D&D 5E [+] Ways to fix the caster / non-caster gap

[TwoSix]

5e cantrips go well beyond "high frequency" and cross into rapid fire unlimited machine gunning though. Spellcasters had ways of getting high frequency attack spells before 5e with low level wands hough.

The difference now is that rather than allowing the availability and type of those wands to be influenced by group/adventure dynamics and needs we have that power budget already consumed by something chosen during character creation. Worse is that caster PCs have even less room for goodies in treasure.

Also again: can you name any of these "modern mage/wizard" characters of fiction that are memorable enough individuals to be named?

Oh no, I get that and I largely agree with doing that, and do similar things in my own games.

My opinion is simply that if the game as a whole is looking to Appendix N for its class tropes rather than the modern sources of fantasy media, it's engaging in unnecessary nostalgia.

 

[overgeeked]

Oh no, I get that and I largely agree with doing that, and do similar things in my own games.

My opinion is simply that if the game as a whole is looking to Appendix N for its class tropes rather than the modern sources of fantasy media, it's engaging in unnecessary nostalgia.

And increasingly nostalgia for things the vast majority of the fan base has never encountered. From Appendix N...Lord of the Rings, Cthulhu, and maybe Conan the Barbarian are touchstones for younger gamers. If they remember Conan at all, it's likely from the bad Jason Momoa movie more than the Arnie movie or the original Howard stories. The rest are effectively forgotten or nonexistent to younger gamers. Their touchstones will be things like Harry Potter, Harry Dresden, anime, manga, light novels, video games, etc.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Agreed. Warlock is one of the very few classes that has a solid skeleton, it mostly just needs some tweaks.

Even as someone who sees a solid skeleton in every 5e class except the Bard (incinerate it entirely and start from scratch), even the Cleric (no edition has made me even kinda like Cleric), I would still say the Warlock has the most solid basic design in 5e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh no, I get that and I largely agree with doing that, and do similar things in my own games.

My opinion is simply that if the game as a whole is looking to Appendix N for its class tropes rather than the modern sources of fantasy media, it's engaging in unnecessary nostalgia.

Unless that's the game they want to make and you want to play. There's nothing "necessary" about using modern sources for your game, even if that game is D&D.

Measure the value of your argument in a way other than $ if you want to make any headway with me.

 

[tetrasodium]

Oh no, I get that and I largely agree with doing that, and do similar things in my own games.

My opinion is simply that if the game as a whole is looking to Appendix N for its class tropes rather than the modern sources of fantasy media, it's engaging in unnecessary nostalgia.

It's one thing to say that they are getting away from old and forgotten things while attaching to newer things.... but if the sun total of those newer things is the gauntlet arcade game with no other capable of being named it rings more than a little hollow. There was a post earlier in the thread talking about how Harry Potter doesn't fit 5e cantrips either. It this "modern sources of media" is a thing d&dis linking to why aren't we calling it video games if those are the only ones that can be named?

 

[TwoSix]

Unless that's the game they want to make and you want to play. There's nothing "necessary" about using modern sources for your game, even if that game is D&D.

Measure the value of your argument in a way other than $ if you want to make any headway with me.

If you want a game based purely on personal aesthetic considerations, and have no concern with revenue or audience reception, then you really have no constraint other than your own muse.

Most of us understand that discussing a commercial product without reference to revenue or user acceptance is akin to discussing rocketry but ignoring gravity.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you want a game based purely on personal aesthetic considerations, and have no concern with revenue or audience reception, then you really have no constraint other than your own muse.

Most of us understand that discussing a commercial product without reference to revenue or user acceptance is akin to discussing rocketry but ignoring gravity.

Games don't care about revenue or audience reception, and neither do I. What I care about is what those games are trying to model, and how good a job they do.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'd be lying if I didn't say that playing a Wizard in 2023 is a far more satisfying experience for me now than it was in, say, 1989. However, I don't think the issue is really that Wizards became less punishing to play.

I would be. And that's not really my jam.
IMHO/X, a 5e.2014 wizard is a less satisfying experience than a 1e Magic-User, because it is so much less challenging, and thus less engaging.

It is more on-point in delivering "I use magic" in every scene, thanks to cantrips, I don't really begrudge that. Contribution wise, throwing darts/daggers or throwing firebolts, is fine, firebolts are at least, y'know, magicky

But, neo-Vancian slotcasting is just... whatever... it manages not to be any less complicted or more beginner-friendly than traditional Vancian, while being even more imbalancing. I admit, 1e balancing factors were a heavy blunt instrument, ok, a collection of them, but that's better than nothing.

 

[Raiztt]

And increasingly nostalgia for things the vast majority of the fan base has never encountered. From Appendix N...Lord of the Rings, Cthulhu, and maybe Conan the Barbarian are touchstones for younger gamers. If they remember Conan at all, it's likely from the bad Jason Momoa movie more than the Arnie movie or the original Howard stories. The rest are effectively forgotten or nonexistent to younger gamers. Their touchstones will be things like Harry Potter, Harry Dresden, anime, manga, light novels, video games, etc.

I whole heartedly agree with this. I love appendix N - I love Ashton Clark Smith, Howard, Lovecraft, tolkein, etc etc.

But I don't think people in their late teens or early twenties care or know about those influences/tropes/etc. Even though that's certainly my preference, I think D&D is old enough now that it needs to adapt with the times and connect with contemporary touchstones for new player bases.

 

[TwoSix]

Games don't care about revenue or audience reception, and neither do I. What I care about is what those games are trying to model, and how good a job they do.

If "design fidelity to reproduce a fictional model" is your metric of measure, that's fine by me.

I'd personally value that more when evaluating a licensed game, like an AiME or Doctor Who or something like that, but obviously your taste is your taste.