D&D 5E Should martial characters be mundane or supernatural?

[Micah Sweet]

It seems (again) that you're not satisfied with the basic design assumptions of the game. This really has nothing to do with casters and martials.

I certainly have issues with the basic assumptions of the game, so I get it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'm unsatisfied with the dishonesty due to the wishy washyness of the D&D community.

They say a DM doesn't need to give you magic items but then designs monsters that practically require magic items for the martial to deal with.

"Oh a DM doesn't have to give you magic items"
"So my DM can choose to not give out magic items"
"They can. But then the game breaks down"
"That doesn't make a-. Can my character be equivalent to one who has magic items in case my DM doesn't give them out?"
"Eh. No. I don't like that image"
"Then fix the monsters and magic"
"Eh. No. I don't like that image"
"So magic items are required but we are going to pretend they aren't."
"Yup"

Magic items are not "required" in a sense that game works without them, but of course having them makes the characters more powerful, and the game easier assuming the enemies remain similar. Of course in reality most GMs just take the character power in account when creating encounters, so the game actually don't get any easier. Most games will probably have some magic items. None of this is weird or confusing, let alone dishonest.

 

[ECMO3]

Cantrips do bad damage.

Heck, a longsword martial with 20 STR is bad damage vs all these 100 to 300 HP monstrosities printed after level 5.

Then what is your complaint?

A Wizard is not going to take a 300hp monster to 0hps without using cantrips.

It sounds like your problem is more with monster design than it is with casters vs non-casters.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Magic items are not "required" in a sense that game works without them, but of course having them makes the characters more powerful, and the game easier assuming the enemies remain similar. Of course in reality most GMs just take the character power in account when creating encounters, so the game actually don't get any easier. Most games will probably have some magic items. None of this is weird or confusing, let alone dishonest.

I would say most DMs do whatever the adventures says or whatever feels right for the circumstances. That has little to do with targeted intentions to make encounters easier or harder.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Third, where are you getting one attack from? Readied action does not limit you to one attack. Neither does reaction. A readied action is not an opportunity attack which only allows one attack, it's readying an action of your choice which can include the attack action. You get all of your attacks with an attack action. That you use your reaction to use the attack action doesn't change the number of attacks you get.

PHB 72 (emphasis mine)
Extra Attack
Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take an attack action on your turn.

A readied action is typically triggered on another creature's turn, not your own. So extra attack doesn't apply. If you don't play it that way, I'm not surprised it isn't a problem for you, but it also isn't RAW.

 

[Maxperson]

At that point you might as well delete con as a stat though. Its sole function would be con saves, and that is not enough to warrant a whole ability score.

I use con for endurance a lot. PCs are often pushing the envelope with what they try to do, from trying to swim the equivalent of the English Channel to staying awake two or three nights in a row. Con checks are great for seeing whether they can do these things or to see if they can avoid exhaustion from them.

 

[Maxperson]

PHB 72 (emphasis mine)
Extra Attack
Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take an attack action on your turn.

A readied action is typically triggered on another creature's turn, not your own. So extra attack doesn't apply. If you don't play it that way, I'm not surprised it isn't a problem for you, but it also isn't RAW.

Fair enough. The rest of my post still applies. The fights do not become hard over this.

Perhaps allowing the extra attacks during readied actions would go a long way towards making you guys feel like fighters are doing more.

 

[FarBeyondC]

Let's look at an all martial party. A 20th level battle master fighter, samurai fighter, berserker barbarian, and assassin rogue. No magic items.

How do they take down a Demilich (CR18, which should be an easy encounter)? It's immune to non-magical weapons.

CR4 Coatls could give them trouble. Again, immune to non-magical weapons,

The mummy rot from a CR15 mummy lord would be a death sentence if they can't find an NPC to cast remove curse on them (or simply can't reach them in time - no access to teleport).

Use your torches to burn them?

If absolutely nothing else (or nothing better), that group of four should have at least those in their packs.

While 1 (+ Strength mod) isn't exactly exciting amounts of damage, it's infinitely better than no damage.

 

[Minigiant]

Then what is your complaint?

A Wizard is not going to take a 300hp monster to 0hps without using cantrips.

It sounds like your problem is more with monster design than it is with casters vs non-casters.

It is.

Most of my complaints about 5e are DM side as I'm usually a DM. I can fix them. But most DMs don't or don't know how and then we have these threads.

 

[Scribe]

But a fighter shouldn't need to receive boot of speed to run faster and boots of striding and springing to jump farther. A normal human so trains physically for years would do so normally.

To a (YMMV) logical limit which is the actual issue here and why (besides the obvious 4e commentary hiding in plain sight) there are so many threads on this.

There is no consensus on what is mundane, what is appropriate as 'mundane' what is magical, what 'magical' even means "No no its supernatural!" and so on.

Until folks actually try and define and set parameters, its all just pointless mud tossing.