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

[Mort]

But it doesn't really matter. These two sides have irreconcilable differences in perspective. Some people just don't mind the imbalence, some tables overcome it through table norms and houserules, you don't see it as much if only playing pre made adventures with 10 x 10 rooms with 8 ft ceilings, etc, etc.

If you NEED table norms or houserules to balance out the classes then doesn't that basically prove the point?

I see a lot of that, even in this thread with (paraphrasing) "well the DM can make up the difference" - Of course he can, but the fact that he has to gives away the game.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

• SLAYER the simple Might Brawler
  • Brute
  • Champion
  • Pugilist
  • Thug
  • Wanderer
• FIGHTER the complex Weapon Master
  • Arcane Archer
  • Battle Master
  • Cavalier
  • Echo
  • Eldritch
  • Psi
  • PDK
  • Run
  • Samurai
• PARAGON the supernatural Bruiser
  • Adamant Warrior
  • Demigod
  • Dragonblood
  • Mythic hero
  • Trollskin

Sure, I'm good with that.

As long as the Paragon is available and goes from mundane to action hero to mythic hero with closer power, versality, and narrative influence as current full casters, I am good.

The rest of the stuff are good options to have as well.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

What is a mythic hero to you? To me it's Hercules who was literally a demi-god, but that's not really a class. Mythic heroes that can redirect rivers or chop down mountains? Not sure how you'd establish rules for something like that other than "the DM decides what miraculous thing the PC does" because I don't know how you'd establish boundaries.

If you just want supernatural warriors, we already have those. So what would a mythic hero be to you? What niche would it fill?

Why not? Aragorn is a class.

The niche is being a living legend who doesn't cast spells, and is better than the BMX bandit we have. Hiawatha, who can swim up waterfalls. Pecos Bill who lassos a tornado. Throw a spear through a bunch of guys like Cú_Chulainn. Strike men dead with a glare, boil water with rage, hold your breath indefinitely to pillage a sunken temple.

Since the game is so infused with superheroics that a caster can make a temporary demiplane at 3rd freakin level (Rope Trick), this doesn't seem a big ask. I get you want your 10th+ level fighter to be like a beat cop who struggled to kill some hired goons. The fighter is not powerful enough. Full stop. I want a guy who is at least as powerful as the paladin, and good in multiple pillars.

What powerups would a Valor bard/Paladin get that traded their spells for other abilities? That's the ballpark.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Unlike "EVERY OTHER CLASS" fighters get 8 ASI's 1-20 instead of the kind of features you are lamenting fighters don't get. Fighters would need to swap some of those extra ASIs for the other features you want but can't justify not taking GWM/Sentinel/etc with 20 in an ability score ASAP. Extra attack giving them a third attack at level 11 makes them good at combat even without a feat & they are still getting action surge second wind 3/7/10/15/18 martial archetype features and extra ASI. Why not just go all in & give them 1:1 gestalt levels if they are as terrible in all three pillars as you are suggesting?

If you give them extra power there needs to be a tradeoff somewhere.

No there doesn't lol. Because the fighter isn't remotely balanced with the top tier classes. Given their lack of flexibility, they should be MORE powerful than those with the versatility magic provides.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

If you NEED table norms or houserules to balance out the classes then doesn't that basically prove the point?

I see a lot of that, even in this thread with (paraphrasing) "well the DM can make up the difference" - Of course he can, but the fact that he has to gives away the game.

Of course. I was just pointing out that it's not really worth arguing about it. Some people are fine with that and who am I to say no? D&D is I think suppose to be a bigger tent so keeping that option and playstyle is not really a big deal, despite what I perceive as its flaws.

What is a big deal are these same people trying to dictate what the other option should be. This I don't get at all and I think should not be encouraged. Just let the people who want it design it and put the parameters around the Paragon Class and as long as it doesn't overshadow full casters (fat chance) then all should be good right? Just very strange that people feel they need to have influence on an option where they disagree with the premise and they don't want? Anyway, I know I am preaching to the choir.

 

[Azzy]

Just went back an look at the totally underpowered and bound to reality 3e fighter and the feats in its PHB i & ii and man does that class make the 5e fighter look a bit weak. I mean imagine if the 3e fighter could move between attacks, does not lose attacks by moving, and successive attacks don't get a penalty,and its class skills wasn't so bad,. it would be pretty awesome.

Now I wasn't a fan of skill trees and heavy requirements of feats. However having feats that were appropriate for levels higher than one would have been great for the 5e fighter. The expansion of the post level 8 fighter's capabilities besides raw numbers is pretty weak.

Yeah, there was a decent chassis there. But damned if, like you said, 3e base system, the feat trees with prerequisite skills and trap feats borked up the execution. If there had been more quality feats, fighter-only feats, level-scaling and level-appropriate feats, no iterative attack penalties, being able to use full movement, etc. I guess, in some ways, the 4e fighter was its natural evolution and 5e took it several steps back. Pity that, 5e has the right system for it, though 5e's feats are a different breed (and optional). I still think that 5.x could learn a bit from the 4e fighter.

 

[Aldarc]

There are already several spell based solutions. We can look at spells like Zephyr Strike 1st level, Ranger only, no material or somantic components that lets the user move faster and avoid AOO.

Tashas give us the example of psychic spells that are themed around a particular approach.

I see no reason why there can’t be a selection of martial spells for the book of nine swords crowd. Have a fighter spell list if needed. Create a new subclass with slots if the Eldritch Knight really won’t do it.

Then stick a feat that can be taken multiple times to expand the impact of magic initiate. Second time it gives a second level spell and an additional 1st. So on so forth.

Problem solved.

FYI, the reason why I keep mentioning the Battlemaster Fighter is because I think that most of us can agree that a Battlemaster does not cast spells. (This is also why I asked you whether Battlemaster maneuvers should be considered spells.) Instead, the Battlemaster utilizes a suite of martial power mechanics, which can reliably manipulate the game fiction, called "Maneuvers." IMHO, the Battlemaster provides a clear example for the sort of non-magical things that people are often calling for when it comes to fixing the fighter.

Even if we say that the Ranger casts spells, most people (from as best as I can tell) consider their ability Natural Explorer to be nonmagical in nature. It's just a skill or knack that Rangers have. This ability nevertheless expands their capability in the Exploration pillar without utilizing what spells they have.

How else would you describe things that lie outside the normal rules of nature, other than as magical?

I know you played Pathfinder, so you should be keenly aware of how 3e/PF1 did it: Extraordinary Abilities. 3e even said that Extraordinary abilities were nonmagical abilities that could break the regular laws of physics: "Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical, though they may break the laws of physics. They are not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training."

I find that this type of dicussion usually defaults to Fighter vs Wizard, but something like Barbarian vs Druid is about as bad in terms of out of combat stuff, and without the extra feats to try and compensate.

This is something that optimizers like Treatmonk often talk about. Classes like Barbarians, Fighters, and Rogues are often short-changed when it comes to getting new, cool, and useful class features in the upper echelons of play.

 

[Minigiant]

Sure, I'm good with that.

As long as the Paragon is available and goes from mundane to action hero to mythic hero with closer power, versality, and narrative influence as current full casters, I am good.

The rest of the stuff are good options to have as well.

Versatility isn't gonna happen. D&D spellscasters are more versatile than a 7 year old playing superhero listing their superpowers.

I keep switching on this but I now imagine the Paragon being the sucessor of the 4e powersystem where you literally pick powers on a AED schedule.

Noble Bloodline
Inhuman Might -At Will
Inhuman Agility -At Will
Inhuman Toughness -At Will
Perfect Bloodline -Short Rest
Power of Legacy -Short Rest
Stun of Stardom -Long Rest
Ancestral Weapom -Long Rest

Mythic Hero
Inhuman Might -At Will
Inhuman Agility -At Will
Inhuman Toughness -At Will
Exploits of Myths -Short Rest
Luck of Legends -Short Rest
Fate of Heroes -Long Rest
Path of Destiny -Long Rest

Dragonblood
Inhuman Might -At Will
Inhuman Agility -At Will
Inhuman Toughness -At Will
Dragon Scales -Short Rest
Dragon Wings -Short Rest
Dragon Breath -Long Rest
Draconic Elements -Long Rest

Herculean
Super Might -Ait Will
Inhuman Agility -At Will
Inhuman Toughness -At Will
Divine Recovery -Short Rest
Driven Leaps- -Short Rest
Divine Regeneration -Long Rest
Divine Beauty- Long Rest

Dhampir
Super Agility -At Will
Inhuman Toughness -At Wil
Inhuman Strength -At Will
Potence -Short Rest
Fortitude -Short Rest
Dominate -Long Rest
Presence- Long Rest

 

[Zubatcarteira]

For the whole spell thing, I think it's fair to look at Wildshape. It's ridiculously versatile, letting you use it to fight, adapt to different terrains, fly, increase your travel speed, easily infiltrate places, blend with groups of animals, etc, and each subclass can gain ways to spend it further.

Prob my favorite ability in the game, and it's not a spell, even if it's very similar to Polymorph. You can definitely give classes cool abilities without worrying about what spells can already do, just giving a spell to replicate the concept is usually what I do when I'm feeling lazy and wanna do a quick homebrew.

 

[tetrasodium]

No there doesn't lol. Because the fighter isn't remotely balanced with the top tier classes. Given their lack of flexibility, they should be MORE powerful than those with the versatility magic provides.

Fighter damage output is far greater than you & the others give it credit with o5e's generally low ac monsters multiplication of modifiers for each attack and the utterly meaningless hurdle of "resistant to nonmagical bludgeoning piercing & slashing damage". With you and the others so hung up about casters it's worth noting that energy resistance magic resistance and legendary resistance are things that can not simply be ignored with a merely uncommon weapon. This wouldn't be a problem if the areas being called for fighter to be improved in were not also the ones that other classes tend to call their niche or at least a strength. You can see a simple damage breakdown here & plus an almost excessively easy to use damage calculation spreadsheet to do some comparisons here.