D&D 5E Martials v Casters...I still don't *get* it.

[Asisreo]

Right. But, as pointed out, boons etc exist in the books. So we have that in common. Trouble is they're locked behind DM fiat. As we don't all share the same DM...that's where the problem is. It may be a technicality, but it's a distinction that makes a difference, I think.

DM fiat is the game, though.

And to be honest, I don't see how Online Discussions can truly be productive if the entire game's arbiter is left out of the discussion entirely.

Sure, we can't agree on how a DM will behave, but the DM must exist and therefore must be considered.

If the problem is because of "Guy in the Gym-ism," would it not be productive to remind the community of how to help within individual cases rather than just not speak out?

 

[ph0rk]

Why are Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters unconsidered in the debates?

I always consider an Eldritch Knight.

When I do consider an Eldritch Knight, I'm forced to contemplate the fact their archetype features can't get out of the way of the base class features by level 11. This feels bad.

Further, RAW, their options for utility spells are quite limited; even if you plan to take both Fey Touched and Shadow Touched.

One could argue that a Rune Knight does nearly everything you'd want to do with an Eldritch Knight, but better.

Arcane Tricksters are great, but rogues are great, and I don't think many people think rogue first, second, or even third when they think "martial". Mundane, sure, but they don't use the word mundane.

This is not an accurate representation of the argument. Your above stated desire is somewhat niche, at least much more niche than the general martials vs casters argument. Furthermore, to be an accurate comparison, your health-sacrificing caster would have to be in the game to begin with, just perceived as being continually subpar.

Also this.

 

[Asisreo]

This is not an accurate representation of the argument. Your above stated desire is somewhat niche, at least much more niche than the general martials vs casters argument. Furthermore, to be an accurate comparison, your health-sacrificing caster would have to be in the game to begin with, just perceived as being continually subpar.

But the argument itself sounds kinda niche to me.

If you could understand, it isn't people that want to play martials that the problem occurs, its the people that

• Want to play martials
• Want versatility
• Want to play into a high-fantasy character but
• Doesn't want to cast spells.

I just feel like this is still a niche audience that may exist heavily in a more grognard community, but isn't so heavily needed that it is even a significant minority of the fanbase.

That's how I feel, but am I wrong?

 

[TwoSix]

DM fiat is the game, though.

But that's not really quite true, though, at least for a fairly large portion of the player base. The whole point of having more detailed rules (as opposed to just running OD&D) is that they specifically grant players authority over portions of the gameplay, most especially over the portions of the game relating to the capability of their particular character.

One can argue over whether that's a good or bad thing for a game to have, but if you're arguing from the position that players having some rule-granted authority is a good thing, than it's natural to ask why some options for players (casters) have more authority granted to them than other options (martials).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

But the argument itself sounds kinda niche to me.

If you could understand, it isn't people that want to play martials that the problem occurs, its the people that

• Want to play martials
• Want versatility
• Want to play into a high-fantasy character but
• Doesn't want to cast spells.

I just feel like this is still a niche audience that may exist heavily in a more grognard community, but isn't so heavily needed that it is even a significant minority of the fanbase.

That's how I feel, but am I wrong?

Fighter has always been the most popular class. It still is in 5e.

And do you know what the most popular subclass of Fighter is? Champion.

 

[overgeeked]

DM fiat is the game, though.

Sort of. If you exclude all the actual mechanics of the game.

And to be honest, I don't see how Online Discussions can truly be productive if the entire game's arbiter is left out of the discussion entirely.

Sure, we can't agree on how a DM will behave, but the DM must exist and therefore must be considered.

Discussion, yes. But no amount of online discussion will change my DM who says "no" into a DM who says "yes". I'm not saying we don't discuss DM fiat, I'm saying DM fiat isn't a good solution to game balance. Every DM is different, so every DM rules differently (within a given set of variables, outcomes, etc). So the solution to unbalanced game mechanics really can't be DM fiat. DMs are as likely to make the game even more unbalanced as they are to make the game more balanced.

If the problem is because of "Guy in the Gym-ism," would it not be productive to remind the community of how to help within individual cases rather than just not speak out?

I don't see how. Players nagging their DMs about getting special powers and abilities doesn't make for a fun and welcoming table. It adds a lot of pressure to the DM who's already doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting re: running the game. Setting up a feedback loop of peer pressure does not sound like a great idea. Far better that the game itself is mostly balanced. Unfortunately it is not. So here we are.

 

[prabe]

Fighter has always been the most popular class. It still is in 5e.

And do you know what the most popular subclass of Fighter is? Champion.

Because --often--if someone wants to play a Fighter they want to do what they think of as Fighter-things. If they want to play a Rogue, they want to do what they think of as Rogue-things. They're not playing a Fighter or a Rogue to do Wizard s[tuff]. If they wanted to do Wizard s[tuff] they'd play a Wizard.

 

[Gadget]

But the argument itself sounds kinda niche to me.

If you could understand, it isn't people that want to play martials that the problem occurs, its the people that

• Want to play martials
• Want versatility
• Want to play into a high-fantasy character but
• Doesn't want to cast spells.

I just feel like this is still a niche audience that may exist heavily in a more grognard community, but isn't so heavily needed that it is even a significant minority of the fanbase.

That's how I feel, but am I wrong?

Given the length of time the argument has been a part of the D&D community (i.e. almost since the beginning, so 40+ years) it must have some traction. Though of course I cannot produce hard numbers to back this up. How you "feel" about the numbers is not something I can judge, but I'd like to see what data leads you to such 'feelings.' Dismissing it as something that is grognard thing may be accurate for all I know, but I'd hesitate to proclaim it as small a group as claimed above.

 

[Aldarc]

Yeah, if caster are more powerful than martials, making martials to be casters too is an unsatisfying solution.

However, I feel that one big issue that prevents fixing the problem(if you believe there to be an problem,) is that a large part of playerbase wants martials to be explicitly non-magical in 'they're normal people' sense and I really don't think this can work. If one person can do all sorts of supernatural stuff whilst another can do just things normal people in real life could do you can never balance that. I feel it would be best if it was explicitly stated that past certain level (tenish) martials are mythical heroes and do not need to conform to what is 'realistic' and can do all sort of superheroic and unreal stuff.

...being exposed repeatedly to magic, the essence of magic suffuses the physical being of martial characters, empowering their ability to perform increasingly more mythic martial feats despite their inability to cast spells or other forms of magic.

 

[ph0rk]

Players nagging their DMs about getting special powers and abilities

On that point, fully mundane martials like champions and battlemasters and samurai are some of the only classes that are entirely reliant on DM fiat to be able to overcome resistance in monsters with what is their core class combat feature.