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

[Kurotowa]

It seems to me that there are three seperate issues being discussed in this thread and it would probably be useful to treat them seperately.

1) Are Martials able to keep up in their key area (damage) when compared to casters?
2) Are Martial characters duller to play in combat because of the smaller range of options that they have?
3) Are Martials lacking because they don't don't have anything like the caster's utility out of combat?

These three things may all be true, may all be false, or may be true in some cases and false in others. They are not really intrinsically connected.

For me, the third is definitely the biggest issue. Combat tuning is hard to pin down because it's so context driven by the adventure and the DM and the party composition. Dullness is a subjective value judgment about playstyle, and different people enjoy different things. But narrative impact is, to me, an issue with a clear divide.

A high level spell can transport a party across great distances, summon angels and demons, raise castles out of nothing, re-write the minds of the weak, and divine the secrets of the cosmos. Meanwhile a high level Rogue can reliably succeed on skill checks, which many DMs limit to a far stricter standard of "realistic" outcome, and other martials get nothing to do at all. Even in combat, casters have options to reshape the battlefield in ways that martials don't.

Maybe the solution is to give high levels martials access to a pool of special abilities, like an intimidating aura that cows the weak or the ability to parry spells with a slash of their sword. But, and this is an important part, it has to be at least as distinct from the caster spell pool as the Cleric spell list is from the Wizard one. If not more so. And then future books have to carefully toe that line so as to not homogenize the ability pools. There can be a little overlap, like stomping the ground to create an Earthquake, but what martial fans really want is cool thing that aren't just being a Wizard with a sword.

 

[Flamestrike]

Hold on, like I said, there were no given spell components in this situation. Every spell component given to the wizard is, in my eyes, equivalent to a magic item of the same cost for the fighter. Which is why I've eliminated them, removing the DM fiat as people would suggest.

You're not removing DM fiat, you're exercising it by saying a 20th level Wizard who can easily make 25,000 GP in his down time, does not have access to iron and silver filings or other costly spell components!

I guess the Fighter also doesnt have access to plate armor and weapons either!

In other words its an unrealistic experiment. You're hamstringing the wizard by making him impoverished, and unable to cast half his spells!

 

[Mort]

Hold on, like I said, there were no given spell components in this situation. Every spell component given to the wizard is, in my eyes, equivalent to a magic item of the same cost for the fighter. Which is why I've eliminated them, removing the DM fiat as people would suggest.

So your Simulacrum must come from the Wish spell, and wouldn't have the 9th-level slot.

You can definitely circle one of them with a Wish, but they can even still participate in the fight.

Exchanges like this are why, generally, back and forth posts for a provided situation are fruitless. It almost always degenerates into a "it works" - "no it doesn't" back and forth.

An actual run through is really the only way to simulate anything like this and see what would happen.

@Asisreo I have no doubt you are attempting to approach this in good faith, as is @Flamestrike, but this kind of exchange seems to not be conducive for it!

 

[Asisreo]

Since my target is an extraplanar being, I am tempted to open with banishment. 4th-level spell, cheap and easy. Charisma save or get off my plane. If I had someone else to tank for me, that'd be my play--just keep banishing until it sticks, hold it for the full duration, done. But I assume I'm soloing here

You're not solo, but I want to gauge your instincts on what spells can work just based off of your ability to manipulate the game without a DM's guiding hand.

So, pulling out the big guns, let's open with wish into Mordenkainen's private sanctum. No teleport for you.

It goes off without a hitch, but their go-to strategy is to immediately fly out of range and

Spoiler: Creature Ability

cast Invisibility on them selves.

Although I don't think it would immediately matter.

Next up, forcecage. Depending on the situation, I might simply use the box version and put the planetar on ice for an hour.

Forcecage has a costly spell component, and you already used Wish to restrict their abilities.

But if it's important to actually finish the thing off, I'll use the barred version, put a wall of fire around it, and walk behind cover to read my spellbook for a bit while I hold concentration. When the spell ends, I'll peek out and see if it's dead. If not, wall of fire again.

If you're within Wall of Fire distance, you're within their own spell distance. They very well

Spoiler: Creature Ability

might cast Blade Barrier and Flame Strike in the meantime to hurt you, while also healing themselves on occasion.

 

[Asisreo]

Deleted: Never mind, I see the "challenge" is mutating. No costly spell components? Don't be ridiculous. Are you denying the fighter access to full plate, too?

It's in the original challenge of the post. I didn't know it needs repeating but I feel that costly spell components have the same weight as magic items, because while stores are likely to have plate armor if its a mundane military town, a store that sells spell components at the ready are likely to sell magic items as well.

Also, if it makes people feel I'm impartial, fine, I'll be willing to not allow a fighter Plate Armor or any equipment not within their starting equipment. I don't mean to be obtuse or seem like the goalpost is moving, so I'll at the very least do this to show impartiality on both sides.

 

[Flamestrike]

I think that's a somewhat misleading claim.

Casters benefit most when they're in a situation where they can basically drop one of their higher-end spells every round. Single encounters days certainly allow that, but in fact I don't think they'll show peak dominance, because at levels above about five, that's likely to be underkill - i.e. the caster will have quite a few strong spells left.

IME - when cleaving to the 6ish encounter/ 2 short rest AD using the AD guidelines in the DMG that is not the case.

At 13th level, you Teleport the party to the dungeon (bye bye 7th level slot). You then have 6 encounters to deal with.

You have 1 x 6th, 2 x 5ths, 3 x 4ths and 3 x 3rds (plus 1sts and 2nds that are likely used on shields, absorb elements, mage armors and utility) to go around (plus arcane recovery), and at this level, 3rd level spells like fireball and fly aren't the same thing they used to be.

Your BM Fighter standing next to you is 2 feats up on you, is spamming 3-4 attacks per round, has action surge, second wind and half a dozen superiority dice, all of which refresh on a short rest, plus 50 percent more HP.

In other words, even at this level, and at this encounter frequency, you generally have enough juice in the tank to meaningfully impact a few encounters (a choice wall of force or a banishment here or there), while the Martials do the actual heavy lifting.

 

[Mort]

It's in the original challenge of the post. I didn't know it needs repeating but I feel that costly spell components have the same weight as magic items, because while stores are likely to have plate armor if its a mundane military town, a store that sells spell components at the ready are likely to sell magic items as well.

That's one reason that setting the challenge at 20th level - and then imposing this limitation seems like a gotcha.

Stating 20th level characters don't have magic items is already a stretch.

Stating that a 20th level wizard who knows big time baddies are after him isn't going to take a bit of time to acquire some costly components (keep in mind 20th level wizards have ridiculous travel options) is absurd.

 

[jmartkdr2]

In other words, even at this level, and at this encounter frequency, you generally have enough juice in the tank to meaningfully impact a few encounters (a choice wall of force or a banishment here or there), while the Martials do the actual heavy lifting.

Well that's the point, innit? Even at the extreme levels, both martials and casters are usually able to meaningfully contribute to encounters. Wide gaps aren't built-in or 'normal', they're the result of particular circumstances.

Unfortunately, there is a situation that's common but detrimental: one encounter per long rest. We all know it's a bad idea, because we've seen it.

 

[Asisreo]

Stating 20th level characters don't have magic items is already a stretch.

Stating that a 20th level wizard who knows big time baddies are after him isn't going to take a bit of time to acquire some costly components (keep in mind 20th level wizards have ridiculous travel options) is absurd.

I agree that it is a stretch, but a large part of the discussion is that martials rely on the DM to give them options/abilities/choices but without that, they have nothing.

But if the wizard also must rely on the DM, that argument is harder to justify in my eyes.

Much earlier in the thread, I said that DM fiat is part of the game and isolating it is likely removing a big chunk out of it. But there was a massive disagreement as the Wizard could do so much more without DM intervention. I wanted to see exactly how much more they can do without DM intervention and if they can beat a simple encounter as easily as claimed.

I agree its a bit ridiculous, but I believe that since the Wizard is considered so powerful without DM intervention and the Martial so weak, it should at least be verified a little bit.

Does this make sense?

 

[Flamestrike]

Well that's the point, innit? Even at the extreme levels.

6 encounters/ 2 short rests per long rest using the Adventuring day XP chart in the DMG isnt 'extreme'. That's the median.

If its not the median, the fault (class imbalance) lies with the DM.

Unfortunately, there is a situation that's common but detrimental: one encounter per long rest. We all know it's a bad idea, because we've seen it.

Doesnt happen in my games because I use doom clocks, or simple 'nopes' to stop the 5MWD.

But I agree (and its obvious) - a long rest resource based class (Paladin, Casters, Barbarians) are going to dominate in single encounter adventuring days. Short rest based classes (Fighters, Warlocks, Monks) will dominate in longer days, featuring more encounters and more short rests.

Rogues are the outlier, in that they're rest neutral (barring HP) with most of their abilities at will or simply requiring set up.

Caster supremacy only exists when they're free to blat high level spells with no consequence. When they run out, they suck bad.

And THATS the reality. Martial/ Caster disparity only exists depending on the encounter and rest frequency meta of your campaign. If wizards are dominating, force them into longer adventuring days. If the inverse is true, do the reverse.

People totally ignore this context and it shits me to tears when it happens.