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

[Vaalingrade]

Im saying if you want characters to do high magical things in utility, to remove "magical dependencies", then they will need magical items as they ar enot mages, do you understand what im mean?

That to remove magical dependencies, we should deepen magical dependencies?

And once we can balance a tack hammer on out heads, we can head off our foes with a powerful attack?

But why am I wearing watermelons on my feet?

 

[Emberashh]

haven't seen this before, let me take a look...
...okay, so they're like...maneuvers designed to stack with a super effect if you spam them? that's pretty neat, honestly, but i uh...don't really think it's quite as different as you've been hyping them up to be. like, it reads as another type of maneuver system to me. i don't have any problem with that - hell, i dig it - but it does make the last bit of discussion feel a tad redundant.

They're the same idea in concept but how they play is very different. You can just spam them if you like, but the idea is that you'll get a much better effect out of combining them, especially once you can get the 5th Level effect without having to use the same move. And thats without considering synergies with other PCs; movement in particular is going to be a lot more important and whether or not an enemy (or a PC) can even move at all is going to shape fights. For instance, just using the 3 Martials I described, a Barbarian could use Slam! to displace an enemy from their own party (lets say they were in a shieldwall), and then Warrior can follow up with Leg Strikes and a Pommel Strike to lock them into place and stun then, and then a Ravager Rogue could come in for easy backstabs and, if the mook isn't already dead 3x over, hit them for some big time damage.

Essentially, its meant to be a vehicle for tactics without it being a requirement and without it being just buttons to press.

Meanwhile with 5es take on maneuvers, they're just one and done and there is very little interaction between them or much else. And it isn't helped either by the fact that theres only like, 20 of them or something.

Laserllamas take on the system is a dramatically better one, though IIRC even he didn't explore the idea of maneuvers that require multiple dice, or even ones that get better if you burn more dice. All things that would go farther in bringing more parity with casters, even going as far as being near mirrors mechanically. (Upcasting vs mult dice)

 

[Gammadoodler]

They dont need magic to improve their abilities this is not what im talking about.

Im saying if you want characters to do high magical things in utility, to remove "magical dependencies", then they will need magical items as they ar enot mages, do you understand what im mean?

I agree martials should get some cooler abilities some of which are(unnecessarily) tied to spells.

But i also feel there are some things that are straight-up just magic, and to do those things them having access to magic items to allow it is part of the game. A lot of casters spells are not meant to be exclusive to them, other characters can access magic to do stuff via these ideas, id argue that is a bigger point of balancing that people think about.

I understand. I just disagree, at least in part.

Very little in a fantasy RPG set in a fantasy world needs to be "just straight up magic" outside of spellcasting. Most of the extraordinary stuff can just be "how the world works". Maybe it's magic, maybe it's physics, chemistry, biology, whatever.

That includes how the classes function in the setting. So, ultimately, from my perspective, class capabilities can be balanced against each other mechanically on a one for one basis across the pillars of play.

Once you have the balance of capabilities, you adjust the narrative flavor to suit(or not potentially).

And then finally you add the toys, items that can expand characters capabilities (whether magic or otherwise), balance those, and adjust flavor to suit (or not)

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is a big point though.

1.The most classic is that magic is "impossible" and does not "work" under the rules of "modern science" , so it's Anti-Science. This is the classic Mundane vs Magic. This also has the split of things must be all mundane or all magic. The vast bulk of all RPG and all Fiction use this one. Nearly any movie that has magic in it is SURE to have a scientist character that says "But that is impossible! It breaks the laws of science!"

2.The other side is that there is NO difference between "magic" and "mundane". Everything follows the same Universal Rules. This one is much more rare in a RPG or any Fiction. The only major "popular" fiction that features it is Marvel comics. Both Dr. Strange and Thor use "magic", but it's stated that it's "not", and it's just "unknown" science and technology.

3.Then you get the weird middle point. This is where psionics are. They "seem" like magic...but are "science".

#2 is less rare than you think. It is also the exact same as what DnD does.

The problem with #1 is that, while people make this distinction, it is a distinction that ignores what science IS. Science is observation of natural/real phenomena and encoding rules to them. And even the most emotionally charged, soft magic does have rules. Heck, we dream and dreams are not 100% explained by science yet... but we wouldn't refer to them as magic. And in a world where words, gestures and intent can harness an otherwise unseen force to produce energy... that wouldn't be "anti-science" because the entire point of science is to observe reality, and magic is reality in those settings.

 

[Asisreo]

I find it interesting that these discussions pretty much never even have a passing mention of the Monk.

Despite that the monk can run almost 200ft up a wall, almost always nullify terminal fall damage, wade through a poison lake or run over it if they want to, survive indefinitely without food or water, and naturally cover a lot of the weaknesses martials have during combat.

And, of course, all of that is the base class.

 

[Krachek]

Santa brings toys.. fun stuff for the kids to play with.

You don't rely on Santa for necessities like textbooks and transportation.

Indeed items are for mere fun. If PCs need transportation to go somewhere they will eventually always find a way to go where they want whatever the party composition.

 

[James Gasik]

I find it interesting that these discussions pretty much never even have a passing mention of the Monk.

Despite that the monk can run almost 200ft up a wall, almost always nullify terminal fall damage, wade through a poison lake or run over it if they want to, survive indefinitely without food or water, and naturally cover a lot of the weaknesses martials have during combat.

And, of course, all of that is the base class.

Generally, Monk doesn't fit the fantasy some players want from a martial warrior.

They want to use big weapons, with big strength, and big armor! Not be a weedy little dodgy man in pajamas!

That and the Monk is explicitly supernatural, which some people don't want, which is exactly what holds back design (in my opinion, YMMV).

 

[Chaosmancer]

DnD is a magical game, and most fantasy heroes rely on magical items, i feel people need to just get over this hang up.

Magic items are expected to be gotten in the game, people argue it but they literally tell you this, why not embrace it.

Second assertion is incorrect. Most Fantasy Heroes DO NOT rely on magical items.

Heck, I'm just going to turn around. Let's see...

Dresden Files? Dresden does not RELY on magical items. He has them, many he made himself, but he can do magic without them.
Kim Harrison Hollows series, Rachel Morgan does not rely on magical items.
Ilona Andrews Kate Daniels series, Kate Daniels absolutely does not rely on magical items
Patricia Briggs Mercy Thompson Series? Mercy does not rely on magical items
Codex of Alera? No one there relies on magical items (don't even know if they HAVE any)
Mistborn/Alloy of Law? No one relies on magical items (though magic is fueled by eating and burning metal)
Stormlight Archive? Okay, some people rely on magical items... but it turns out those magical swords are actually the corpses of REAL magical forces, and poor shadows of a better way.
Threadbare? No reliance on magical items
Beesong Chronicles? no Reliance on Magical items
HunterxHunter? No Reliance on Magical items
Gunnerkrigg Court? No Reliance on magical items.
One Piece? No reliance on magical items.
Girl Genius? Eh, steampunk fantasy, so everything is SCIENCE! even the supposedly magical stuff.

Seriously, I might struggle to find a single fantasy series in my entire house where the heroes RELY on magical items, and the very few I might be able to think of likely have a third act triumph of revealing the hero didn't truly need the magical items.



I have no problem getting magical items, they are part of the game and a fun part of the game. The problem is relying on them to be a cool hero. The problem is "You need magical gear to matter". Because that goes against every single fantasy story I love.

 

[FallenRX]

That to remove magical dependencies, we should deepen magical dependencies?

And once we can balance a tack hammer on out heads, we can head off our foes with a powerful attack?

But why am I wearing watermelons on my feet?

My point is there is no way ot argue "just teleporting to another world" is not magical on some level, if that isnt magical, then magic is an innately pointless thing, its not magic its mundane.

Magic is doing the impossible, things that literally do not make sense, that is the point of playing a "magic" class, do impossible.

And after a certain point the issue people have is they fundementally want a different level of fantasy then what the point of dnd is, which is a clear gap between "magic" and "mundane".

The plus side to this is magic is accessible to all via these items, i feel imbracing that has always BEEN a part of DnD and the fantasy of it forever

 

[Chaosmancer]

In my fantasy, Fighter use weapon, armor, mount, the more magical and powerful they are the better it is.
otherwise I would play a werewolf that crush his ennemies with his claw and bite.

Okay, but that isn't anywhere close to the fantasy I enjoy. I like my fighter's having toys, but if stripped of their toys, I want them to still be a threat to reckon with, because THEY are powerful and dangerous, not because they have powerful and dangerous gear.