D&D (2024) Martial vs Caster: Removing the "Magical Dependencies" of high level.

[Vaalingrade]

Bad dming is instilling a table culture thats not just afraid to just talk these things out, but will have to repetitively do so every single time.

Define the last 50 years of D&D culture. Other games don't give the GM this mystified status.

My group has an unwritten running list of random things we can do when we want to just go completely off the cuff in whatever game we're playing, and that all just built up over time.

A table shouldn't be relitigating intimidating the peasant every time the party passes through a new town, and when there is something genuinely new to hash out, there shouldn't be this culture where you're arguing yourself out of doing it out of fear for the whims of the DM.

Here's the thing: Not everyone is exclusively playing with a regular group. People pick up games online. They go down and play Official Adventurer's League, they play at cons. You and I?

We're very lucky to not have to deal with the slot machine of who you're going to play with. But we shouldn't forget others do and that the lack of rules and cohesion are a very real issue for them.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That you both still have clear roles to play in combat and to say that the wizard wasting time grappling when they could be doing literally anything else is to say the wizard should be stepping on the fighters fun.

This is why I talk about the bad attitude player being conflated into the discussion.

Unless we're talking about such a player, no wizard player is going to go out of their way to grapple. Thats not how the game plays and the only reasons you can suggest for a wizard to do this is because they either A) want to hog the spotlight to the detriment of their friends fun, or B) want to serve the hypothetical to prove the point that martials suck.

Well, yeah, any wizard who'd want to physically grapple a single opponent is being dumb. They either use Web to restrain (superior condition) multiple people or hold person to paralyze (far superior condition) a single person. Both spells available by level 3, BTW

 

[Emberashh]

Other games don't give the GM this mystified status.

DND doesn't either.

But we shouldn't forget others do and that the lack of rules and cohesion are a very real issue for them.

Sure, and thats why Ive said it could be better integrated than it is. It still exists, however.

Well, yeah, any wizard who'd want to physically grapple a single opponent is being dumb. They either use Web to restrain (superior condition) multiple people or hold person to paralyze (far superior condition) a single person. Both spells available by level 3, BTW

Precisely, which is why I brought up this point in the first place, to show that the idea that just because casters can do something doesn't mean the martial can't make use of it to great effect or that it "doesn't count" as something they can do in the game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Also note that Gourry without mind control casually cuts through rocks and ballista bolts using the fake blade tenuously installed in the Hikari no Ken's hilt by a tiny dowel.

I've fully noted it.

I also noted that you gave an answer before I typed this of, basically, certain people wouldn't accept a non-magical sword doing those things. And that's a bad reason to advocate that only magical or special swords can do these things.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I don't love this as a solution necessarily (personally, I think it's a strain on the skill system to cover both "mundane action declarations" and "utility abilities for all the non-caster classes") but I have noted before that as a game, low-level utility spells are a more interesting mechanism than skill checks in nearly all cases. You have a planning/drafting element, where you try and bring the correct abilities to resolve the situation, a resource management element, where you evaluate the value of expending any given resource to deal with a problem, and a tactical element, wherein you have a specific set of effects that you have to leverage for maximum value against fixed obstacles in the setting.

Skill checks can't really provided the first two, unless we're using a radically different model of skills where you're making daily choices instead of character building decisions, and rarely allow for the latter, particularly because we don't have a game with clearly fixed objective DCs. Skill checks are nearly always reactive instead of proactive. You're telling a lie or climbing a wall because you have to, not choosing to deploy Charm Person or casting Spider Climb, because getting this person on side or climbing this wall will prevent more resource expenditure or result in a better end state later.

yeah, i understand that it's not a great solution but it's somewhat better than the situation we've currently got IMO.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Well, yeah, any wizard who'd want to physically grapple a single opponent is being dumb. They either use Web to restrain (superior condition) multiple people or hold person to paralyze (far superior condition) a single person. Both spells available by level 3, BTW

or sleep or tasha's laugh both at 1st...

 

[James Gasik]

Here's the thing though; should a Fighter be using grapple or shove either?

We know that warrior type classes excel at single target damage. And, to paraphrase Sergeant Zim, "if the enemy wizard cannot use their hand, they cannot cast a spell", ie, dead is the best status effect. So should our melee guys be giving up damage dealing attacks to immobilize one guy or knock someone prone?

 

[Pedantic]

Here's the thing though; should a Fighter be using grapple or shove either?

We know that warrior type classes excel at single target damage. And, to paraphrase Sergeant Zim, "if the enemy wizard cannot use their hand, they cannot cast a spell", ie, dead is the best status effect. So should our melee guys be giving up damage dealing attacks to immobilize one guy or knock someone prone?

That's a pretty intensive DPR calculation question, that comes down to validating how many actions you're charging your opponent, relative to how many you're losing. If you've got multiple attacks and a sufficiently high chance of success, and by grappling or tripping you're effectively stunning your opponent out of entire actions, then dealing less damage is potentially a reasonable decision.

 

[Emberashh]

Here's the thing though; should a Fighter be using grapple or shove either?

We know that warrior type classes excel at single target damage. And, to paraphrase Sergeant Zim, "if the enemy wizard cannot use their hand, they cannot cast a spell", ie, dead is the best status effect. So should our melee guys be giving up damage dealing attacks to immobilize one guy or knock someone prone?

Well that question kind of springs up into whether or not any sort of status effect regardless of its source is worthwhile. If we suppose grappling or what have you aren't worth it, then that directly implies the only reason spells that provide the same effect have any value is because they're buttons instead of rolls.

So that in turn just starts in on combat in general being too shallow and giving fighters buttons isn't going to really change that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Weapon breakage.

A high level fighter could perform many great epic deeds with a mundane spell.

But blocking Tier 4 magic is too much for common steel. Masterwork steel sure.

Even a god cannot make a mundane pillow block a 50 cal bullet.

Why not? Why can a high enough level of skill not supersede the material? Like, if you are using a sword to cut something, and you have vibrations hitting back through your hands, you aren't actually cutting well, because done properly there is no feedback.

You are setting a limit like it is necessary, but I don't think it really is.