D&D General Compelling and Differentiated Gameplay For Spellcasters and Martial Classes

[FrogReaver]

There are lots of answers to the problem outlined in the lead post.

My guess is that creating a situation where martial characters dominate the arena of combat (with spellcasters being relegated to support or bystanders) and spellcasters solving all (or at least the overwhelming bulk of) other play obstacles (with martial characters being relegated to support or bystanders) is also a non-starter.

Alternatively, you can have obstacle engagement be a dynamic, emergent property of play while simultaneously having strong, coherent archetypes. You can have niches where you don't dominate specific arenas and relegate other "classes" or "playbooks" to mere support or bystander status.

Which is a non-starter because the fiction we are modeling has spells that occur on demand...

 

[Manbearcat]

Can you point out which area is a non-starter in what I typed above?

 

[FrogReaver]

Can you point out which area is a non-starter in what I typed above?

The part where you are advocating for a solution where spell effects don't always or nearly always occur when the caster casts a spell.

 

[Manbearcat]

The part where you are advocating for a solution where spell effects don't always or nearly always occur when the caster casts a spell.

That is not included in the post I typed above.

Can you point out where the play outcome (dynamic and potent engagement from scene type to scene type by all classes/playbooks) that I typed directly above becomes "a non-starter?"

I posted several possible solutions early in the thread, but nothing in that particular post.

Are you saying that dynamic and potent engagement by all classes/playbooks from scene to scene is a non-starter (that was what that post was about)?

 

[FrogReaver]

That is not included in the post I typed above.

Can you point out where the play outcome (dynamic and potent engagement from scene type to scene type by all classes/playbooks) that I typed directly above becomes "a non-starter?"

It's implicit to the concepts you were speaking of.

I posted several possible solutions early in the thread, but nothing in that particular post.

Are you saying that dynamic and potent engagement by all classes/playbooks from scene to scene is a non-starter (that was what that post was about)?

I'm not sure what the bolded means.

I will say this, the issue with your proposed solutions is that they don't work with the kind of in fiction magic that we are trying to model. That's why you can't have equal contributions from scene to scene by caster vs martial classes - because casters have an implicit advantage in such scenes under such in-fiction magic.

 

[Manbearcat]

It's implicit to the concepts you were speaking of.



I'm not sure what the bolded means.

I will say this, the issue with your proposed solutions is that they don't work with the kind of in fiction magic that we are trying to model. That's why you can't have equal contributions from scene to scene by caster vs martial classes - because casters have an implicit advantage in such scenes under such in-fiction magic.

That is what I thought you were saying.

You're saying:

a) I'm saying that you can ONLY achieve dynamic scene engagement by all classes and broad cross-class parity by making magic unreliable (I'm not saying that).

b) Dynamic scene engagement by all classes and broad cross-class parity is only attainable by making magic unreliable.

To confirm:

You believe (b) is true? If so, what exposure to games do you have with D&D's tropes (spellcasters and martial characters embroiled in conflicts against supernatural and mundane obstacles in particular) outside of classic D&D, 3.x, 5e, and OSR derivatives?

 

[FrogReaver]

That is what I thought you were saying.

You're saying:

a) I'm saying that you can ONLY achieve dynamic scene engagement by all classes and broad cross-class parity by making magic unreliable (I'm not saying that).

b) Dynamic scene engagement by all classes and broad cross-class parity is only attainable by making magic unreliable.

To confirm:

You believe (b) is true? If so, what exposure to games do you have with D&D's tropes (spellcasters and martial characters embroiled in conflicts against supernatural and mundane obstacles in particular) outside of classic D&D, 3.x, 5e, and OSR derivatives?

On b) I already provided a solution to b that didn't require making magic reliable. It wasn't a good solution as it had it's own issues - giving the player to much control over the fiction.

On a) then what other solutions are there than either making magic unreliable or giving the player a vast amount of control over the fiction?

I think you are trying to make this discussion much more simple than it is - by conceniently forgetting the other statements and positions that have been examined and dismissed. My answers to you depend on all that. So please keep that in perspective.

Oh, and It doesn't matter what experience I have with games outside D&D.

 

[Manbearcat]

Of course it matters if you have actual empirical experience with other solutions to the lead post's problem that don't involve magic being unreliable!

How could it not! Particularly if you are saying its not attainable!

Check out my initial post in this thread on page 2 (solutions 2 - 5):

Compelling and Differentiated Gameplay For Spellcasters and Martial Classes

 

[Undrave]

I'm still baffled at the Battlemaster maneuvers... Why can't I just use them at will, forgoeing the bonus damage?

I'd be perfectly fine trying to use Goading Attack all the time (even if the target can save against it mind you) even if it didn't improve my damage output. Maybe you can keep Superiority Dice as a limited ressource just to spike in damage every once in a while.

Which is a non-starter because the fiction we are modeling has spells that occur on demand...

But WHY should we model THAT fiction in particular?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Maybe... but fictionally shouldn’t magic and mundane things function differently?

Arguably, yes. But, plausibly only in the reverse: mundane abilities - stats, shills, weapons, gear - should have predictable, defined, reliable effects, while magical/supernatural powers and heroic stunts should be more open-ended and risky.