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

[AnotherGuy]

The game's combat speed, especially after level 4, comes up often too. The game's short rest/long rest comes up often too. The game's "adventuring day" and what should be in it comes up often too. The game's weapon list and its lack of influence on attacks comes up often too. The game's skill list, and how it is too detailed or too short, comes up often too. The game's species and their attributed feats comes up often too.

And would you say the short/long rest or the adventuring day is not an issue in 5e? I'd say it very much is an issue.

Weapon lists, expanding or decreasing the skill list are but a preference for how granular you want the game to be. I would not place it in the same category as the above.

So since all those things come up just as often, do they also need to be fixed?

In a way, that is what the DMsGuild is there for, to fix the non-issues which exist.

The point is, the fighter IS a problem - but only for some tables.

Sure, but one might also take into account that MOST tables do not advance beyond a certain point...

 

[Chaosmancer]

For example, the PHB casters and martials are designed around having magic items.

No. They are not.

Perkins said they aren't:
Crawford said they aren't: (Edit: this is a podcast link, and I don't have the timestamp) https://media.wizards.com/2017/podcasts/dnd/DnDPodcast_07_06_2017.mp3

Now, I don't know about your copies of the books. But when I open my PHB, DMG and MM I see things like "D&D Lead Designer: Jeremy Crawford" and "Editing: Chris Perkins" so if the people who designed the game say they designed the game around not having magical items, in what possible world should we assume they are too stupid or too dishonest to understand that the game they designed was ACTUALLY designed around the idea of having magical items.

You don't have to like Crawford and the team. You don't have to think they are good designers. But can we stop pretending that they have spent the last 10 years lying to us about how they designed the game?! I think they would know. I think they would understand what they did and did not consider when designing the game. They were the ones designing it after all!

You can play without magic items but it does require ignoring chunks of the DMG and PHB.

There are no magical items in the PHB

A Mythic Martial who doesn't need magic items would have to be designed in a world with magic items as well. So where does its base of power cap? Damage near the Fighter, Rogue, or Wizard? Rewrite the treasure tables? Etc etc.

And the fighter was designed not to need magical items too! So our design is 100% fine assuming that magical items are boons, just like they were for EVERY SINGLE OTHER CLASS!

 

[CreamCloud0]

I never said it was better. I am refuting the statement that people who play fighters are old grognards that don't want to think. But, in my experience, these imaginative ideas are not equivalent to trying to screw in a screw with their bare hands. It is "out of the box." Meaning it is more than I try to do what a wizard's explicit text says I can do.

You are proving my point exactly. You can't even imagine a fighter coming up with an imaginative solution to a problem that doesn't involve the screw.

okay yes, people can be creative with the fighter if they want, but in my opinion picking the fighter to be creative isn't too unlike not buying groceries so you can be creative with what scraps you find in your cupboards, but if i see someone picking fighter i assume they're doing it to be competent in melee combat aka because they're intending on getting take-out food, rather than seeing what they can do with half an onion, a bag of walnuts and powdered cheese sauce.

 

[Emberashh]

If we have had 40 years of tank combat, maybe the game isn't really about old ladies solving mysteries despite what people keep insisting.

We haven't had 40 years of tank combat. We had 4-5ish and then 9 years of half-tank, half little old ladies, half manbear.

There's a disconnect for me. You don't think the problem is very severe. But going from a 20th level 3 Fighter 1 Wizard party to a 20th level 1 Druid, 1 Cleric, 2 Wizard Party makes the game much more difficult to handle?

That's part of the severity.

All caster parties aren't the norm. Ive never been in one, and the few times Ive DM'd for them took a great deal of strain well beyond what a more typical party distribution requires.

I don't call caster utility "turn off these mechanics" buttons just to be funny, but they also weren't excessively prevalent in 95% of games Ive ever run or played in.

No. They are not.

Insofar as strict combat encounter balance is concerned, it was found that hit dice is basically the only thing that actually matters in 5e as designed.

 

[Minigiant]

No. They are not.

You didn't read what I said

I didn't say they are balanced around magic items.

I say they are designed around having magic items.

You can play 5e without magic items. The game edition changes drastically if you take them out.

 

[AnotherGuy]

no.... high level encounters without high level magic is just mid level encounters relabeled as High level easy enough for an untrained DM to run it. People who play High level games want the magic, The artifact items, the fighter with his christmas tree and a bag of magical options to use against the casters, the gods all the crazy stuff that make it harder to DM. Taking the away any one of those things is just changing the definition of high level play in an attempt to make easy mode high level play. (I don't think that's possible but other's seem to think it can be done)
IME two things kill high level games the fastest. DM nitpicking over spells that just messed up a week of plannning, DM nitpicking against magic items they forgot that allow non caster to mess up a week of planning. I've seen both of those things kill more high level games than anything else. Players just get up and walk away. High level games are fast furious and whack a mole till your DM brain explodes. That's why most DM's don't run long term High level games.

so far since 1972 every argument I've seen for fixing magic in DND can be easily solved by playing a different game. Quit trying to fix the game who's original roots involved High level spells, Greek Style gods and players with artifacts tromping around by taking that stuff away. go play GURPS or one of the other systems made for the play you want.

I'm currently running a 14th level party (which is effectively 17th) given our homebrewery on HD use, Feats and Attributes so I feel I have some experience on the matter in which I speak.

I can understand your points and to a point agree, but I think you have one solitary view of High Level play which doesn't necessarily match up to everyones. High Level need not ONLY be Wuxia or similar, there are other ways to interpret High Level play.
And to note, I haven't even touched spells in my system.

 

[Chaosmancer]

And as for when the game stops working, Ive yet again repetitively pointed out that all-caster parties are extremely difficult to DM for and that doubling down on that happening all of the time is not going to result in a better experience for anybody, least of all DMs that already get the short stick as is.

How is adding one more "full caster" to the roster going to double down on all-caster parties? Do you imagine it will be so enticing that no one will ever want to play a normal martial again? Wouldn't that indicate that... they ALWAYS wanted more?

Also, as a DM... I have yet to find an all-caster party significantly more difficult to DM for. So, while you state that position as a fact, I have not found it to be true. So now what? I am a DM who is fine with an all-caster party, at high levels, and am designing a class and system to create a more balanced situation between casters and martials that I want to use. What part of this is a problem for you? What part of this will affect you at all? And if other people like what I do and adopt it... how is that a problem? Because they may have to do something different?

And you know, I pretty rarely see an discussion of nerfing casters.... except when buffing martials comes up and then nerfing casters is presented as the only sane and reasonable choice. It is an odd phenomena

 

[Chaosmancer]

You didn't read what I said

I didn't say they are balanced around magic items.

I say they are designed around having magic items.

You can play 5e without magic items. The game edition changes drastically if you take them out.

What difference are you trying to express here? What is the difference between being balanced and being designed?

 

[Hussar]

I'd prefer greater continuity of abilities from low to high level. Or put another way, I don't like when a class changes feel midway through play. For example, warlock pact magic works a certain way all through low levels (new spell level every 2 levels, 2 slots that recharge on short rest) but once you get to 11th level, you don't continue to 6th level slots. Instead, pact magic stagnates and your high level magic comes through Mystic Arcanum, which has a different set of casting rules. Now I completely understand why they did it; having four 9th level spells per short rest would be OP, but I still don't like that their magic system essentially changes at double digits.

To that end, I would not like at 10 level fighters (or other martial classes) all of a sudden gained "Hero points" or "superhero actions" but would like a ramping into that: a few points and minor effects at low levels to build to more spectacular effects. Not a lightswitch of supernatural for killing enough goblins.

This is how Barbarians work though. Monks as well. And rangers.

All gain significant new abilities in the double digits, including some pretty mythic stuff- flight for example.

 

[Emberashh]

Wouldn't that indicate that... they ALWAYS wanted more?

People often have their choices dictated to them. You can try to be sly about what it is you're doing but people will gravitate towards whats more powerful, regardless of what they may "want".

Thats why whenever a game adds a broken, busted thing people start to overuse it, and that in turn starts impacting the intended game experience.

Also, as a DM... I have yet to find an all-caster party significantly more difficult to DM for

I have pages and pages of you arguing that your problems shouldn't be discounted or dismissed just because someone else doesn't think they exist.

Oh how the turns have tabled.

And you know, I pretty rarely see an discussion of nerfing casters....

Sure you do; you just recognize them as countless topics covering some specific spell or caster ability thats busted.