily to utility magic. You cast fly and you fly, invisibility and you are invisible, etc. I'm sure it could be, but I haven't ever seen anti-magic used to combat a wizard shooting fireballs or casting save or suck spells.

In my experience it is used to avoid having a caster trivialize navigation past some kind of obstacle.

Beyond that, it seems crazy to me that a character can fail a check to jump a gap, fix a wagonwheel, or balance on ice, but casters cannot fail in their efforts to manipulate the magical tethers that gird together reality.

The Fly spell specifically has combat applications thus goes against the point of noncombat rituals. But a noncombat version of flight, such as with wings, might require an Action to fly a speed, rather than a Move.



However, if rituals allow anyone to perform them but require ability checks, most spellcasters will also tend to rely on rituals to save their spell slots for emergencies. Then these spellcasters will also have times when magic fails spectacularly.

 

[Minigiant]

I certainly can't argue against that.

40% of the randomly generated magic item treasure was Shields, armor or weapons (with swords getting a whopping 10% all on their own). So, yeah, that is a point to remember. D&D, in the early days, had fighters (and characters in general) that were absolutely dripping with magic items. Paladins were limited to 10 items. Which meant that everyone else was expected to have more.

The larger issue became in 3e when players were allowed to create bespoke magic item loadouts. So, you effectively got the Christmas Tree effect where everyone had the same items because those items were just better than any other option. Thus, 4e went the other way and just built the items right into progression. Then 5e tried to pretend that magic items don't really exist at all, but, still tried to keep to 3e and 4e levels of balance.

It really is a big mess.

The designers of D&D for most editions were okay with or even preferred warriors kitted to the nines with magic items.

The problem started in 3e when crafting was hardcoded. Players would spend all their treasure buying the same best equipment.

This is where the "Magic Shop" started to lose favor. Because what could not be crafted themselves was crafted by appreciative allies. And the rest was bought. So even caster casted the smae spells and every warrior or expert wore the same gear.

4e built it into the system an said you can have the strong items but the secondary was randomly chosen or you have sacrifice a +1 to chose you secondary aspect. So a fighter who wanted noncombat secondary power could disenchant and enchant combat power for noncombat power or vice versa.

But now people what the power, combat or noncombat, without magic spells, magic items, or magical sources. And I doubt D&D or most major fantasy games will be lead by the type of people who can achieve this is a simple way that doesn't split the community for the earliest a decade.

 

[Gammadoodler]

The Fly spell specifically has combat applications thus go against the point of noncombat rituals. But I noncombat version of flight, such as with wings, might require an Action to fly a speed, rather than a Move.



However, if rituals allow anyone to perform them but require ability checks, most spellcasters will also tend to rely on rituals to save their spell slots for emergencies. Then these spellcasters will also have times when magic fails spectacularly.

I'm not too finicky about the particulars, but I think if you had a range of outcomes between

"I can produce the effects of that spell 100% of the time"

And..

"I cannot produce the effects of that spell at all"

Then you could more easily introduce things into the system that make casting more difficult or easier sometimes. Maybe you're standing on a leyline or the moon is just right or something and you get a bonus on whatever your casting.

 

[Emberashh]

I am referring primarily to utility magic. You cast fly and you fly, invisibility and you are invisible, etc. I'm sure it could be, but I haven't ever seen anti-magic used to combat a wizard shooting fireballs or casting save or suck spells.

In my experience it is used to avoid having a caster trivialize navigation past some kind of obstacle.

Beyond that, it seems crazy to me that a character can fail a check to jump a gap, fix a wagonwheel, or balance on ice, but casters cannot fail in their efforts to manipulate the magical tethers that gird together reality.

Like..a squirrel with 'summon celestial' on a spell list cannot fail to conjure an angel to do it's squirrel bidding, but it could fail a survival check to make sure it has enough food for the winter..

In DCC one often has to consider the possibility of their eyeballs falling out of their sockets when casting spells.

And you'd better hope you're not on a 3ft mountain trail when it does...like me that one time

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I know @GMforPowergamers said it all the time but I think he is gone. Where is @Vaalingrade i think he has similar experience. I wish I paid more attention to screen names of people I didn’t know we had to justify ourselves with references

I’m not sure why it’s so hard for folks to keep in mind that you could name a dozen people and it’s still gonna round to 0 when viewed as part of the D&D community.

Like I said, some folks I have on ignore (who I can’t recall ever saying the extreme claims I’ve been repeatedly calling out in this incredibly silly interaction but an easily recall them stating dissatisfaction with the fighter (y’all know there’s a distinction, yea?), a couple I don’t, set against the fact that most players like the fighter as is and play the Champion, which is the blandest subclass in the entirety of the edition, and all the social media posts, Reddit discussions, etc, where the “fighters are terrible and when you play one the group would be better off without you” crowd is heavily out numbered by everyone who doesn’t see the problem as…starkly as all that.

 

[Minigiant]

Reading all 46 pages of this topic I came to the conclusion that the game would be much better if D&D design team remove all utility spells, leaving only the damage spells. Thus, any actions out of combat or aimed at utility would be resolved with skill checks. Well, I'm going to test this rule on the next table I'm going to run.

Congratulations.
You're 50% of the way to recreating 4e.

If reddit wasn't a third blocked out, I'd reply that this is a meme.

 

[Chaosmancer]

@Chaosmancer

Going back to the idea that Fighter gains a special magic item as a high level class feature ...

If your objection is, you want the Fighter oneself to be more mythic, then I agree. A legendary warrior should be able to do legendary things, despite being overtly magical.

The use of a magic item for a class feature is for those players who want the Fighter oneself to be nonmagic, even when using a magic item, such as a magic sword, feels fine to many of these players.

To resolve the conflict between the players who dont want personal magic flavor versus the players who do want personal legendary warrior magic, there is a solution.

When the Fighter player chooses the default special magic item, the player can instead choose an other magic item, and also can decide that the Fighter innately becomes the magic power of the item instead of having an item.

Why would I want to compromise on this? Your assumption is based solely on this idea that I have any desire to cater to people who want their 20th level fighter who fights the Elemental Embodiment of the concept of Flame to be a normal soldier with a fancy weapon and some enchanted armor.

How about this compromise instead. We give the fighter abilities that make sense for high-level, if you don't like those because they are too magical, you can pretend you found a magical item that gives you that ability instead.

 

[Chaosmancer]

As an aside, the Rogue is just as nonmagical as the Fighter but never seems to be part of these nonmagical Fighter protests. Is it because of the earlier D&D traditions of 3e Rogue "Use Magic Device" and 1e Thief "cast from scroll"? So players are simply accustomed to the Rogue having some magical competence? Or is it something other than habit?

Notably, allowing any 5e character to freely perform "rituals" as a separate design space using skill checks, would probably have a similar effect.

I think it is because of the aesthetic of the rogue. We constantly shoe-horn them in on the ideas of being fast, sneaky, and disarming traps, and we often forget to consider how magic-users can utterly dominate in those fields.

Also, rogues are weird in that they have a lot of their story in the fighter archetype. And vice-versa

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I have been afraid to step my toe in here since page 5 or so, but I think it odd you don't hear that at least often enough that you wouldn't find it odd.

I hear dissatisfaction with the fighter often enough. Not “non-casters are useless and casters are always the only correct answer”.

I don't think fighter rogue and barbarian are useless myself, but I can see where people feel that way. Especially if for them the fun is picking special features and how those features interact in the world.

Is that the same thing, though? I’d certainly say no.

I find fighters very boring as anything but MC material, but that has nothing to do with how I view their power level or ability to contribute.

Id still find them mostly boring if they always crit and could force all hostiles within 60ft with a CR calculated like clerics destroy undead to save vs instant death. (Excepting some subclasses like Echo Knight)

I’m happy to bring fighters up at high levels and make them more epic as well as giving them some kind of dynamic choice round by round. But always with an eye toward remember that the majority of fighter players play the most basic and simple fighter subclass, and that champion fighter is the most popular subclass in general.