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

[Incenjucar]

I deeply miss 3e DR.

I would love to just have all the options.

Resistance
DR
Resist specifically magical/non-magical
And add an option for weak/strong damage that can be fully negated by resistance so we can let tieflings play with camp fires without being immune to fireballs.

 

[Emberashh]

let tieflings play with camp fires without being immune to fireballs.

Im reminded of a certain Sean Paul song

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Wait wait wait. I’ve been told here repeatedly that wizards have plenty of spell slots and don’t need them all.

that is correct

So do wizards need the spell slots from their staff or not? You can’t have it both ways. I guarantee a staff of fire is less ubiquitous than a magic weapon or armour.

that is where you are missing the point.
The fighter NEEDs the magic items
the wizards just get a buff from them

DOes the 9th level wizard with 3/3/3/3/1 need more spells no. no they do not.
in a given 6 encounter day where the average is 3 rounds per encounter you have 18 rounds to cast spells... that is if you look your 5th your 3 4th your 3 3rd and 1 of your 1st or 2nd for 9 rounds of combat spells and 9 rounds of cantrips. Remember when we showed that with cantrips wizards where just behind fighters... yeah now add 9 spells to that. THis saves 5 1st and 2nd level slots plus your arcane recharge of 4 levels of slots for non combat or for interupt like shield or bonus action like mist styp..

now lets add in a +2 sword and +2 armor to the fighter and a ring of prot and staff of fire to the wizard... the fighter gets a bit of a damage boost the wizard gets 3 more fireballs most days (somedays he will roll low on recharge and only get 2) either replaceing 3 cantrips with fireball or being able to not prep fire ball and have a better win condition spell at 3rd level slots.

Its not green flame blade that makes a bladesinger good.

no it's being able to use a cantrip and attack while also where magic light armor and wield magic weapons they can use as spell focus that does that... oh and prof times per day adding Int to AC and Con saves...

The spell is probably adding an average of 6-10 damage if you get it off successfully and the foe isn’t resistant or immune.

at level 11 when the fighter is making 3 attacks... lets give them a 20 str and a big axe
1d12+5 x3
the bladesinger with a longsword or rapier is dealing 1d8+x... lets give them a 16 dex 1d8+3 x2

2d8+6 vs 3d12+15 sounds like a no brainer... I think you are the one that wanted to use the .5s so that is 15 vs 34.5
change 1 attack to a green flame blade you add 2d8 fire damage and 2d8+int damage to a second target... for this lets say there is no second target first, that is 9 more damage bringing the 15 to 24... more then a 50% increase, if there IS a second target (we will give this blade singer a 16 int) that is 12 more damage and that is 36... more then the fighter

but they don't have to GFB every round, they can fireball or haste or cone of cold some rounds

If your argument for why casters being so good is that they try to emulate martials then I say good for casters. Being martial is fun

the argument is that the caster can do anything, the martial is stuck at 'deal damage' but one of (but not the only) things the caster can do is be about the same at damage.

Same goes for fireballs. I really don’t see any argument that ’casters are awesome because they could cast five fireballs in a day’ holds up. It’s so circumstantial.

 

[TheSword]

Um... you realize how bad a match-up a manticore is for a fighter, right?

Sure, they only deal 1d8+3 damage from a tail spike attack... but they make three of them. And their attack is as good as the fighter's attack. So your 5th level fighter against a CR 3 monster is making two attacks for their three. At an average of 21 damage per turn, that fighter could be heavily wrecked by that. Especially if they aren't a dex fighter who normally uses a bow.

And sure, the PC can run, but "they can run away" doesn't inspire confidence in the design.

You’re missing an important point that means it’s a fine match up. The Manticore is AC 14, +5 to hit and up in the air.

The fighter is likely AC 18 - 22 and can take cover if they want to. As well as being probably having better to hit rolls.

 

[nevin]

And yet with the exception of a wizard doing AOE a fighter can outdamage them every round for as long as the combat goes. If I play a wizard and i don't stack my feats right then I'm in the same boat as the fighter with improperly stacked feats. And you've completely ignored the fact that if you memorize 3 more spells that are useless in your combat's, which happens all the time then you are no more effective. these arguments always turn into a specific argument about a specifically tweaked character who's spells are always what they need. fighter's are always useful. Very few things in DND are not affected by brute strength and raw damage.

 

[Incenjucar]

And yet with the exception of a wizard doing AOE a fighter can outdamage them every round for as long as the combat goes. If I play a wizard and i don't stack my feats right then I'm in the same boat as the fighter with improperly stacked feats. And you've completely ignored the fact that if you memorize 3 more spells that are useless in your combat's, which happens all the time then you are no more effective. these arguments always turn into a specific argument about a specifically tweaked character who's spells are always what they need. fighter's are always useful. Very few things in DND are not affected by brute strength and raw damage.

If you are constantly fighting exactly one monster who stays in melee range.... the wizard probably has a more useful spell than damage to cast.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

The fighter is likely AC 18 - 22 and can take cover if they want to.

what the hell fighter are you playing that can get themselves a 22 AC at level 5?

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

No, they can't "win the damage race" when they want

over a day yea they can... lets go back to my last example.
9th level wizard with 3/3/3/3/1
gonna give them 1 damage spell of each level, burning hands, scorching ray, fireball, wall of fire and cone of cold (one of these doesn't look the same)

I will NOT take a d12 or d10 cantrip for damage I think chill touch is d8s

9th level fighter with 18 str and a big axe 1d12+4 2x plus action surge we will say twice in a day.

6 encounters, average of 3 rounds per encounter for 18 rounds... remember thanks to action surge teh fighter is getting 20 not 18
1x wizard gets 2 targets with cone of cold (8d8)
3x wizard gets 3 targets with wall of fire first round and 1 the second (5d8)
3x wizard gets 3 targets once with fireball 2 targets once with fire ball and 1 target once with fireball (what a waste that last one) (8d6)
that is 12 targets getting 'hit 'by the wizard lets say the cone of cold all the walls of fire make the saves and and of the 6 hit with fireball 3 make it 3 fail it for saves
so Cone of cold did 35 damage across 2 saves
1st round wall of fire dealt 32 damage across 3 saves and round 2 did 11 per casting
fireball is 84 for people who missed save and 42 for made
8 rounds of combat but 1 of them was just conenctrating so "useing" 7 rounds that is 290pts of damage
11 rounds at 2d8 average of 9 is 99 more for 389pts of damage

fighter makes 40 swings each for on average 10 for 400 damage

but WAIT that assumes all 40 swings hit, remember we had a;; 3 cone of cold ect ect make there saves, so if 2 out of 40 swings miss what happens... 380!?!?! that can't be less then the wizard that used 0 1st and 2nd level spells and had a sub damage cantrip now can it!?!?!

 

[TheSword]

A fighter isn't doing more with their action, what are you talking about? A +3 weapon doesn't give more attacks or more abilities on those attacks, it just increases the numbers.

And sure, a wizard with a staff of fire is not, on a turn by turn analysis, doing better. But on an adventuring day analysis, they are essentially getting, what? Three more spells per day? That is very good, because remember, the entire supposed conceit is that the wizard's spells are better than the fighter's actions, but the wizard has a limited number of spells. Giving them three more spells per day means they are getting three more actions better than anything the fighter could possibly do, meaning the fighter (with their limited hp) would need to fight more battles to catch up. It also, by giving spells you don't need to prepare, assists in the whole "always prepared" trope. A wizard who doesn't need to prepare fireball because it is in their staff now has a free slot to prepare something else to solve a situation fireball couldn't have.



Interesting. So, you realize the wizard is going to 22, right? Just because you have a +2 cloak doesn't mean you don't have shield. You seriously underestimate how easily a wizard can get high AC. Heck, the bladesinger? They can have 19 AC and jump to 24 when they are actually attacked.

And even if it is just a subset of wizards, they are still a group of wizards who can do the fighter's job, and you are completely ignoring the clerics, the druids, and the bards as well.



And by level 8 the wizard can have three feats. Do you really think that a single feat is enough to off-set all the advantages of spellcasting we've laid out?

Oh, and "how the game is played in reality"? According to WoTC their data (which should be pretty good and accurate data) is that 50% of games are featless. So... in reality, a significant number of people are playing as the game was designed.

And, again, you seem to be ignoring things. If you have sharpshooter, how does Sentinel increase your combat ability? Or Polearm master? Or Shield Master? They don't. Again, once a fighter picks a path... that's generally it. There are only an incredibly small number of combat feats that synergize.



Right, you are looking round per round, but power isn't only generated round per round. A wizard who can cast three more spells, and have a 30% increase in their spells known is more capable of solving more problems, longer. And you don't seem to understand that spellcaster feats tend to stack. A spellcaster with Warcaster, Spell Sniper, Elemental Adept, and Fey-Touched can benefit from all four of those in a single combat without losing any effiency. A fighter with Sharp-shooter, Great Weapon Master, Shield Master and Tavern Brawler... can't. Those are all exclusive abilities that don't stack.

I think we fundamentally disagree about what benefit means. A +3 weapon makes a fighters primary action more reliable and do more damage, every time. What magic Item can do the same for wizards?

The wizard doesn’t need AC 22 unless they’re covering the front line and wizards have to highly specialise to do this. Do you often see blaster wizards holding the front line? Or are they hiding behind the martial?

If You spend your resources to emulate another class then thats fine by me. Blade singers are good. They’re fun to play. But they’re not the wonder fighter you think they are. They suffer the same fate that everyone who tries to do two things at the same time suffers from. Same as bards and clerics. They end up ok melee and ok casters.

At higher levels, damage is per round. Combats become extremely concentrated and explosive.

There are lots of combat feats that synergise, polearm master and Great weapon mastery for instance or polearm master and sentinel. Plus lots that are good for any attacker whatever weapon they use. Mage slayer, parry, eleven accuracy Etc etc. not to mention the way these feats synergies with fighting styles.

Can you source the WotC data about Feats. Because they’re taking up lots of space in the core PHB. I’m not calling you a liar. Genuinely interested.

 

[TheSword]

what the hell fighter are you playing that can get themselves a 22 AC at level 5?

Are you joking?

Start with AC 18 from plate or 17 from half plate and dex and add your chose combination of feats, racial abilities, fighting styles, magic items etc.

Thats why I gave a range that started at 18. Does 18 AC invalidate my point about the manticore when the archer gets to add cover to it?

That is of course if they can be shot at all rather than just running from total cover to total cover.

it also assumes a normal fighter and not one who happens to have specialised at all in archery.

I also mentioned earlier that the PC is the instigator. If they ignore the manticore then manticore can only react to the PC… follow them and hope for a shot or close in for hand to hand.