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

[Chaosmancer]

Kill the wizard casting Hypnotic pattern?

Or simply wake the people who failed their saving throws. Action surge and a level 5 fighter can slap 5 people for a point of damage and get them back in the fight. Only four people and be can slap the wizard too for lolz

So, step one for beating hypnotic pattern... don't fail the save against hypnotic pattern.

Also, sure, the fighter with action surge can do that. How many enemies are fighters with action surge again? If (in another real world example) they are a bunch of gnolls, then at a bare minimum the result you can end up with is the vast majority of the enemies losing their turn. Everyone who failed loses their turn, then everyone busy shaking their allies awake loses their turn. And that's assuming a 50/50 split.

What action can a fighter take that will make every single enemy on the field lose their next turn?

Edit: Ah, I see your next argument was that the fighter can kill multiple enemies. After all, if they action surge they can kill up to four enemies....

But that's not quite true, is it? A gnoll (CR 1/2) has 22 hp. Assume a crit and battlemaster, we'd be looking at... what? 4d6+2d8+4 = 27. So, unless the fighter is a greatsword wielding battlemaster and crits on all four attacks, they can't action surge and kill four healthy gnolls. And that would be it, they'd be completely out of combat resources.

More likely? More likely with 2d6+1d8+4 = 15.5 damage per hit, it would be two gnolls dead. And also completely out of combat resources.

All to MAYBE get something close to equivalent to the casting of a single spell.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't believe anyone disputes that 5e isn't good at teaching new DMs.

That, however, isn't a system problem.

You're right.

It is not a system problem. It is a lack of instructions problem.

If you are not told that after level 5

1. always have 8 or more resource draining encounters
   1. because casters have too many slots and rrituals
2. noncombat encounters don't count unless you drain resources
3. martials require certain effects if you use most of the MM
   1. mostly magic items
4. never lock a obstacle behind one spell
5. don't make featureless battlefields
   1. features have to scale with level
6. don't use MM monsters as solo combatants
7. play with feats or let PCs and NPCs have access to feat features in RP

the DM runs into issues.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Also, it has been a bit of time. I'm guessing my analysis of the manticore fight is going unchallenged?

 

[Emberashh]

You're right.

It is not a system problem. It is a lack of instructions problem.

If you are not told that after level 5

1. always have 8 or more resource draining encounters
   1. because casters have too many slots and rrituals
2. noncombat encounters don't count unless you drain resources
3. martials require certain effects if you use most of the MM
   1. mostly magic items
4. never lock a obstacle behind one spell
5. don't make featureless battlefields
   1. features have to scale with level
6. don't use MM monsters as solo combatants
7. play with feats or let PCs and NPCs have access to feat features in RP

the DM runs into issues.

1. You need 4 hards at a minimum, and you can multiply the difficulty thresholds by 3 to account for things not in the PHB.

2. If the encounter doesn't drain resources when where is the issue? If no one is using resources in an encounter, there is no class disparity.

4+5. The game actually does tell you these things.

7. Feats are optional. They're not a core part of the game and aren't factored into its encounter math unless you follow the advice in #1

 

[ReshiIRE]

That would require someone putting their money where their mouth is and designing a solution.

This piece of rhetoric always pees me off.

People are discussing problems, trying to get on the same page, and trying to find a way forward; arguing and trying to make better cases. It might be talk, but it's clear a few people are thinking about how they would fix the fighter, which could inspire others.

That is, in some forum, productive (or at-least was for a while, maybe not the last few pages).

As well as that - I assume a lot of the people here talking are not game designers, but players. They can point out problems, but maybe they don't have the design expertise to create the solution; they just want to get down common points so that designers can solve the problem

What you're saying here provides nothing except mocking others for talking; which apparently, has become a common response to all sorts of other problems - many more serious than this. Which is highly troubling that shitting on others for having the audacity to talk about problems without MAYBE having a full solution to go is apparently a popular thing to do now. And especially troubling when it is essentially an appeal to authority and expertise in an area where things are grey and subjective - "oh, you don't have game design experience and a solution? How dare you talk about and argue about a piece of game design you aren't a fan of!!"

----

For my measure, the talk of the fighter's damage and ability in combat in regards to that is not a problem in 5e. As far as I can tell, the Fighter does perform well at doing damage (and perhaps, depending on items dropped, at adapting to a situation by pulling out other weapons).

But what about other interactions? It feels to me from reading the base Fighter class, that anything beyond damage and maybe grabbing is not well specified - there aren't clear rules as there are, say, in Pathfinder 2e for applying status minuses and status buffs to others, or doing invention actions; nor is there a way to get interesting attack enhancements.

And with skills and skill challenges being under-baked in 5e, skills are not a reliable way of providing social solutions - which really affects the Fighter badly, as they are fairly reliant on skills to do things outside of the combat portion in the game, without many buffs too them. This is where the Fighter - and other martials - need the most help - OUTSIDE of combat. Give them a way to be strong here without relying on combat or pure roleplay, and give guidance for DMs to help accomplish this.

That, and some modifications to particularly strong spells in 5e, could make the experience of playing a Fighter that much better. Then continue with giving Figthers a lot more interesting things to do in combat than damage; because damage is NOT the only thing that matters in a fight, and is more of a means to an end.

 

[Minigiant]

1. You need 4 hards at a minimum, and you can multiply the difficulty thresholds by 3 to account for things not in the PHB.

2. If the encounter doesn't drain resources when where is the issue? If no one is using resources in an encounter, there is no class disparity.

4 Hards is not enough to drain a party that is at least 50% casters of their spell slots if they play intelligently and don't just spam damage/healing spells without thought.

At level 11, every full caster has 4/3/3/3/2/1 of slots. There is no way to drain 80% of those slots in 4 fights without risking a TPK.

5e has the same problem as 3e.
It was designed under the assumption that the DM is experienced and the players are not.

 

[Clint_L]

How is "there are three monsters on the field, close to each other" an artificial sutuation? Do you typically not use more than one or two creautures in your combats?

I know for me, I tend to default to at least five enemy combatants if I'm not doing a big BBEG, and sometimes more. So, AOEs are not exactly an artificial and unnatural situation to have be useful.

We don't need hypotheticals designed to support your argument. We looked at an entire, 141 game campaign of Critical Role, from levels 1-17, featuring as wide a variety of encounters as you would like, and the fire wizard was seldom the top damage dealer, and typically then because of an AoE situation. As expected.

What does it take to admit that martial classes more than hold their own as damage dealers? Like, if your basic premise is that martial classes suck at every aspect of the game, then there is nothing more to discuss with you. And you are going to be inevitably disappointed by any changes that come out of OneD&D.

 

[Emberashh]

4 Hards is not enough to drain a party that is at least 50% casters of their spell slots if they play intelligently and don't just spam damage/healing spells without thought

The system does not rely on, expect, or tell you that the party needs to be drained to zero.

 

[TheSword]

Blinding Smite

Not when they empowering their weapon with divine smite they’re aren’t. They not casting any spells.

Needing to try and exclude any ability martial have to try and somehow claim supremacy for spells is very strange. it weakens your argument.

 

[Minigiant]

The system does not rely on, expect, or tell you that the party needs to be drained to zero.

The martials rely on the casters conserving their resources.

The entire problem discussed in this 60+ page discussion is due to high level casters run by an experienced player never having to conserve resources and being able to afford to nova.

There's nothing stopping a caster of level 11 or above from casting 3 big spells every encounter in a 4 encounter day. That's before other class features and magic items.

That's not selfishness. That's smart.

The D&D designers have now realized this and this is why they gave the fighter and barbarian ways to nova. And the barbarian a way to use rage out of combat.