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

[Aldarc]

What people seem to be wanting, is powers that do similar things to spells, without the limitations. That are as powerful at high levels as high level magic, without the sacrifices wizards make. It’s just seems to be wanting your cake and eating it.

Maybe that is what you are seeing, and I respect that you have that reading of the situation; however, I see things differently from you. I see people who want a warrior with the reliable mechanical capability to exert an impact on the direction of the game in ways other than making things dead.

As such, I don't think that people are pointing to the wizard or spells because they want the warrior to perform these exact things, but, rather, because magic is a clear area of the game where players have mechanical buttons to push or levers to pull that can reliably exert a certain degree of narrative agency over the game fiction. Magic does not require GM approval for it to succeed. The player casts X, Y happens as a reliable result (assuming successful check/roll), and Z becomes the new state of the game fiction. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I suspect that the popularity of the Battlemaster Fighter is no small part a result of how it has a suite of mechanical powers that allows the player a greater latitude of impact over the game in a way analogous to spells. Again, it does not necessarily involve the sort of things that high level magic is capable of performing, but it does often give the players a mechanical means to influence the state of the game fiction.

Moreover, magic is not limited to combat. Magic can also have a profound effect in the other game pillars. So casters often have a means to mechnically exert that sort of agency in all modes and pillars of the game.

 

[Remathilis]

I can think of 2 ways and there are more:

1) you give them meta currency to mold the fiction. "my old buddy is a guard at the keep and he is disatisfied with his treatment at the hands of Baddy X". Not really embraced by D&D but it works for other games so you can have Batman and Superman together.

2) You give them mythical martial abilities that are outside the action economy that allow for similiar effects but are not the same as D&D magic. (they are 'magical' in the sense that they are fantastical in a fantasy world)

Why is fly useful? Allows you to easily fight flying enemies and allows you to get to places that might be difficult.

So, some combat ability to reliably knock down fliers or jump on their backs. Some movement ability that lets you use any crazy jumps, handholds, vines, etc. to move from point X to point Y without any checks.

Dimension door = break through walls
Teleport = there was a great epic destiney ability in 4e:

Dark Road (24th level): You can walk to any destination you desire in a single, uninterrupted 24-hour period of walking. No matter how distant the location, or how many planes separate you from it, you reach the destination 24 hours after you begin, finding shortcuts, portals, or other modes of transport previously unknown to you. You do not require any rest, food, or water during this travel, except to recharge powers and regain healing surges. During your journey, you are safe from hazards, attacks, and other dangers.

Of course, not all spells can be replicated. Which is ok.

One of the keys I think though is to let mythic martial abilities break the "1 action = 1 dicrete move" that is most regular martial abililties and let them be reliable.

You're getting closer to the heart of the matter.

D&D doesn't really have a lot of meta currency to change the narrative of events. While some of it's rules are fairly abstract (HP) it almost always uses descret action/reaction as it's method of resolution. In other words, the action justifies the result, rather than the result justifying the action.

Now, D&D could go into a more results-oriented method of resolution, where a character describes his intended result (I convince the guard to let me pass, I get up to the balcony) and spends the requisite token and the method is narrated (you cast a charm spell, you fast-talk the guard, you put on a low-cut top and drug his wine) but that would be a fairly radical departure from declaring an action (I cast a charm spell, I use the deception skill on the guard) and the effect is narrated, varying by the type of action and token used.

I'm not saying that's bad, just very different from the current game assumption and would probably require more than a 5e refresh to implement.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I understand this isn't a real suggestion, but how would this look like in-practice. Would "Destroy Mountain" and "Flow River" be a feature? If they were, and let's assume they were automatically given so it's not a choice-point, how many more features would they need or how specific/loose would they be.

For example, Destroy Mountain means they can break a mountain in, let's say, a minute. Okay, but does that mean all mountains are destroyed equally? Does this player now have the capability to basically destroy entire dungeons only because they reside in a mountain? Are we leaving this up to the DM or are we coming up with a rigorous system. Is this at-will or daily? Or based off of a resource? It would be odd if a fighter could destroy a mountain and kill 8 dragons in a day, but two mountains and no dragons are suddenly too much. Although, I'm fine with oddities like that.

The issue is that now the fighter can break mountains but can't cut trees. Or they can redirect rivers but can't swim against a current. Making them features will usually cause each feat of strength to be difficult to compare with similar but different feats of strength.

So then the alternative solution would be to rather let mountains have some form of destructibility and rivers have some subsystem that dictates how they can be redirected and trees have a set amount of damage until they're cut. All well and good, but that system becomes exhaustive quickly. Technically, that a loose-form subsystem like this is already baked into the rules. If a DM decides a mountain counts as a gargantuan object, there are rules to guide them, making it possible for a fighter to do so.

Though, I'm assuming that would be unsatisfactory, which leads back into creating a bigger subsystem just for destroying mountains. They certainly could spend their time on making this subsystem, though I don't see why they'd bother. It doesn't really have much to do with their core themes and adventures might never see a mountain in their campaign anyways. It adds pages to their books and expends more ink, but those pages and ink could be served to adding a more beloved subclass or that time could be spent creating hundreds of more iconic monsters.

It seems like your objection is that because the rules for such a feature could be poorly designed, nothing even similar to such a feature would ever be worth attempting. That smells like a fallacy to me.

Here's an simple suggestion:
At 11th level, and every 2 levels thereafter, the fighter can choose a rare item. At 17th level, the item may be very rare. At 19th, it may be legendary. Flavor as desired.

Not exactly a crazy page count, nor did designing it break my brain.

Although, given the page count that some spells take up, one big fighter ability that requires a page (or, gasp, even two) doesn't strike me as all that unreasonable.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

Maybe that is what you are seeing, and I respect that you have that reading of the situation; however, I see things differently from you. I see people who want a warrior with the reliable mechanical capability to exert an impact on the direction of the game in ways other than making things dead.

As such, I don't think that people are pointing to the wizard or spells because they want the warrior to perform these exact things, but, rather, because magic is a clear area of the game where players have mechanical buttons to push or levers to pull that can reliably exert a certain degree of narrative agency over the game fiction. Magic does not require GM approval for it to succeed. The player casts X, Y happens as a reliable result (assuming successful check/roll), and Z becomes the new state of the game fiction. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Moreover, magic is not limited to combat. Magic can also have a profound effect in the other game pillars. So casters often have a means to mechnically exert that sort of agency in all modes and pillars of the game.

Bingo.

 

[Vaalingrade]

So tell me what level "spells" a fighter's shenanigans should replicate?

It's not a question of level, or replication.

It's a question of getting things to do:

Big Heroic Leaps
Mighty feats of strength
Crashing blows that throw enemies around
clobbering hordes of cannon fodder critters around you in one great sweep.
Taunts, staredowns, battlecries that unnever, goad or terrify enemies.
smashing walls
lifting and throwing huge things
grabbing one guy and hitting his friend with him
being a danger to anyone in a room with both you and matter like Jackie Chan.
running down wild animals like Tarzan.
executing basic battlefield tactics with allies including rallies
having some kind of danger sense
not being threatened by sad goblins when they are the pinnacle of mortal existence (don't say they're not. This was a specific design choice)

 

[Neonchameleon]

the most interesting fighter subclasses add magic...

I thought I'd pick up on this to say that you miss the corollary. The most interesting fighter subclasses add magic without adding spells. The Eldritch Knight is, to me, the least interesting of the actually good fighter subclasses (and actually less interesting than the Battlemaster). The Rune Knight and Psi Warrior I find about equal second place, with the most interesting subclass being the Echo Knight because it's magical and can do stuff without being a caster. Instead it is what it is. And it's not a coincidence I think that both these subclasses showed up in Tasha's - which is the book that the traditionalists seem to detest.

What people seem to be wanting, is powers that do similar things to spells, without the limitations. That are as powerful at high levels as high level magic, without the sacrifices wizards make. It’s just seems to be wanting your cake and eating it.

Strawman - except in the cases like Steel Wind Strike where the spellcaster is trampling all over martial territory. One of the things I've frequently pointed out about the "martial at will" paradigm is that what you end up with is the martial characters being untiring robots. No one said fighters shouldn't have limitations - just that they are set far far too low.

And the only "sacrifice" wizards make is being awesome and able to bend the rules of reality. Once you get past the first few levels they aren't even that squishy.

 

[Asisreo]

Maybe that is what you are seeing, and I respect that you have that reading of the situation; however, I see things differently from you. I see people who want a warrior with the reliable mechanical capability to exert an impact on the direction of the game in ways other than making things dead.

So then, what's wrong with magic, specifically, performing that role?

It's not like such a character doesn't exist, it's just that they use magic as their proxy. I can make a Ranger exactly as that warrior-type, but that's apparently not enough.

What is wrong with magic? Is it shameful that your warrior uses the essence of the weave to bolster his allies or navigate a wilderness? What satisfaction do you get from a warrior that does the same thing a Ranger does, but nonmagical?

It seems like your objection is that because the rules for such a feature could be poorly designed, nothing even similar to such a feature would ever be worth attempting. That smells like a fallacy to me.

Well, not exactly. It's less of an objection and more confusion.

I actually think such rules could be designed with great precision and do exactly as intended. If WoTC invested in doing it, they could achieve it relatively easily. My confusion is how that should be a priority for them enough to do it. How often are martial players truly wishing to jump extraordinarily far? And is the lack of these rules hindering the game objectively?

If it's a matter of personal preference, then it isn't a problem or issue that needs to be resolved. And throwing shade at WoTC for not providing utility martials could be seen as inappropriate. I'm asking, what turns this from a design that doesn't cater to everyone into a problem?

 

[HammerMan]

There is "more complex." A champion is much simpler than a rogue or battlemaster fighter. It's just that the most complex martial is less complex than the simplest caster. Which only reaffirms that the dichotomy exists, though the question is less about that dichotomy existing and more about why it should be a priority to get rid of.

yes there is a range... a realy short one that goes from so basic no thought needed to slightly baisc.... not nothing on par with artficer or warlock let alone sorcerer... and cleric/druid/wizard blow them out of the water.

 

[TheSword]

Maybe that is what you are seeing, and I respect that you have that reading of the situation; however, I see things differently from you. I see people who want a warrior with the reliable mechanical capability to exert an impact on the direction of the game in ways other than making things dead.

As such, I don't think that people are pointing to the wizard or spells because they want the warrior to perform these exact things, but, rather, because magic is a clear area of the game where players have mechanical buttons to push or levers to pull that can reliably exert a certain degree of narrative agency over the game fiction. Magic does not require GM approval for it to succeed. The player casts X, Y happens as a reliable result (assuming successful check/roll), and Z becomes the new state of the game fiction. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I suspect that the popularity of the Battlemaster Fighter is no small part a result of how it has a suite of mechanical powers that allows the player a greater latitude of impact over the game in a way analogous to spells. Again, it does not necessarily involve the sort of things that high level magic is capable of performing, but it does often give the players a mechanical means to influence the state of the game fiction.

Moreover, magic is not limited to combat. Magic can also have a profound effect in the other game pillars. So casters often have a means to mechnically exert that sort of agency in all modes and pillars of the game.

That’s fair.

But if people are looking for something that looks, sounds, smells and acts like magic. Maybe the solution is to have magic.

Spells are just useful packages for granular abilities that can be selected ad hoc and applied as the user wishes.

We acknowledge that when a sorcerer is using magic it will be different to the way a wizard uses it, or a bard or a warlock. Why can’t the fighter be happy with that?

When the fighter smashes his maul into the ground and causes everyone around him to save vs Str or take damage and be knocked back, why does that have to be fundamentally different to the Thunderwave spell?

Magic is just another way of saying beyond the norm.

 

[Remathilis]

off the top of my head I would start with the gibs slap...(I know it had a diffrent name but that was what we called it based on NCIS) where when an ally fails a skill check you can let them reroll it. next the gibs stare (Yeah when 4e came out with skill powers a bunch of us where into NCIS) where with a look you can auto accomplish a social skill.

on the more physical end, I would go with "Move mountains" like literally at level 17 let a fighter just destroy/move large chucks of terrain (maybe not mountains...that was tongue in cheek) I will keep coming back to the 'devert river to clean stables' and stomp cause minor earth quake as my examples.

superman punches through time, superboy punches reality (retcon punch) and the excuse is they are just THAT strong... those should be crazy weird things, but they are pretty much on par with wish.

even at lower level an option (not every fighter, not every rogue, just an option that can be taken) to just duplicate knock and kick through magically sealed doors...

bat back spells... like just use your martial agility to counter spell

But why can Hercules move a river? He's the son of a God. Superman punch reality? He's an alien who gains power from the sun. They are "magical" in the sense that they aren't mortals. They have special birthrights that set them apart. They aren't normal people who trained hard enough to punch reality.

And if the goal is that every class is "Magical" in some way, be it spells, superhuman abilities or whatever, that's fine. Barbarian rage and monk's ki are basically magical in nature, so it's not a giant stretch. The only thing you're losing is the true everyman archetype, and it wasn't exactly a big one anyway. Now, your fighter isn't just a farmboy who learned to fight, your fighter is a farmboy who found out he's the last survivor of a dead world, or the son of a powerful Force user, or the seventh son of a seventh son, etc.