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

[tetrasodium]

I will say this: Damage is a constant.

As in a character that can deal an ungodly amount of damage per round consistently is going to be a big boon in any D&D game (barring the few where combat is extremely rare; I haven't seen one of those yet).

Spellcasting and magic is less of a constant. In one person's D&D game a warlock with prodigy, actor (+ relevant skills) and mask of many faces is utterly game breaking. In another person's game it could be entirely useless.

That's the problem. The original claim was "The champion is still unlikely to be as good in both melee and ranged combat at the same time as the hexblade. They don't need any slots at all for this.". That last bit of your post obviously falls well outside his claim. If he wants to talk about noncombat elements like those it's fine to do so but doing that involves actual discussion. Vaguely alluding to spells solving nonspecific edge cases the other characters without a (generally) unnamed spell is not doing that. Listing a bunch of noncombat spells in isolation void of any context or anything likewise is not discussion.

I agree that the warlock changeling you describe could be very powerful in a highly specific niche of campaign.... However... you could avoid the need to be a warlock and just play a changeling & get some shiftweave. I also think we can both agree that such a campaign is going to be quite unusual & even moreso if that already unusual campaign is also one where combat is rare.

 

[Mort]

In a hypothetical 6e I would want more 4e concepts built into a 5e frame... that would start with the current monk and warlock (and artificer) chaises being the default classes for fighter wizard and cleric.

Why the monk? I find the monk design to be the most problematic of the classes.

Since the monks abilities, by and large, go of Ki - the class (at the early levels that people actually play at) is much more ability starved than it should be. Further, the design of the class means to be effective your mostly stuck in a very specific design and play loop - which is irritating.

Or do you mean the 4e monk - which certainly was a more solid design than the 5e one?

Also, fighter is (by a decent margin) the most popular and most played class (by surveys and D&D beyond) I sincerely doubt that, 6e or earlier, WoTC would want to mess with that by significantly altering the chassis of the class.

 

[Sithlord]

In a hypothetical 6e I would want more 4e concepts built into a 5e frame... that would start with the current monk and warlock (and artificer) chaises being the default classes for fighter wizard and cleric.

That is why 4E failed. Didn’t resemble the game or feel like it.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't think there is a problem with having simple and complex classes. The problem is that it is also tied to character concept. You may be a big Harry Potter fan and want to play a "wizard" but dislike the complexity of spellcasters in DnD. Conversely, you may want some tactical decision making with your Conan expy. Right now, the martial character is not going to be as complex as the simplest spellcaster. Which means you either choose playstyle or character concept.

That's a creativity problem.

I can easily flavor a complex warrior as a studious warrior who learned several specific techniques and tactics.

Good old sword nerd.

 

[ph0rk]

That's cute that you think those are needed to make "RotPK+1, Armor of your choice +1 and a weapon of your choice +1" look like child's play against "Gear: Bow, Greatsword, Full Plate. All +1" with GWM & Sharpshooter.
at any level the longbow with sharpshooter or GWM+greasword will out damage agonizing eldritch blast with rotpk+1. Leveled spells don't save your claim either.

If you are doubling down on the idea that a champion built where you pour every resource into being ok at both ranged and melee damage just to tread water with a hexblade when they are out of slots, go right ahead.

However, you bring the evidence if you don't like the claim. Or don't, I probably won't read it.

 

[Asisreo]

That's a creativity problem.

I can easily flavor a complex warrior as a studious warrior who learned several specific techniques and tactics.

Good old sword nerd.

If flavor is so adaptable, why can't someone just flavor a spellcaster class into a nonspellcaster with flavorful exceptions.

The easiest would be Ranger who already has a more grounded expression of their magic through skill.

Then we could do Paladin or even a bladepact warlock.

The only obstacle that I can think of is the case of counterspell, which is rare, but in such a game it could be called "disrupt focus" and break the ability of certain martial abilities (reflavored spells) and regular spells at once.

 

[ph0rk]

Good old sword nerd.

Kyūzō from Seven Samurai.

 

[Asisreo]

However, you bring the evidence if you don't like the claim. Or don't, I probably won't read it.

With all due respect, I do intend for this thread to have, well, at least some sort of dialogue between the participants.

Its certainly one thing that someone replies in an unrequested manner, but it feels almost like taunting when you request a response only to follow up with the fact that you aren't even going to entertain it. I'm trying to foster a thread that isn't about one-upping the other side, just questioning and reasoning.

 

[ph0rk]

If flavor is so adaptable, why can't someone just flavor a spellcaster class into a nonspellcaster with flavorful exceptions.

Antimagic is a pretty big one, but you can't un-supernatural a thing like Steel Wind Strike.

It's cool, sure, but there's no way to demystify teleportation, especially since it works over chasms, through bars, etc.

Wire-fu might be as close as you can get, but there are divergent fanbased for Wuxia and Kung Fu for a reason - one is much more fantastical than the other.

Its certainly one thing that someone replies in an unrequested manner, but it feels almost like taunting when you request a response only to follow up with the fact that you aren't even going to entertain it.

If you don't like a claim, it is upon you to demonstrate evidence of its falseness. I'm not going to do the work for them, and at this point they've been hostile enough I am likely to just ignore them.


But here is some of it: A resourceless hexblade with no feats other than PAM and no advantage can manage 22.04 DPR at range with eldritch blast and agonizing blast vs AC 17 (half orc), without hex or hexblade's curse. They can do this without the action economy costs of dropping their pact weapon. That same resourceless Hexblade can manage 33.83 DPR in melee against the same AC, including crits and Savage Attacks, without advantage or GWM. When and if necessary, they can spend an action to switch their pact weapon to a bow, and this will rise to 30.03 damage at range, although it will take them another action to prepare for melee.


They can do this naked, without any items, and even their pact weapon serves as an arcane focus.

At this point the warlock has used 2 ASIs to max cha and taken PAM. Not even a particularly optimal build because they don't need to be. Of their 6 invocations known, x are spent: Improved Pact Weapon, Agonizing Blast, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker. Two are free. One would likely be spent on Eldritch Smite, so really only one free. At 12, I'd probably consider Ascendent step, Whispers of the Grave, or Misty Visions - all offering really good at-will utility with no slots required. They also have three other cantrips, after Eldritch Blast, which might include Blade Ward, Mind Sliver, and Mage Hand.

Because they don't need magic weapons, they might have other wondrous items if the champion needs items.

Now, I'd really like to know by what percentage those numbers should be exceeded so that a champion feels balanced - because this warlock is running on empty, supposedly.

That percentage has to make up for something like three cones of cold or smites and True Seeing or Soul Cage. I'm thinking 30-40%.

This is basic warlock stuff, and I'm someone who cares more about engaging with a public exhibition could do better.

If it is much closer than that, then I would say the champion gets the short end of the stick in terms of balance.

 

[Minigiant]

If flavor is so adaptable, why can't someone just flavor a spellcaster class into a nonspellcaster with flavorful exceptions.

The easiest would be Ranger who already has a more grounded expression of their magic through skill.

Then we could do Paladin or even a bladepact warlock.

The only obstacle that I can think of is the case of counterspell, which is rare, but in such a game it could be called "disrupt focus" and break the ability of certain martial abilities (reflavored spells) and regular spells at once.

Because again like criticisms of 4e say.

The D&D system spell system doesn't really make sense for martial actions.

Also very very very few spells can be reflavored to martial actions. You can't flavor a wizard to look like an action movie star.

The idea needs to be done from scratch to really bring out the flavor, please the ones who want it, and silence potential detractors.

Paladins and Ranger spells are mostly blatantly magical and you must do work and to flavor their spells as martial.