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

[Gammadoodler]

Yeah. I'm not too concerned with encounter set-up for this discussion, though. If the DM is setting encounters up to make either casters or fighters king, and he can do both, then that's a DM issue and not a class design issue.

No..it isn't. If the martial's superiority in combat niche requires DM cooperation to secure, while caster's superiority in the utility niche does not, it is a class design issue.

If I tell you you have the fastest car on the road, but only when you are going downhill with the wind at your back, if your car is underperforming, the problem isn't with the guy who designs the racetrack.

 

[Maxperson]

No..it isn't. If the martial's superiority in combat niche requires DM cooperation to secure, while caster's superiority in the utility niche does not, it is a class design issue.

That's simply not the case, though. Your last few posts have involved the DM setting up encounters so the wizard can shine. Most high level fights don't involve that many creatures, and if they do, most of them are low level mooks designed to die. So what if the fireball kills them. If the DM is designing encounters to allow the wizard to shine, that's the DM's fault, not a problem with class design.

What's more, those monsters have be deliberately picked in order to avoid the huge numbers of fire resistant, magic resistant or immune creatures that exist at high levels.

On top of that, it's only for a few rounds out of the adventuring day, which the fighter will quickly overcome and surpass, unless the wizard gives up his out of combat versatility entirely. The wizard simply does not have enough slots to persistently use them in 6-8 moderate to hard combats a day.

 

[Undrave]

And since I know this will invite this criticism because it always does, no, "things everyone gets" are not enough, not in the game of 5e as designed. They could have been, in theory, but in practice the things everyone gets are such piddly-nothing stuff compared to what actual dedicated class features look like that I cannot accept them. It would require a FAR more radical re-design of 5e to get the common features up to the level that I'd be happy with them, and because I'm aware that's a non-starter for most folks, I don't even bother pursuing that avenue.

God I'm so tired of the argument 'use skills! ', 'take non-combat feats!' or 'you just need to role-play not roll play ' as if everybody else didn't ALREADY have that available?! Why doesn't anyone ever tell the Wizard to just 'use your imagination!'. Because they don't need it.

Because this is an issue that's been simmering for twenty years. 4e addressed it. 5e reverted most of that. People are sick and tired of feeling like saying "I prefer playing Fighters" makes you a second-class citizen of D&D-land. Feeling marginalized and forced to either play along or put up with just straight less than others get sucks. It turns what should be a delightful funtime experience into a constant reminder that the things you like are "supposed" to suck compared to Magic, because Magic Is Awesome And Always Will Be.

Amen!

 

[Gammadoodler]

That's simply not the case, though. Your last few posts have involved the DM setting up encounters so the wizard can shine. Most high level fights don't involve that many creatures, and if they do, most of them are low level mooks designed to die. So what if the fireball kills them. If the DM is designing encounters to allow the wizard to shine, that's the DM's fault, not a problem with class design.

What's more, those monsters have be deliberately picked in order to avoid the huge numbers of fire resistant, magic resistant or immune creatures that exist at high levels.

On top of that, it's only for a few rounds out of the adventuring day, which the fighter will quickly overcome and surpass, unless the wizard gives up his out of combat versatility entirely. The wizard simply does not have enough slots to persistently use them in 6-8 moderate to hard combats a day.

It isn't though. Higher level AoE spells have large enough range, damage and size of effect, that it just isn't that hard to break even and then some, and that's without the various status riders many of those spells come with. That's also ignoring the flexibility to target foes' weaker defenses.

Also, there's no deliberate enemy selection here, just using the same types of super simplified assumptions as @tetrasodium used when doing his damage calculation for martials, no misses, no saves, no additional enemy protections. I suspect the exercise @EzekielRaiden and @FrogReaver are working through yield more useful data.

Perhaps all adventuring past a certain level truly is all cramped megadungeons with no long sight lines at any point where the only emcounters are against singular high threat creatures. Seems dubious to me but whatever I guess.

And when the martial catches up is a matter of how much force multiplication the caster achieved, how easily the martial can get in position to do their damage vs. how many actions they have to waste to movement (assuming such a position is even available).

Although presumably by the end of the mythical 6-8 encounter adventuring day, they should..probably..catch up.

 

[Maxperson]

It isn't though. Higher level AoE spells have large enough range, damage and size of effect, that it just isn't that hard to break even and then some, and that's without the various status riders many of those spells come with. That's also ignoring the flexibility to target foes' weaker defenses.

Also, there's no deliberate enemy selection here, just using the same types of super simplified assumptions as @tetrasodium used when doing his damage calculation for martials, no misses, no saves, no additional enemy protections.

So essentially useless for any game played in the real world. I don't do that.

In the real world there aren't going to be tons of super high level encounters with lots of creatures for wizards to beat up on and when that does happen, they will often not be close enough together until they are on top of the group. That and many, even most will be resistant or immune to fire or at least magic resistant. Fighters will have some missed attacks.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

Fighters don't do too great against a horde of low CR creatures, even weak ones usually have enough hp to not be one-shot, at least. Say, CR 2 Ogres have 59 HP, so they'd need 2-3 attacks to kill one, even with GWM. Fireball can't one-shot either, but it's good enough to take a chunk of their health and make it easier for the others, especially if it's a horde charging you.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm so glad this discussion just slipped into the usual combat power argument so nothing will get done.

 

[Gammadoodler]

So essentially useless for any game played in the real world. I don't do that.

In the real world there aren't going to be tons of super high level encounters with lots of creatures for wizards to beat up on and when that does happen, they will often not be close enough together until they are on top of the group. That and many, even most will be resistant or immune to fire or at least magic resistant. Fighters will have some missed attacks.

If you say so... I guess we can only rely on acontextual unrealistic calculations with super simplified assumptions only when it supports the conclusion that martials have no competition in the damage niche from casters. Everything else has no basis in the real world.

Seems fair.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, in a scenario where there are a bunch of tightly packed, non-fire resistant, non-fire immune, non-magic resistant, non-counterspelling enemies for a 20th level wizard to fireball, fireball is good and not the only things the wizard can do.

IMO, the list of meaningful issues the Fighter could have to deal with is much longer, even more common, and he has much less flexibility to do something else when they arise.

IMO, In the grand scheme of things, fireball is a solid spell to base wizard generalized AOE damage on due to other spells also doing similar damage with different damage types. Ice storm and synaptic static come to mind as alternatives that can be used as needed against fire resistant/immunes and both do comparable enough damage.

 

[Minigiant]

Now that we have 2 "percentage of combat in D&D" threads here I am confident with these statements.

Based on the way the majority of ENWorlders play, a class that is 90% Combat and has little Out of Combat strength would mechanically be shut out 50% of their games.

Because many Enworlders stop sessions at rests and rarely grind a whole 6-8 encounters in a session, classes who recharge on long rests have an advantage at ENWorlder tables over classes that rely on at-will features.

Therefore due to the way ENWorlders play, most 5e martial characters rely on at-will, short rest, and lower effect feature does not satisfy the gameplay of a large percentage of ENWorlders in their base forms and require favoritism or house rules to maintain fun in them.