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

[Yaarel]

Now, I do want to say. Yes, there is a great argument to be made that martials need more utility outside of combat, but in practice... this isn't an easy thing to do for the fighter.

The Rogue gets expertise in skills, reliable tallent and has excellent mobility.
The Barbarian is now allowed to take skill checks with strength (only while raging which is a desperately needed combat mechanic) and has a different form of reliable talent that only works with strength.

So... what do you give fighters? Even at low levels, what do you do to push them beyond normal skills. You don't want to make them MAD by adding mental skills to their physical checks. You can't do expertise. You can't really do reliable talent. You can't copy the barbarian move. They kind of end up stuck in a rut because everyone else got every other possible idea.

I went with giving them an extra die prof times per day, but that kind of mechanic is difficult to figure out how to scale into high level stuff like mind control effects. And that may just be because the skill system itself is very mundane and hasn't been written to give some of those abilities that mid to high level magic can give.

When the Athletics skill swallows up Acrobatics, and Strength is used for all physical stunts − including running across a tightrope or a tree branch at top speed − then Athletics becomes a powerful skill for exploration encounters.

A warrior with expertise and-or advantage in this agile Athletics, helps make the Fighter competent or even expert at various mobility challenges.

 

[Minigiant]

For the record. Magical vs nonmagical has nothing to do with mechanical interactions in-game.

In D&D it does.
Magical stuff is always its own mechanics.
Spells, invocations, infusions, runes, psi magic.

Whereas the nonmagical is just reflavoring the base mechanics for poor results.
There's no additional mechanics to play a Eagle Warrior or Mandinka warrior.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, and I accept that. What I am saying is that the debilitating spells you are talking about have ranges that are greater than melee (with limited exception), ranges which most if not all caster players will attempt to avail themselves of.

A melee martial does not have that option.

So you may say that the casters are trading damage for conditions, which is only partially true. I say, yes, but they are inflicting conditions from 30, 60, 90, 120 feet away from threats.

If you're going to be in melee, taking heat from the enemy, you should have to trade off less than the guy standing a full turn of movement away from the action.

One could argue that melee is a choice, that history has shown us the general superiority of range, but I see your point.

 

[Yaarel]

Also, the Fighter should have more tool proficiencies. Think of most warrior archetypes, they are good with tools generally, including a riding mount or ship as a kind of vehicular tool proficiency.

The usefulness of a tool depends on the whim of a DM. In my campaigns, tools are as effective as skills. Meanwhile, when a tool and a skill overlap, and a character is proficient with both, the character gains advantage, mechanically.

At the mid tier, Master 9−12, tools and skills can imply mastery, a master swordsmith, a persuasive politician, a prize winning racer, a doctoral medic (or poisoner), an accomplished alchemist, and so on. Tools, potentially, can expand the noncombat prowess of the Fighter class at low tiers as well as high tiers.

 

[Gammadoodler]

One could argue that melee is a choice, that history has shown us the general superiority of range, but I see your point.

Sure. And if "historical fidelity" is a significant priority in the game's design, I will be deeply disappointed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure. And if "historical fidelity" is a significant priority in the game's design, I will be deeply disappointed.

Whereas I would be gratified, if used where it would logically apply.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Whereas I would be gratified, if used where it would logically apply.

Me too. I want its priority to align where it logically applies.

 

[Yaarel]

Whereas I would be gratified, if used where it would logically apply.

A setting can be strictly historical and nonmagical, if remaining at tiers 1−4 and 5−8.

Level 8 is the cap. It would be worthwhile for the 2024 DMs Guide to mention this, and give suggestions for this kind of setting.

Action movies tend to lean into the quasi magical mid tier 9−12 (such as "wire fu").

 

[Micah Sweet]

A setting can be strictly historical and nonmagical, if remaining at tiers 1−4 and 5−8.

Level 8 is the cap. It would be worthwhile for the 2024 DMs Guide to mention this, and give suggestions for this kind of setting.

Action movies tend to lean into the quasi magical mid tier 9−12 (such as "wire fu").

I completely agree. That would be excellent advice.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Your post complained about a caster casting from range − but a Fighter with a longbow has the most powerful ranged effect.

And eliminating a target from the combat encounter makes "dead" the most powerful "condition" to inflict.

And yet, I think the discussion was more about things like Topple, which are basically never going to be done by someone with a longbow from 600 ft away.