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

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

How about "doubling down in class disparities is not a solution"?



That jacked up Martials and Casters violate the genre of the game considerably and this isn't rectified without entirely rewriting the game to accomodate a new genre properly.

Yeah, I think if everything else remains the same then adding a mythic martial just somewhat levels the playing field for those that want to be martially and play at high levels next to the current jacked up Wizard.

We already have jacked up Wizards which basically violate most fantasy genres anyway.

For me:

Perfect world = total redesign of spellcasters, and martials should be made more interesting but don't have to go gonzo

Assuming spellcasters remain the same = it's the bad design we have and leads the high level game into gonzo supers territory so just add a martial equivalent (keeping the existing FIghter). It gives players that want it a chance to play that kind of character. And since we can play all caster parties now anyway, it will not "double down" on broken. It's the same broken with a happier sub group of players.

 

[Vaalingrade]

We've gotten to the fun stage of:

"This really isn't a problem, but if you have to have this mythic martial in then you must design it under these highly restrictive parameters to satisfy me even though I don't want it and will never use this class"

Fun times.

And 'put it beyond most player's reach so I don't have to look at it'

 

[Emberashh]

For example, do you think that the Rune Knight is "entirely rewriting the game to accommodate a new genre", because it can come across as a superhero with a superpower?

Rune Knights aren't violating the genre.

And Ive explained this elsewhere in the topic. DND is a genre unto itself thats a kitbash of epic fantasy and sword and sorcery. Mythic fantasy, superhero fantasy, etc are all distinctly separate from what DND is, and Casters as designed in 5e violate the bounds of SS/EF.

There's a reason Mages are never depicted like they are in DND in movies and novels based on DND and its the same reason something like a Rune Knight wouldn't be problematic. Rune Knights don't shut off the adventure just by existing.

 

[Yaarel]

Rune Knights aren't violating the genre.

And Ive explained this elsewhere in the topic. DND is a genre unto itself thats a kitbash of epic fantasy and sword and sorcery. Mythic fantasy, superhero fantasy, etc are all distinctly separate from what DND is, and Casters as designed in 5e violate the bounds of SS/EF.

There's a reason Mages are never depicted like they are in DND in movies and novels based on DND and its the same reason something like a Rune Knight wouldn't be problematic. Rune Knights don't shut off the adventure just by existing.

I think you are describing the 1e Greyhawk setting. Rather than an extremely diverse 50 years of D&D.

But if your criterion is that 5e casters arent D&D, I am less sure how useful your critiques would be.

 

[Vaalingrade]

D&D doesn't have a genre. It barely stays in the Supergenre of Fantasy. Need I remind everyone of the anti=matter rifles, the crashed UFO and the gnomish Jaeger? Oh, and the whole gothic horror world?

 

[Yaarel]

D&D doesn't have a genre. It barely stays in the Supergenre of Fantasy. Need I remind everyone of the anti=matter rifles, the crashed UFO and the gnomish Jaeger? Oh, and the whole gothic horror world?

Yeah, even the 1e Greyhawk setting is all over the place!

 

[Yaarel]

If Superman flew into the city of Neverwinter in the Forgotten Realms setting, I doubt anyone there would think that was notable.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What genre problem? That the superhero like martial shouldn't be in the game at high levels?

This is all predicated on spellcasters remaining the same. D&D has chosen a supers like high level magic user that is more like Dr. Strange than any fantasy archtypes -- extreme power, versatility, reliability at no personal cost. That indicates what kind of game it is.

Many people on this thread would love a total redesign of spellcasters and spellcasting but that's a different topic (my preferred solution to this whole thing). By given the assumption that this won't happen, put in the mythic martial.

Keep the existing Fighter and put in a mythic martial that is no more powerful and versatile than the existing Wizard. I haven't seen any reasonable objection to this.

Exactly why I based my narrative of the mythic martial on Marvel's mutants.

 

[Emberashh]

Yeah, I think if everything else remains the same then adding a mythic martial just somewhat levels the playing field for those that want to be martially and play at high levels next to the current jacked up Wizard.

Not really. Trying to design the "Universal Fighter, but Mythic" is just retrodding the same path the 5e Fighter did. You're not going to be able to design a Universal class thats going to be appealing to all of the people that its meant to appeal to and also specific enough that it actually delivers on what its supposed to deliver.

It gives players that want it a chance to play that kind of character

But does nothing for people who don't actually like whatever trappings you gave that class.

You're trying to design the class mechanics first and leaving the fantasy as unimportant. Which can work if you're inventing a new fantasy.

For instance, the mechanics of a Divine Mystic, The Pilgrim, had to come well before the fantasy did, as the unique blend of mechanics wouldn't have been prompted going in the other direction. Same goes for the Seraphite, combining Divinity with Summoning. These ideas don't really exist all much in fantasy, and where they do, they don't resemble how the classes will play in practice.

But thats not the case with a Fighter, mythic or otherwise.

I think you are describing the 1e Greyhawk setting. Rather than an extremely diverse 50 years of D&D.

No, Im describing DND. The only exception to that description has been 4e.

But if your criterion is that 5e casters arent D&D, I am less sure how useful your critiques would be.

Id appreciate if you would stop putting words into my mouth. There is a distinct difference and nuance between "violates the genre" and "these aren't DND"; busted casters have never been good for the game nor consistent with the genres its mechanically emulating.

D&D doesn't have a genre. It barely stays in the Supergenre of Fantasy. Need I remind everyone of the anti=matter rifles, the crashed UFO and the gnomish Jaeger? Oh, and the whole gothic horror world?

The other name is Appendix N, which isn't a useful name to invoke over the more recognizable genres that encapsulate virtually everything the Appendix.

The inclusion of Scifi in the appendix is seldom recognized, especially nowadays, but still there as you pointed out.

If 5e's probblem was miniscule amounts of science fiction elements creeping in, this wouldn't be the same 150 page topic.

Busted casters aren't any good for science fiction any more than they are epic fantasy or sword and sorcery.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not really. Trying to design the "Universal Fighter, but Mythic" is just retrodding the same path the 5e Fighter did. You're not going to be able to design a Universal class thats going to be appealing to all of the people that its meant to appeal to and also specific enough that it actually delivers on what its supposed to deliver.



But does nothing for people who don't actually like whatever trappings you gave that class.

You're trying to design the class mechanics first and leaving the fantasy as unimportant. Which can work if you're inventing a new fantasy.

For instance, the mechanics of a Divine Mystic, The Pilgrim, had to come well before the fantasy did, as the unique blend of mechanics wouldn't have been prompted going in the other direction. Same goes for the Seraphite, combining Divinity with Summoning. These ideas don't really exist all much in fantasy, and where they do, they don't resemble how the classes will play in practice.

But thats not the case with a Fighter, mythic or otherwise.



No, Im describing DND. The only exception to that description has been 4e.



Id appreciate if you would stop putting words into my mouth. There is a distinct difference and nuance between "violates the genre" and "these aren't DND"; busted casters have never been good for the game nor consistent with the genres its mechanically emulating.



The other name is Appendix N, which isn't a useful name to invoke over the more recognizable genres that encapsulate virtually everything the Appendix.

The inclusion of Scifi in the appendix is seldom recognized, especially nowadays, but still there as you pointed out.

If 5e's probblem was miniscule amounts of science fiction elements creeping in, this wouldn't be the same 150 page topic.

Busted casters aren't any good for science fiction any more than they are epic fantasy or sword and sorcery.

I think superhero tropes can definitely work in 5e. That's why I used them in my narrative write up.