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

[Chaosmancer]

Fighters can benefit the most from magic items. That isn’t a weakness it’s a strength.

fighters benefit from weapons, armour and utility powers in ways that other classes don’t. AND it gets all its fighter abilities.

Ah, of course! I totally forgot their are no clerics who can wear heavy armor... oh wait. But it is impossible for a wizard or a bard to use a magic sword... oh wait. But you'd never see a druid with a magical shield... oh wait.

But, well, other than clerics the ability to use armor is limited. Surely the fighter gets mighty abilities from magical armors. Let's see... Legendary armor that let's you copy a spell once per day... Armor that is just increasing AC.... armor that gives resistance that can be copied by spells (Fire, Acid, Poison, ect)... armor that makes you immune to crits... advantage against dragon fear and the ability to find dragons...oooh, the ability to be moved 10 ft less when pushed!... Oh, here is magical armor that can be worn by people who can't wear armor, wonder who that is for? Armor that can look like normal clothes... armor that lets you swim...

Well, okay, maybe I'm being unfair. I mean sure, the most impressive thing on the list seems to just be increasing AC and giving elemental resistance, but it isn't like casters can get access to elemental resistance from an item, right?

Oh... except for rings, rings do that.

But, increasing your Ac is much harder right?

Well, unless you get a staff of defense, a staff of power, magic robes, cloaks of protection...

Huh... what EXACTLY are the powerful armor abilities that martials get access to that no one else does? Except clerics and paladins?

Wizard Magic items (with a few rare exeptions like robes of the magi, staff of power) generally provide alternatives but dont make what they essentially do any better.

[Wand of the war mage is another but as has been discussed earlier few important wizard spells have attack rolls]

Ah, right, they don't make them better at what they do... Like, a cleric is really good at healing, but you wouldn't have like a staff of healing that would offer a bunch of healing spells for them. Oh, you mean they don't increase their numbers, like an all-purpose tool, or a shard that sorcerers can use to affect their metamagic, maybe from like the feywild, or if there was a wizard book called like, the crystalline chronicle that allowed the wizard to cast spells without components on top of giving them more spells, on top of allowing them to switch spells they know. Or an amulet of the devout to increase the numbers for a cleric...

Huh, these options seem... way more powerful, versatile, and useful than something like +1 AC and not being pushed...

 

[Chaosmancer]

At the very least, only the warcleric can actually use Martial ranged weapons with proficiency.

Ah yes, the full range of... two magic bows?

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

I mean, I think "because they're 9th level and 9th level characters can fly" is sufficient reason. 9th level characters can fly for the same reason they have 9 Hit Dice and a saving throw proficiency bonus of +X (whatever). You reach a certain point where "resistance to falling" becomes "immunity to falling" and that's that.

In real life normal people terms? That's "magic". In D&D terms, it's just being 9th level.

I mean I assume you will have something. Even superman and invincible have like a paper thin vainer of an explanation...

"I extend my aura and it lifts me"
"I think my happy thought and can fly"
"I am so strong I leap into the air and stay there, and have control of my muscles to manuver"
"I grow wings"
"I throw myself"

 

[Chaosmancer]

Are you seriously claiming that "the only thing that really makes an impact on the game is magic"? This seems very hyperbolic - I am currently playing a monk and I feel like I am having plenty of impact on our games, as is the barbarian in our party. Incidentally, in a previous campaign my spouse's monk did have a solution for a wall of force: she ran up and over it.

It may be hyperbolic, but the solution being offered was to give fighter's more access to ritual magic. If your solution to "fighters aren't doing enough" is "give them more magic" then... what else are you supposed to come away with? If the only solution is magic... why might that be?

And, you know, I'm currently playing a barbarian, and I'll agree my character has an impact... in that he is the wall of meat between the monsters and the actually effective characters. And we are still quite low level... and I'm already getting bored and frustrated. I can only describe my attacks in a cool manner a dozen or so times a fight, and when that's all I do round after round, other than getting punched in the face? I'm frustrated because there is nothing I seem capable of doing that another party member can't do better. I wanted to make a hunter for my beast barbarian, and used a varient elf to get expertise stealth... and the gloomstalker ranger can now turn invisible in the dark and is a better scout than I ever could be. And does more damage than me. And can use her spells to talk to animals for utility. And can heal. I've tried to make my protector role part of my character's identity... but literally all I can do is attack an enemy and RP and hope that they decide to attack me instead of a squishier party member. Since they are all ranged, I generally run forward into the fray, hoping that the enemies will pound me to near death to buy a turn or two for the party. And as I look at future levels.... that isn't going to change. I get nothing else tactically unless I go to the DM and start begging for houserules.

And hey, great that you were playing a game where the wall of force was used in a large open space that left room to run over the top of it, but what if... that didn't happen? What if they used a dome, or the ceiling was too low? I mean, monk mobility is great, but it seems like it is of limited use against walls of force in a dungeon.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I mean I assume you will have something. Even superman and invincible have like a paper thin vainer of an explanation...

"I extend my aura and it lifts me"
"I think my happy thought and can fly"
"I am so strong I leap into the air and stay there, and have control of my muscles to manuver"
"I grow wings"
"I throw myself"

"I know a guy who knows a guy whose brother-in-law is an air elemental, and he gave me some pointers in exchange for a hot tip on some owlbear races."

 

[DammitVictor]

I mean I assume you will have something. Even superman and invincible have like a paper thin vainer of an explanation...

"I extend my aura and it lifts me"
"I think my happy thought and can fly"
"I am so strong I leap into the air and stay there, and have control of my muscles to manuver"
"I grow wings"
"I throw myself"

I mean, yeah, I can't help it. As soon as you ask the question, I start coming up with answers.

But... it's useful to compare the questions to all the other questions people take for granted or... think about a little too hard once, and can't take D&D seriously ever again, like how someone with triple digit hit points or a double digit saving throw can just survive something that normal "non-magical" humanoids don't get to survive. Sure, there's a literal answer in there somewhere... but the practical answer is just that the fantasy world we're playing in works that way. Some magic is Spells, some magic is merely Spell-Like, some magic is Supernatural, and some magic is just Extraordinary.

I actually have a set of answers I prefer, in my own work, but they basically boil down to XP is magic and the ability to absorb and... utilize XP is an innate magical ability itself that all of the Player Characters and all of the non-player characters who have class levels somehow, for some reason, possess. XP is diegetic in my games, but I know a lot of people are averse to that.

Some people can just fly as an expression of the same immaterial force that neutralizes the venom in their veins or deflects the sharpened blade from their vital organs. We can debate the essential nature of that force... or we can play the game.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

"I know a guy who knows a guy whose brother-in-law is an air elemental, and he gave me some pointers in exchange for a hot tip on some owlbear races."

I mean at the end of the day that ISN'T any more crazy then some things I have seen and heard in D&D

 

[DammitVictor]

I mean... I don't intend to keep harping on "it's just like hit points, shut up" as the end-all and be-all answer to that question.

But think of it like an action movie-- in real life we know that what keeps the hero alive through all of the action is "plot armor", they're a fictional character who's supposed to win in the end. But if you look at it now... the way that the D&D gamers in this forum are looking at D&D... it's hit points (ex). The action hero is a cut above the ordinary man, and the forces of Fate itself are protecting their fragile bodies from the harm they should be accruing.

Turn on a Chinese fantasy movie. There's a force that lets those characters fly, and they never discuss it. It's "plot thrust" and "plot lift", because they're fictional characters who are supposed to have a swordfight thirty feet off the ground. It's their self-propelled flight (ex) mundane extraordinary ability that works because they're supposed to be able to fly. They're a cut above the earthbound ordinary man, and the forces of nature itself lift them literally above his lessers.

At some point, you have to say "this is the movie I want to watch" or "this is the game I want to play", and accept the reality it is portraying for you. You can ask the question, but the real answer is always "we wanted to" and the Watsonian answers are interchangeable and don't matter.

edit: It's easy enough to describe how a fighter's chi allows them to do something... but there's going to always be people who nod and say "yes, that makes sense" and people who say "no, that's just magic by another name". And... you can't even argue with that, because some people think "magic" means anything supernatural and some people think "magic" only means spells and spell-like abilities and and sometimes those people are the same people.

We're throwing around three or four different definitions of "magic" at any given moment, in terms of how the world works and what we want martials to do, and what we don't want martials to do, and a lot of times we can't pin down the same person to using the same definition or the same context when they're using the word twice in the same sentence.

 

[Clint_L]

It may be hyperbolic, but the solution being offered was to give fighter's more access to ritual magic. If your solution to "fighters aren't doing enough" is "give them more magic" then... what else are you supposed to come away with? If the only solution is magic... why might that be?

And, you know, I'm currently playing a barbarian, and I'll agree my character has an impact... in that he is the wall of meat between the monsters and the actually effective characters. And we are still quite low level... and I'm already getting bored and frustrated. I can only describe my attacks in a cool manner a dozen or so times a fight, and when that's all I do round after round, other than getting punched in the face? I'm frustrated because there is nothing I seem capable of doing that another party member can't do better. I wanted to make a hunter for my beast barbarian, and used a varient elf to get expertise stealth... and the gloomstalker ranger can now turn invisible in the dark and is a better scout than I ever could be. And does more damage than me. And can use her spells to talk to animals for utility. And can heal. I've tried to make my protector role part of my character's identity... but literally all I can do is attack an enemy and RP and hope that they decide to attack me instead of a squishier party member. Since they are all ranged, I generally run forward into the fray, hoping that the enemies will pound me to near death to buy a turn or two for the party. And as I look at future levels.... that isn't going to change. I get nothing else tactically unless I go to the DM and start begging for houserules.

And hey, great that you were playing a game where the wall of force was used in a large open space that left room to run over the top of it, but what if... that didn't happen? What if they used a dome, or the ceiling was too low? I mean, monk mobility is great, but it seems like it is of limited use against walls of force in a dungeon.

Sure, but what if we were in an encounter where the wizard didn't have effective spells prepared? My monk's punches and maneuverability are almost always handy. I've seen many battles where a spellcaster contributed basically nothing - their spells were resisted or they had a lousy damage roll and then the target made a saving throw... I think just as we've seen that fireball that rolled great and fried seven orcs at once, we've also seen that fireball that wound up doing 10 damage. Spellcasters tend to be more flexible, but also more high risk.

With your example, it sounds like playing a barbarian is not for you. Barbarians, even more than fighters, basically do two things really well: take and deliver damage (at least when sub-classes are taken into account, since fighter sub-classes offer a lot more ply style options than barbarian sub-classes do, IMO). And there are some folks who love playing barbarians. In our current campaign the player with the barbarian is loving it; his previous two characters were a mage and a wizard and he is enjoying just getting to smash face for a change.

He is very effective, and vital to our success. I agree that he doesn't have nearly the options that my spouse does with their artificer, but he delivers way more damage, more consistently.

Every class can't do everything. A wall of force is going to be a problem for most characters; it is designed that way (what if you have a wizard, but they didn't happen to have disintegrate prepared?). Spellcasters do have more options, by and large. Mundane classes have fewer options but tend to be very good at them. I guess we just disagree on the basic viability of non-magic classes. I think barbarians and fighters are very viable; I am never disappointed to have one in the party.

The irony is that we spend so much time arguing about the viability of fighters, in particular, but they are by far the most popular 5e class according to the data we have, and are generally considered a good class that can fill a vital role, tanking, in any party, and are also an excellent DPR class. If we are talking mundane/martial classes that are don't have a super vital role, shouldn't monks and rogues be at the heart of the conversation?

 

[Gammadoodler]

Regarding the tiers, defacto, they are:

• 1 to 4
• 5 to 8
• 9 to 12
• 13 to 16
• 17 to 20

These tiers are the rythm of the 5e gaming engine, the feats, the proficiency bonuses, and how the class features time arond them.

Because the frequency of games falls off around level 8, this "mid tier" of levels 9 to 12 is significant in 5e concerning who is playing it.

Meanwhile, in earlier D&D editions, 5 to 8 roughly corresponds to the "sweet spot", and 9 to 12 to published "high level" adventures.

Officially, 2014 has the tiers be 5 to 10 and 11 to 16. Recently, there was talk of 1 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and 16 to 20.

But defacto, the rythm of mechanics across all 5e classes, and the fact the mid tier of 9 to 12 feels so different from 5 to 8 before it and 13 to 16 after it, the tiers split up most usefully by 4-level tiers each.

Each of these five tiers, including the mid tier, contitutes the mechanics for a completely different genre of fantasy.

Fair enough. I didn't have a particular reason for using that level beyond being just past the "halfway point"