D&D 5E Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

[Stoutstien]

So, its just a suggestion and none of the mechanics are tied to it? At wills, compared to encounters, compared to dailies were not tested against it? Just trying to understand the 6-8 encounters because I always thought 5E was built around it.

Pretty much. Not only was the six to eight encounter range not developed prior to allotment and recovery rate of resources that number is also based on the XP budget that is presented in the same section. What's more is that budget is actually from an earlier edition than what actually saw print for 5e so the values don't actually line up that well.
So not only is the 6-8 encounter thing purely something that people are forcing into the game because we have been conditioned that a baseline must exist so he cleaned to whatever fragments we can find it also doesn't line up with a single published adventure module.

If you want even further in depth encounters in it and them themselves are a terrible form of judging resource expenditures. Unlike a lot of pasta dishes even classes that have resources on the same recovery schedule don't maintain the same value throughout the adventuring day. A few weeks ago there is a thread floating around trying to figure out the value if you were to confirm warlock short rest slots into a long rest resource and in the end the only answer you're ever going to find is going to be dependent on the table. There's no formula to go by.

The only thing that we know for absolute certain is that one or two encounters are inadequate to challenge most parties regardless of how deadly they are because of the depth of their pool and on the other end of the spectrum once you get past five or six encounters it becomes a struggle to maintain any reasonable pacing.

Ironically if you were to split up an adventuring day to six to eight scenes where resource expenditures are possible it actually does line up. I would call each of these scenes and encounter but I don't because it leads to confusion with people who have associated encounters with combat or some form of direct threat to the players well-being which doesn't always have to be the case. The most important thing is the possibility of always one more encounter hanging overhead.

 

[Mort]

I said in the other thread, I'll say it again. I think the wizard should be able to do awesome things now and then because my fighter gets to do cool things all the time. I want to play a game where we're emulating a reasonably grounded fantasy novel. Making fighters into yet another supernatural PC or a demi god doesn't do that.

So what cool things can the fighter do "all the time" that the wizard can't?

 

[HammerMan]

So what cool things can the fighter do "all the time" that the wizard can't?

nothing... slightly more damage or alot more damage depending on optimization... but over all nothing

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

A further point of discussion. This is the list of fighter from fiction in a different thread. Of the list, few have the kind of supernatural/superhero/“narrative control” that people appear to be advocating for. Where they do have magic it is generally magic to do things that they already have access to. They don’t teleport or fly, etc etc. This list is why a lot of people don’t want to see martials with superhero powers. (And no, tolkeinien elf magic doesn’t resemble D&D magic in its effect.)

How many of these examples are in worlds where D&D like casters also exist? That's why you have to also look at the context of martial relative to D&D caster.

Many of those fictional fighters are in worlds where "spell casting" takes a 2 day ritual with blood sacrifices, has a chance of going wrong and consuming your soul, ages you 50 years, spellcaster only can do 1-2 thing well (divination, summoning, shapeshfting) and has very little direct blasting, etc., etc.

Almost no fictional magic works like D&D magic because it would be too boring and feel too superheroey (not even the D&D novels often work like this...).

I think a reason some people want mythic martials at high level is the nature of D&D spellcasters --- huge versatility, big power, and very little 'price' for magic. It's the Dr. Strange model not the Thulsa Doom model of magic.

Conan feels great in a world of Thulsa Doom or even Gandalf, not so great with Dr. Strange taging along.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I actually don’t see travel as big a part of exploration as much as I see creeping down that 10 foot wide corridor trying to decipher the runes on the wall. Exploration is any time you step into the unknown and try and work out what’s going on.

LOL that is just a dungeon crawl to me, not Exploration. Exploration is about the overland travel, finding the dungeon, figuring out how to cross the raging waters without PCs or pack animals drowning, etc. When there is a blank area on the map, that is exploration.

So, because of that, travel is included. I can honestly say about 75% of the adventures I run as a DM are spur of the moment based on a random encounter, which gave me an idea...

 

[DND_Reborn]

Druid did something that caused all seven Drow Assassins to go prone and they were all lumped next to each other because we were fighting in an underground tunnel. And then I pretty much Combat Manuevered: Sweeping Attack+Action Surged.

To this day when the DM of our table talks about it, he goes "Yeah he's a Fighter and gets Action Surge to do that kind of crap." and I have the widest smile on my face when he says it.

Well, then it wasn't...

seven Drow assassins with one attack (Combat Maneuver: Sweeping Attacking)

(one attack) as you implied.

And if these are actual "assassins" (as in the stat block with 70+ hp each) there would need to be a whole more more shenanigans or DM fiat going on here...

But you need not elaborate further as it really has nothing to do with the thread. If you want to PM me further details, feel free.

 

[Oofta]

So what cool things can the fighter do "all the time" that the wizard can't?

Do a decent amount of damage, comparable most of the time to the wizard when averaged out. Take blow after blow and remain standing. Stop enemies either by blocking the way or with sentinel, grapple. Shoving enemies back, knock them prone, jump across a chasm to hold a door closed, lift the portcullis and then holding it so the group can escape.

Being a fighter isn't always glorious, but that's kind of the point. The casters tend to go down really fast if you the front line doesn't at least slow down the enemy. That, and some people just prefer simple, easy to run characters. It's fun to just yell insults at my enemies or roar a battle cry while I come to the aid of an ally without having to think about it too much.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The posts about exploration and social being (relatively) inconsequential confuse me. Has no one ever run/played a session with zero combat but high stakes? I wouldn't say they're common at my table, but I would estimate they happen at least once in any a campaign and are incredibly fun for me (oftentimes, not so much for whoever is playing the fighter though).

At our table, a potential discovery (exploration) or tense negotiation (social) can have a more dramatic impact on the outcome of a campaign than all of the combat encounters combined. Is that atypical?

 

[Oofta]

nothing... slightly more damage or alot more damage depending on optimization... but over all nothing

So what do you want? Because to me being a dirt simple fighter is fun. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but you have plenty of options even with just fighter subclasses.

 

[HammerMan]

So what do you want? Because to me being a dirt simple fighter is fun. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but you have plenty of options even with just fighter subclasses.

I want a class (it doesn't have to be called fighter) with more bells and whistles, with closer to the abilities of the casters without them being spells.