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

[Manbearcat]

I agree (which is why I typically focus on broad, noncombat applications).

If this was Dungeon World, the 3 things you’re referring to would fall under playbook moves (there are several) or basic moves (eg UaPJ and the particular Roles therein).

 

[Garthanos]

Wife application, you say! My wife won't run any untrusted apps, unfortunately.

he could have left it at broad application and got a similar pun out of it.

 

[Garthanos]

Portent My Analysis
Flexibility some times to aid allies and harm enemies (nice)
Affects more types of rolls this is also flexibility (saving throws ) (nice)
Unpredictability : you don't know til you roll (ok)
Infrequent only twice daily or thrice when entering epic
Can include mediocre rolls well I suppose that is better than risking a bad roll
Can be wasted while you get it on exactly the thing you want you do not know if you need it.

Did I miss anything?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A fighter with high STR often enough outshines the whimpy wizard.
STR checks are quite common in exploration.
If you don't build every fighter with STR 8 you don't have to complain.

 

[Undrave]

The thing I always find somewhat odd about all the times I've seen this discussion is there is little attempt to generate capability in those areas I see non-casters as sorely lacking: discovering things, surviving hostile environments, and long range mobility.

Adding combat depth is mostly pointless since every class has become combat competent. Combat breadth may feel neat, but won't generally change a failing situation into a successful one.

We've acknowledged this deficiency in the non-combat department and we've discussed it elsewhere. We're just focusing on combat in this particular thread. There's a brainstorming thread for non-combat capability if you want to contribute.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The thing I always find somewhat odd about all the times I've seen this discussion is there is little attempt to generate capability in those areas I see non-casters as sorely lacking: discovering things, surviving hostile environments, and long range mobility.

Partly I think because there is little that will seem non-supernatural that can compete with teleporting, flying, and breathing underwater. Simply being the guy who can march for days at rapid pace is thematic, but not useful unless the rest of your group can do so.

Mostly however because any suggestions as to martial-based exploration abilities tend to get pounced on and demands made that they go to a spellcaster like the Ranger rather than a pure martial class.

Adding combat depth is mostly pointless since every class has become combat competent. Combat breadth may feel neat, but won't generally change a failing situation into a successful one.

True. The OP of this thread is specifically about both combat and non-combat options. The martial classes do have issues with options in combat, but it is their out-of combat performance that has the worst problems.

 

[Manbearcat]

A fighter with high STR often enough outshines the whimpy wizard.
STR checks are quite common in exploration.
If you don't build every fighter with STR 8 you don't have to complain.

Could you give maybe 5 pithy excerpts from play experience (2-3 sentences) where the 20 Strength Fighter is performing at relative parity in dealing with tier-relevant exploration challenges with a Wizard when both are level 14 or higher?

 

[Garthanos]

The weight of his presence, the specter of inevitability through him looming:

1) Moralized allies to heights they would be not be capable of otherwise.

2) Demoralized opposition to depths that they otherwise had no business falling to.

How do you accomplish this in 5e?

Simple,

Reskin the Diviner Subclass ability Portent and have it work mechanically in exactly the same way (because that is effectively what happens in our world).

Perhaps call it Bold Presence and in Epic tier Kings Presence

 

[Manbearcat]

Perhaps call it Bold Presence and in Epic tier Kings Presence

You can call it “Snortling Piggies” for all I care! I just want it to work and yield thematically coherent, tactically engaging play!

It could be done differently in different systems.

Dungeon World may have a Playbook Move like below:

The Weight of a Thousand Victories

When your allies or your enemies behold the spector of your resolve, roll Cha and Hold 1. On a 10+, gain 2 more Hold. On a 7-9, gain 1 Hold and your foe/obstacle shows similar resolve (your GM will tell you how).
On a 6-, mark 1 xp and your foe/obstacle is reinforced (your GM will tell you how).

Spend Hold 1 for 1:

- An ally takes +1 against the foe/obstacle.

- A non-damage cost/complication is lessened.

- A damage roll against you or an ally is worse of 2d.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Could you give maybe 5 pithy excerpts from play experience (2-3 sentences) where the 20 Strength Fighter is performing at relative parity in dealing with tier-relevant exploration challenges with a Wizard when both are level 14 or higher?

I'm not sure I've ever run a campaign where that's been on the table(npi). My longest campaign, AD&D, did go to 14th, did have (for a while) a fighter and a wizard, but the fighter (as it was a low-magic campaign and I never placed a Girdle of Stone Giant Strength), never had a 20 STR - and, in retrospect the party Druid and elf fighter/MU/thief dominated "exploration." I played a fighter(/ranger/rogue) in a 3.x campaign that got as high as 13th (technically we made 14th, but immediately retired), but there was no PC Wizard. Of course, in 4e it'd be the status quo in most skill challenges that could be classed as exploration - unless, of course, arcana was the driving skill. 5e I haven't gotten anywhere near 14th.