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

[EzekielRaiden]

Thanks for the offer. I don’t really think modeling is best conducted by people with a strong bias either way. I also am not confident that the modeling would be able to reflect the gaming table. You’d have to conduct hundreds of models with small variations and nuances, repeated to account for randomization. Build a computer program that does that and we can see.

Fair enough. I'm not really up for that level of invested time (nor am I confident I could actually code such a thing). We will have to leave it in the space even beyond white room: the dream room, where we are not even working with numbers, just vague impressions.

Though the offer remains open to anyone who would take it up, I don't consider it a fault to refuse. I do think that everyone should be much more cautious about throwing around statements of the relative combat prowess of characters from here on, if there is no interest in crunching even "white room" numbers.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Regarding the ranged fighter discussion.

If you build a dex fighter that uses shield and rapier and a longbow you don't have this issue. Which is a bit unfortunate as it is just one more thing that favours dex builds over strength. And I actually doubt that under point buy/array a strength focused fighter would have a dex of even 14.

There are couple of ways I'd start to address this. First would be getting rid of fighting styles, and just baking a lot of their benefits into basic rules or rules for fighters (and possibly other martial classes.) Using your extra attacks with thrown weapons for example simply is something anyone with extra attacks should be able to do. Thrown weapons have crap range and not so amazing damage, so it's not like being able to do this would make bows obsolete.

And other, and more difficult to address issue is the ability score generation, which I've for a while found to be broken. The point buy is very stingy and how the game is built strongly encourages minmaxing. This makes giving characters secondary competencies incredibly punishing. I feel the escalating cost of ability scores should only apply to your highest score! Sure, whether you main stat is 12 or 16 is a huge deal, but the impact of high secondary and tertiary stats is far less, so it shouldn't cost the same. And taking +2 with a levelling ASIs shouldn't be an option, because when it is, you basically always have to do that. If it was always two +1, you would always boost a second stat too.

 

[TheSword]

Following on from my earlier points I think there are a few other thoughts I and others have alluded to, that are worth expansion.

- The first round of combat effectiveness of a fighter, without prep or set-up can’t be beaten by casters. Irrespective of surprise they are hitting at 100% from round 1. This goes for tanking and absorbing damage as well as dishing it out. We know it’s possible for casters to absorb damage and reach high AC using spells but not as well as a fighter in round 1.

- We have been asked what can compare to the power of a 6th level spell. Well for a fighter it’s the culmination of seven or 8 additive powers. No matter what level, the wizard is only casting a single spell (possibly a cantrip as well). The question is not is any single thing a fighter has as good as a 6 level spell. The question is does the third base attack when added to all the other additives the fighter gets to their attack, equal the difference between a 5th level and a 6th level. While taking into account that the sixth level spell can only be used 1/day and the fighters extra attack is every round.

- While you can’t count on magic items, they can’t be ignored and the fighter sees one of the greatest enhancements to core power from magic items in a way that caster characters don’t. Wizards can gain power with items by gaining extra uses of a spell or by rare and small saving throw DC increases, that’s about it. For fighters whose primary roles are dealing out damage and absorbing the damage, every magic weapon ability applies multiplication to their primary abilities. Every + from armour and shield stacks with their own AC abilities and ability to absorb damage. Can you say the same about disintegrate or Mass suggestion.

- Wizards can often end up wasting high level powers. The wizard always has to keep something in reserve because they can never know when they might need to take part in one more combat. Or need to escape. A wizard with no spell slots left is one combat away from being a dead wizard. I also can’t count the number of times I’ve cast a protection like mirror image, then a long term bonus damage spell like Bigb’s hand, only to discover the enemy weren’t as tough as I thought. Wizards aren’t mind readers (unless they take a round to cast detect thoughts) and have to carefully shepherd resources. I don’t think you need a 6-8 encounter day for the this to be a problem. I definitely see it in the 2-4 encounter days I typically play with. One encounter days are not helpful to a wizard unless they know it’s going to be a one encounter day.

- The last thought I have is the sheer synergy of the fighter for working with other classes. In its simplest terms it’s the fighter standing in the way of the foes to allow the wizard to open up their full range of effects without having to spend two rounds buffing first. The reverse also applies. The fighter is the best recipient of the fly or haste spell… or bless. The fighter is also the character in the fight that is granting the rogue their sneak attack every round. The wizard isn’t doing that. You have to look at how each character fits into the synergy of the whole party and the fighter becomes a strong ally to any group.

 

[FrogReaver]

Thanks for the offer. I don’t really think modeling is best conducted by people with a strong bias either way. I also am not confident that the modeling would be able to reflect the gaming table. You’d have to conduct hundreds of models with small variations and nuances, repeated to account for randomization. Build a computer program that does that and we can see.

IMO, even with a computer program someone has to weight the various scenarios. In that regard it shares the same limitations as what @EzekielRaiden has proposed.

By the way @EzekielRaiden I'm game. I propose that I'll calculate Fighter damage for a few different variations of Fighters. Something like no Feats or magic items, +feats, +magic items, etc. I'll also calculate one Fighter build of your choice. I don't think a single Fighter build will ever do justice to the comparison because people's starting point for what is the best starting point differs so much.

I'll post some suggested ground rules in a bit. To kick things off I suggest we look at level 11 unless you have some objection.

 

[FrogReaver]

Regarding the ranged fighter discussion.

If you build a dex fighter that uses shield and rapier and a longbow you don't have this issue. Which is a bit unfortunate as it is just one more thing that favours dex builds over strength. And I actually doubt that under point buy/array a strength focused fighter would have a dex of even 14.

I'd just add that donning or doffing a shield is still an action. That's a pretty big tradeoff when encounters last mostly 3-4 rounds.

There are couple of ways I'd start to address this. First would be getting rid of fighting styles, and just baking a lot of their benefits into basic rules or rules for fighters (and possibly other martial classes.) Using your extra attacks with thrown weapons for example simply is something anyone with extra attacks should be able to do. Thrown weapons have crap range and not so amazing damage, so it's not like being able to do this would make bows obsolete.

Agree there.

And other, and more difficult to address issue is the ability score generation, which I've for a while found to be broken. The point buy is very stingy and how the game is built strongly encourages minmaxing. This makes giving characters secondary competencies incredibly punishing. I feel the escalating cost of ability scores should only apply to your highest score! Sure, whether you main stat is 12 or 16 is a huge deal, but the impact of high secondary and tertiary stats is far les, so it shouldn't cost the same. And taking +2 with a levelling ASIs shouldn't be an option, because when it is, you basically always have to do that. If it was always two +1, you would always boost a second stat too.

I find it really fun to roll characters. I like the variation is gives. But I hate the swinginess it gives when it comes to actual play. The difference between a 14 high stat and an 18 is pretty noticable.

Maybe point buy should only be for players choice 3 attributes and the other ones are rolled for.

 

[Minigiant]

=I think you perfectly demonstrated the thing I dislike. These characters have already have classes to represent them in the game, but you want to create duplicate parallel classes because you don't like the execution. I would rather improve the existing classes if they're lacking (and they're a bit.)

Isn't dislike of execution the whole point of the Barbarian, Ranger, Monk, and Paladin existing?

The barbarian existing because the Fighter class cannot support a Super Mode?
The ranger existing because the fighter lacks the skill sand special exploration aspects?
The monk existing because the monk features are too numerous?

So a supernatural mythical martial class could be needed because D&D currently does not support always on, at will mythic superpowers that is common in myths, legends, epics, and tall tales.

Many of the powers of such legends and special folk don't run out. They usually have full on weakness or require curses to not have their powers work. Samson, Gilgamesh,and Hercules' strength doesn't run on uses. Achillies is 99.9% invulnerable even when he dies. Most mutant's powers don't run out and this is source of great stress for them. Alucard and Blade's Vampiric Speed doesn't shut off.

So you have to balance a whole class around that. It's a aspect you see in other games where powers grow in power and flexibility with experience instead of number of uses.

 

[TheSword]

We talk a lot about how fighters are more dependent on stats, but in truth they just get more benefits from stats than a wizard does.

A fighter’s role is improved by having extra hit chance on every attack, extra damage on every attack, improving an already good AC, adding hp to a character who’s role involves taking hp damage.

A wizard’s intelligence adds to the hit chance of their spells, and spell DCs which is obviously crucial. But it doesn’t increase damage (in all but evoker and then only once). It adds flexibility to an already flexible character but doesn’t make the one spell per round the wizard can cast, do more (beyond helping it hit)

Wizards aren’t intended to absorb damage so extra hp doesn’t help them do that. They don’t want to be in the thick of combat so moving a poor AC to a mediocre one isn’t very useful to their role.

The fighter is getting direct boosts to their effectiveness in every stat increase, feat, magic item, extra attack, or ability, and every buff their Allie’s puts on them.

What does the wizard really gain to increase power apart from spells once they’ve put level 4 and 8 ASI’s into Int?

 

[FrogReaver]

Following on from my earlier points I think there are a few other thoughts I and others have alluded to, that are worth expansion.

- The first round of combat effectiveness of a fighter, without prep or set-up can’t be beaten by casters. Irrespective of surprise they are hitting at 100% from round 1. This goes for tanking and absorbing damage as well as dishing it out. We know it’s possible for casters to absorb damage and reach high AC using spells but not as well as a fighter in round 1.

IMO at lower levels this is true. At higher levels this is disputed.

- We have been asked what can compare to the power of a 6th level spell. Well for a fighter it’s the culmination of seven or 8 additive powers. No matter what level, the wizard is only casting a single spell (possibly a cantrip as well). The question is not is any single thing a fighter has as good as a 6 level spell. The question is does the third base attack when added to all the other additives the fighter gets to their attack, equal the difference between a 5th level and a 6th level. While taking into account that the sixth level spell can only be used 1/day and the fighters extra attack is every round.

IMO, the question you ask here seems to be making the assumption that a 10th level caster is already equal to a 10th level fighter. If the caster is already ahead at level 10 then it's no longer as simple as comparing a 6th level spell + slot to a 3rd extra attack every round.

- While you can’t count on magic items, they can’t be ignored and the fighter sees one of the greatest enhancements to core power from magic items in a way that caster characters don’t. Wizards can gain power with items by gaining extra uses of a spell or by rare and small saving throw DC increases, that’s about it. For fighters whose primary roles are dealing out damage and absorbing the damage, every magic weapon ability applies multiplication to their primary abilities. Every + from armour and shield stacks with their own AC abilities and ability to absorb damage. Can you say the same about disintegrate or Mass suggestion.

I did a comparison earlier (can't remember the exact level but...) A wand of fireballs was roughly equivalent to a +2d6 damage weapon in terms of daily damage.

- Wizards can often end up wasting high level powers. The wizard always has to keep something in reserve because they can never know when they might need to take part in one more combat. Or need to escape. A wizard with no spell slots left is one combat away from being a dead wizard. I also can’t count the number of times I’ve cast a protection like mirror image, then a long term bonus damage spell like Bigb’s hand, only to discover the enemy weren’t as tough as I thought. Wizards aren’t mind readers (unless they take a round to cast detect thoughts) and have to carefully shepherd resources. I don’t think you need a 6-8 encounter day for the this to be a problem. I definitely see it in the 2-4 encounter days I typically play with. One encounter days are not helpful to a wizard unless they know it’s going to be a one encounter day.

This I agree with. In a typical game the wizard will not use all his level 3+ slots before resting. He chooses to hold a few back. I'm not sure how to bake that into analysis but it's very valid when comparing actual performance.

- The last thought I have is the sheer synergy of the fighter for working with other classes. In its simplest terms it’s the fighter standing in the way of the foes to allow the wizard to open up their full range of effects without having to spend two rounds buffing first. The reverse also applies. The fighter is the best recipient of the fly or haste spell… or bless. The fighter is also the character in the fight that is granting the rogue their sneak attack every round. The wizard isn’t doing that. You have to look at how each character fits into the synergy of the whole party and the fighter becomes a strong ally to any group.

Fighter isn't actually the best recipient of haste or bless. You want a character with high single attack DPR. Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians and Rogues all fare better with haste than the fighter.

A single Fighter on the front lines is very often a liability. He is to prone to getting focused and dying. Grant him more melee characters in the party and he survives better, but each melee character you add also lessens the importance of having him up there on the front line in the first place.

I think there is a more tactically sound way to play. You want characters that are effective at range but can shift to melee to engage enemies that get to close. Something like a longbow archer Fighter that swaps to a rapier at the last moment to engage an enemy trying to run by him. Or a hexblade using EB that then swaps to a longsword and engages an enemy right as it nears the wizard.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

We talk a lot about how fighters are more dependent on stats, but in truth they just get more benefits from stats than a wizard does.

A fighter’s role is improved by having extra hit chance on every attack, extra damage on every attack, improving an already good AC, adding hp to a character who’s role involves taking hp damage.

A wizard’s intelligence adds to the hit chance of their spells, and spell DCs which is obviously crucial. But it doesn’t increase damage (in all but evoker and then only once). It adds flexibility to an already flexible character but doesn’t make the one spell per round the wizard can cast, do more (beyond helping it hit)

Wizards aren’t intended to absorb damage so extra hp doesn’t help them do that. They don’t want to be in the thick of combat so moving a poor AC to a mediocre one isn’t very useful to their role.

The fighter is getting direct boosts to their effectiveness in every stat increase, feat, magic item, extra attack, or ability, and every buff their Allie’s puts on them.

What does the wizard really gain to increase power apart from spells once they’ve put level 4 and 8 ASI’s into Int?

Wizards also greatly benefit from feats, magic items and stat increases. AC and HP are also pretty important for them, optimizing a wizard is pretty much just picking the right spells and multiclassing to get armor (or get a race that grants armor prof).

 

[TheSword]

Fighter isn't actually the best recipient of haste or bless. You want a character with high single attack DPR. Rangers, Paladins, Barbarians and Rogues all fare better with haste than the fighter.

A single Fighter on the front lines is very often a liability. He is to prone to getting focused and dying. Grant him more melee characters in the party and he survives better, but each melee character you add also lessens the importance of having him up there on the front line in the first place.

I think there is a more tactically sound way to play. You want characters that are effective at range but can shift to melee to engage enemies that get to close. Something like a longbow archer Fighter that swaps to a rapier at the last moment to engage an enemy trying to run by him. Or a hexblade using EB that then swaps to a longsword and engages an enemy right as it nears the wizard.

Martials are better I agree, though I would discount rogue because of the 1/r sneak attack and ranger because they don’t need the mobility and the changes to favoured enemy to 1/round.

The fighter though gets max benefit from the extra attack (because of the focus on improving attacks) max benefit from the mobility (because he lacks the mobility that a ranger potentially has) and max benefit to AC (moving an already good AC to great is very useful).

Paladins are great, but then always have been. If we start comparing ourselves to Paladins we all get little man syndrome.