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

[Remathilis]

I'm just going to post this list of DC's for Epic level Skill use from 3.5. If you want to know the DC to balance on a cloud, it's there (it's DC 120). So there is precedent for some amazing stuff.

Well there you go! The DC to balance on a cloud is 120. If anyone can figure out how to reach that DC in 5e, you can try. [emoji12]

 

[Krachek]

I guess I could manage to play any half caster and pretend to be a mundane warrior. Favoring some spell and ability would help describe the fluff of mundane ability. A little help from the DM would be useful.

On the same way, I would have no problem to pretend be a psionic powered character using a monk, a rogue, a sorcerer, a warlock, and probably many other classes.

For the fighter, it’s about the tone the DM want to give to his game. I could understand rapidly what the DM allow or not and play along with that. It’s not just about playing a mythic fighter all the time, it’s about adapting the play according to the table, the level, the tone of the adventure.

 

[Remathilis]

What I have said is that I don't believe that a high level D&D PC human (or any other PC race), of any class, needs to continue to follow the same rules as an Earth human.

And I don't believe that they need a specific narrative justification for their ability to depart from that standard. Whatever supernatural thing leveling up allows them to do, they have adequate narrative justification to do it. Players and DMs can decide what that narrative justification is, if necessary. But the game doesn't need to address it at all.

All the game needs to do is provide fun cool maybe supernatural things for high level PCs to do.

No. No no no no no.

I hate disassociated mechanics. They are the equivalent of giving someone a bowl of oatmeal and telling them to imagine eating a feast.

I once played Mutants and Masterminds. I could not for the life of me get intrigued by the power system. "Here is a beam of energy. It can represent Iron Man's repulsor beams, Cyclop's optic blast, Captain Marvel's photon blasts or Dr Strange's magical incantation. They all have the same stats". It doesn't work for me. I need a reason for it to work. "At 11th level, a fighter can fly. Figure it out" is a nonstarter. It's not going to work for me.

 

[TwoSix]

No. No no no no no.

I hate disassociated mechanics. They are the equivalent of giving someone a bowl of oatmeal and telling them to imagine eating a feast.

I once played Mutants and Masterminds. I could not for the life of me get intrigued by the power system. "Here is a beam of energy. It can represent Iron Man's repulsor beams, Cyclop's optic blast, Captain Marvel's photon blasts or Dr Strange's magical incantation. They all have the same stats". It doesn't work for me. I need a reason for it to work. "At 11th level, a fighter can fly. Figure it out" is a nonstarter. It's not going to work for me.

Sure, but by the same token, imagine if a light cleric's burning hands and a wizard's burning hands were actually two different spells with the same effect, and only differentiated by name and their spell list. I think a lot of people would be bothered by the perceived unnecessary repetition just to create multiple associations. And right now, I don't think the assumption for 5e is that the light cleric and the wizard are actually using the exact same magical technique in the fiction when they cast burning hands.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

No. No no no no no.

I hate disassociated mechanics. They are the equivalent of giving someone a bowl of oatmeal and telling them to imagine eating a feast.

I once played Mutants and Masterminds. I could not for the life of me get intrigued by the power system. "Here is a beam of energy. It can represent Iron Man's repulsor beams, Cyclop's optic blast, Captain Marvel's photon blasts or Dr Strange's magical incantation. They all have the same stats". It doesn't work for me. I need a reason for it to work. "At 11th level, a fighter can fly. Figure it out" is a nonstarter. It's not going to work for me.

But that doesn’t seem to be an issue with the game. You are arguing for something that HAS to be in a game based on whether or not you like it. I loved Mutants and Masterminds and had no problem making a Living Stone space alien that fell from the sky and can travel through the earth like it’s swimming at the speed of sound.

Super fun.

It doesn’t make it bad just because you don’t like it.

I guess i understand where your argument is coming from, at least.

 

[Gammadoodler]

No. No no no no no.

I hate disassociated mechanics. They are the equivalent of giving someone a bowl of oatmeal and telling them to imagine eating a feast.

I once played Mutants and Masterminds. I could not for the life of me get intrigued by the power system. "Here is a beam of energy. It can represent Iron Man's repulsor beams, Cyclop's optic blast, Captain Marvel's photon blasts or Dr Strange's magical incantation. They all have the same stats". It doesn't work for me. I need a reason for it to work. "At 11th level, a fighter can fly. Figure it out" is a nonstarter. It's not going to work for me.

They're already in 5e. They always have been.

Probably half or more of the class abilities in the book are pure mechanical expression, no narrative justification. Seriously..I'll start a list.

Aura of Protection
Aura of Courage
Aura of Devotion
Purity of Spirit
Extra Attack
Cleansing Touch
Stillness of Mind
Empty Body
Perfect Self
Deflect Missiles
Slow Fall
War Magic
Arcane Charge
Relentless
Know your Enemy
Student of War
Improved Critical (this one gets bonus points for putting the mechanics in the name)
Superior Critical (why fail once when you can fail twice)
Thousand Forms
Elemental Wild Shape
Primal Strike
Nature's Ward
Lands Stride
Bonus Cantrip (another purely mechanical ability name)
Archdruid
Beast Spells
Timeless Body
Avatar of Battle
War God's Blessing
* Stormborn (seriously. Change nothing in the description, call it "Windstrider" or some such and give it to the fighter or a fighter subclass and it would have equal justification there as it does on the Tempest Cleric)
Thunderbolt Strike
Dampen Elements
...etc.

 

[Remathilis]

Sure, but by the same token, imagine if a light cleric's burning hands and a wizard's burning hands were actually two different spells with the same effect, and only differentiated by name and their spell list. I think a lot of people would be bothered by the perceived unnecessary repetition just to create multiple associations. And right now, I don't think the assumption for 5e is that the light cleric and the wizard are actually using the exact same magical technique in the fiction when they cast burning hands.

However, imagine they instead just made this.

CONE ATTACK
1st-level evocation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self (15-foot cone)
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
Each creature in a 15-foot cone must make a Dexterity saving throw. A creature takes 3d6 damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 for each slot level above 1st.

How evocative! I literally don't have any idea what the spell does except for its mechanics. No description, no examples, just pure mechanics. Ultimate creative freedom, right?

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

There has to be a default flavor, from a reallife marketing point of view.

There are many players (including DMs including me) who want to create their own flavor. So the default flavor needs to be innocuous and easy to remove and override.

That said, many other players (and probably numerically greater) feel it is the designers job as an author to supply a rich and flavorful world. In the interviews, the designers themselves often mention the importance of "narrative" when deciding if a concept justifies an addition to the mechanics.


The other day I was looking at a chart that showed the result of an informal survey. It was contrasting how good the mechanics of each subclass is versus how fun the subclass is to play.

There was a direct correlation between how mechanically effective something is and how fun it is to play.

The only exception to the direct correlation is, somethings can be acknowledged to be mechanically effective but still unfun. There were no examples of something fun that is ineffective.

My takeaway from it is. Fun flavor must have mechanics to support it. But good mechanics can never be a substitute for fun flavor.

The DM can invent new flavor that the players enjoy. But there can never be a vacuum in flavor.


If a Fighter does things that are overtly superhuman, a flavorful explanation needs to fill the vacuum.

I still don’t get how you’re hung up on superhuman. We already used the rogue as an example of the superhuman stuff they can do without needing quantify it any more.

Why can a rogue dodge explosions? They’re a rogue.

Why can a fighter leap across a chasm and cleave a foe? Theyre a fighter.
As other people have said, I don’t see the line you’re drawing between what super abilities need justification and which ones don’t. All your examples seem arbitrary to me.

It seems we just have different preferences.

the 3rd level Archetypes already cover all the different fluff. I guess that’s why they’re called archetypes.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

However, imagine they instead just made this.

CONE ATTACK
1st-level evocation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self (15-foot cone)
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
Each creature in a 15-foot cone must make a Dexterity saving throw. A creature takes 3d6 damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 for each slot level above 1st.

How evocative! I literally don't have any idea what the spell does except for its mechanics. No description, no examples, just pure mechanics. Ultimate creative freedom, right?

To know what the spell does, you have to use your imagination. I actually like this but with more customization.

To be fair, there isn’t anything evocative about most straight damage attacks.(no pun intended) What’s the difference between a red Dragonborn’s breath weapon and a white Dragonborn’s breath weapon? Elemental type.

The only truly interesting spells are the ones that have riders or have utility. Damage spells aren’t interesting and many DMs will let players change the element type if your concept supports it. (Freezing hands instead of burning hands if you’re playing an ice witch, for example)

 

[MockingBird]

It's funny.

The original interpretation of thieves in D&D was that they had a chance that they could literally hide and become invisible in shadows or silent to those without extraordinary sense. Not that other people could not sneak or hide.

A fighters has unlimited attacks against mooks. Full on Dynasty Warriors.

But the playerbase and DMbase, rather than create solid stealth or cleave or ranger tracking or ambush for regular folk, co-opted supernatural features for the base system, nerfed them, and got upset that the game breaks after level 10.

Funny.

It's been 50 years and we still don't have solid stealth, cleave, tracking, and ambush rules in D&D.

I'm not caught up in this thread but this jumped out me. Way back in 2e I was DMing a game with my cousins. One of my cousins wanted to be a barbarian. He wanted to he able to cleave (or how he put it, chop dudes in half). For the sake of fun I said sure you can do that. No idea I was adding anything to the game, had no idea how to do it. So I sort let him just auto succeed every now and then. One of the good memories I have of my early D&D ventures. I wonder how many groups did this. Probably better at establishing the mechanics than me. He enjoyed it and as long as my cousins had fun in a game that I roped them into, I was cool with. It didn't break it by anymeans, not anymore than I was breaking it with my newbie grasp on the rules. I dunno that post just sparked that memory for me.