D&D 5E Are Wizards really all that?

[Undrave]

Did you read my post? I literally said forget Hercules.

Robin Hood is essentially a real person. In D&D terms, he'd probably be no higher than low-end T2. What he can do is something that real (albeit skilled) people can do. I'm not taking it as a personal attack, but I do find it slightly frustrating that some people can't (or won't) acknowledge that the most exceptional fighter in D&D cannot even match the accomplishments of an exceptional real world person (without relying on DM fiat). I mean, if we're going to limit the fighter to what a real world person can do, could we maybe at least try to emulate the most exceptional people and not just aim for the middle of the pack? Would having a 20th level archer fighter be able to reliably split an arrow wreck the game for you in some way?

Yup, a lv 20 Fighter should match or exceed any world records. For example, the world record for a standing long jump is a little short of 12 feet 3 inches. In D&D, to break that World Record would require a strength score of 26!!! Even a Barbarian with their maximum 24 STR at level 20 falls short of that.

 

[Fanaelialae]

What does splitting an arrow have to do with anything? When would that come up in game in a way that it would matter but not demand some sort of roll (even if to see whether they could split more arrows than their rival archer)? I don't understand what you are trying to accomplish in play from a mechanical perspective. You keep expressing frustration without actually explaining what you want from a mechanical perspective.

The mechanical perspective is irrelevant as long as it achieves the desired narrative ends. Here's a few ways that splitting the arrow could be accomplished in mechanical terms:

1) The fighter can make a called shot, automatically striking the intended point if an object, or automatically getting a critical hit if a creature. You can use this X times.

2) When you hit, your next attack is automatically upgraded. An upgraded attack becomes a hit if you rolled a miss, a critical hit if you rolled a hit, or deals one extra weapon die of damage if you rolled a critical hit. An upgraded attack does not upgrade the next attack.

3) If you attack an inanimate object, it it an automatic critical hit.

There's three completely different mechanical implementations of the same narrative conceit.

As to when you would use it? How about when an NPC is about to be hanged and you want to show off by slicing through the rope with an arrow? I realize that's pushing the bounds of realism, but it's hella cool and definitely something a player might want to attempt. The fighter player is at the mercy of the DM. Meanwhile, the wizard player can cast Shatter on the rope and probably auto succeed (despite the silliness of shattering a rope).

 

[Maxperson]

That's a good point. Also, anyone who's ever tried to cast a spell irl knows that it isn't always successful. So you might want to add Arcana checks in order to successfully cast a spell. For the sake of realism.

A comparable for casters would be to make them roll to cast their highest slot(s) as that's the magic that is at their max.

 

[Fanaelialae]

A comparable for casters would be to make them roll to cast their highest slot(s) as that's the magic that is at their max.

Right, but I betcha if you actually made them do that, the wizard players would howl bloody murder.

 

[Maxperson]

your average 20th level archery-specialized fighter can't even emulate Robin Hood (splitting the arrow) without having to rely upon DM fiat.

Why? We have rules for breaking objects. DM gives the first arrow an AC and hit point(very low I'm sure) and off you go with your second shot to split the arrow.

 

[Maxperson]

Right, but I betcha if you actually made them do that, the wizard players would howl bloody murder.

Sure, but I'm not going to make the fighter roll athletics to get his extra attack, either. Now if you're talking skills, then both would have to roll for things at their max. That's what "in doubt" means.

 

[Scott Christian]

Yes. I have said many times in many threads, that's where the fighter needs help. They need to add ways for the fighter to be better in the other pillars. Combat is fine.

But this thread is not about the fighter. The title is: Are Wizards Really All That?

I was answering that question. The fighter was just being used as a point of comparison.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Why? We have rules for breaking objects. DM gives the first arrow an AC and hit point(very low I'm sure) and off you go with your second shot to split the arrow.

I'll grant you that I hadn't thought of that, but it still smacks of DM fiat. Sure, the DM could assign a low AC to the arrow. They could also decide that because the arrow is extremely narrow that it is AC 30!

 

[Maxperson]

Yup, a lv 20 Fighter should match or exceed any world records. For example, the world record for a standing long jump is a little short of 12 feet 3 inches. In D&D, to break that World Record would require a strength score of 26!!! Even a Barbarian with their maximum 24 STR at level 20 falls short of that.

It would actually require some strength between 16-20 + athletics and a good roll. Athletics is used to jump unusually far.

 

[Maxperson]

I'll grant you that I hadn't thought of that, but it still smacks of DM fiat. Sure, the DM could assign a low AC to the arrow. They could also decide that because the arrow is extremely narrow that it is AC 30!

5e rules are vague to encourage rulings. The alternative is going back to 3e where there are rules for everything and the rules arguments are endless. I've had a small fraction of the rules arguments in 5e that I had with 3e and I'm playing with the exact same group. I see 5e's method as a feature, not a problem.

Edit: I'd also argue that a DM giving the arrow an AC of 30 isn't DMing in good faith, which isn't a rules issue.