D&D General Wizard vs Fighter - the math

[Scott Christian]

No, because the first thing most referees ban is Leomund’s Tiny Hut.

I have never seen the spell banned. I have used it many times. When we were in the jungles of Chult, it was a life saver. When we were held up in Rime of the Frostmaiden, it was great. Without it, we would have suffered exhaustion from frostbite. We used it in a bedroom where we thought something might go awry in the middle of the night. It was great!

We also used it in The Keep on the Borderlands. It got all of us killed except our wizard. We used it in the Feywild, and it enabled a very angry mushroom gang to find us and steal everything that wasn't inside the circle with us.

Those are all things that happened during my 5e play experiences. It helped tell a story. It is not an OP spell by any means. It is a way to highlight the PC, and let them roleplay their character's motives.

 

[Scott Christian]

It's generally easy to rationalize punishing players for deviating from the expected day length (or week length, if you go that way), yes... generally...

...But, If the players are exploring an ancient tomb, untouched for centuries, that only they know the location of, and they decide to retreat from a powerful construct guarding one of the inner chambers, re-seal and cover the entrance, rest up, make a new magic weapon capable of harming said construct, and come back to dispatch it later, well, that's just 'bout Smart Play, i'n'it?

You could rationalize a punishment there, and if you don't, the players may realize they can slowly grind away at the challenges in the tomb, methodically, one challenge and one long rest at a time, which would render the whole resource-attrition balancing act moot. But, if you do, they players may realize you're forcing things and their decisions don't really matter.

In my experience, that during that scenario, the DM would never punish the PCs. That's not how it works, and it is not how the DMG suggests doing things either. It is based on the story. And there are times within the story the characters rest up, equip, and as you put it, "Smart Play." I have never seen any player punished for this.
But, just as the DMG suggests, there are times they can't go get what they need, or they can, but there might be consequences.

All of this is the interplay between the DM and the players. The social contract that the DM has done the work, and that the players show trust in that work.

 

[Tony Vargas]

As with all of it, it is a DM problem. Everything about rests is a DM problem. Not being able to challenge players is a DM problem. And one class always outperforming the other is a DM problem.

All the problems with D&D are DM problems? Sure.
The DM's problem was deciding to run D&D.

In my experience, that during that scenario, the DM would never punish the PCs. That's not how it works, and it is not how the DMG suggests doing things either. It is based on the story. And there are times within the story the characters rest up, equip, and as you put it, "Smart Play." I have never seen any player punished for this.

The issue we're digging into here is one of class balance. Da Math says the fighter and wizard, at least, tend to balance in terms of DPR only, when your day goes closer to 18 rounds, which is, in the model used, close to the 6-8 encounter days the DMG helpfully hints may be appropriate.

So, two classes may be balanced in terms of one metric, if you stick to that day length.

Your anecdote is that you have never seen that day length enforced and, indeed, it sounds like doing so by 'punishing' players feels almost unthinkable.
That coincidentally jibes with WotC's own surveys which indicate the vast majority of 'days' go 1-3 encounters.
Which is unfortunate, for the potential mathematical DPR-balance the OP found, but not surprising.

 

[Minigiant]

It's also kinda telling that almost every popular fantasy dungeon adventurer RPG that isn't Old School or trtin to have an Old School feel gives it's spellcasters either

1. has encounter/focus spells which recover after a short period of rest
2. has a base damage attack of near equal power of a warrior class's weapon attack
3. has a base rest and rest time for resources that is a short period of time

Today it's really only 5e and OSR games that front load all of a spellcaster's power at the start of a rest and then recovers it ALL back after a length time of rest.

"But this feels like D&D."

Sure. There's not problem with that. But one has to admit that It's only Post 2000 (non-4e) D&D and ts clones that has this problem. Only these games give casters 10+ magic bullets that can do everything up front and almost nothing else*.

*Well nothing else. When they also give the casters extras like good Channel Divinities/Turn Undeads or Wildshape, they break the game and are obviously OP coughtTwilightClericcough

 

[FrogReaver]

What do thise 100 orcs eat? Where do they sleep? If the PCs cut 1/3 of the previous tribe into ribbons using their highest spell slots, why would anyone else agree to come act as cannon fodder? Where did 100 orcs come from within 3 days of the ruin? (3 days to send a messenger, 1 day to organize, 3 days to return). How did no one notice an army of 100 orcs marching through the woods.

It seems like in order to discourage a 5MWD, you are throwing verisimilitude out the window.

Not just that, if my decisions to fall back and recover resources were consistently met with the equivalent of 1000 orc scenarios, either me or the DM would be quitting. I'm all for pushing on as a PC, but if and when i try to rest there's something like that, it's ridiculous. I mean, it's a ridiculous scenario in any event.

 

[FrogReaver]

IMO. There's 2 effective ways to incentivize less 5MWD's.

1. PC's need time pressure. One time pressure example I've thought about adopting are doom clocks from other games. Essentially when the PC's intentionally rest when it's not really warranted you tick the doom clock and something bad happens due to their dilly dallying. Then provide a mechanism for resetting doom clocks (likely a longer rest).

2. Give them incentives for finishing quests quickly. One thing I'm thinking about would be something like - NPC: I'll give you 1000 gold for this but 100 less for each day longer than X it takes you. Alternatively you could build it into the loot systems - the gods take notice when you are pushing yourselves to the limits and bestow their favors upon you. You have a better chance of acquiring better loot the more encounters you complete before taking a long rest.

 

[Scott Christian]

All the problems with D&D are DM problems? Sure.
The DM's problem was deciding to run D&D.

Not going to lie, that was funny.

The issue we're digging into here is one of class balance. Da Math says the fighter and wizard, at least, tend to balance in terms of DPR only, when your day goes closer to 18 rounds, which is, in the model used, close to the 6-8 encounter days the DMG helpfully hints may be appropriate.

So, two classes may be balanced in terms of one metric, if you stick to that day length.

And I beg to differ. The "so-called" math people purport is flawed to such an insane level, that it would make any high school math teacher throw up.
6-8 encounters is one variable, a single gust of wind in a storm that lasts hours. And the inability of people to overlook the other variables is mind blowing. A single glance at the MM, at an adventure path, the DMG, or even the PHB points to all these other variables.

Your anecdote is that you have never seen that day length enforced and, indeed, it sounds like doing so by 'punishing' players feels almost unthinkable.

My remark is specifically about trusting the DM. I have never seen a DM "punish" players for resting or leaving an area when the story dictates; they often do so without consequence. If the story dictates otherwise, they players are still free to make that decision, but it might have consequences. Some DMs use dice rolls for this (maybe a skill check from the air sniffing creature to see if it can track them), and others use their judgement. No matter which one has been used, I have never seen it done unfairly.

That coincidentally jibes with WotC's own surveys which indicate the vast majority of 'days' go 1-3 encounters.
Which is unfortunate, for the potential mathematical DPR-balance the OP found, but not surprising.

Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I can run one encounter per day and never have a class imbalance unless I, as DM, want there to be a class imbalance. That is how DMs build encounters. I guess, if a DM is so lazy, that they only use random tables, then things could favor a specific class. But to anyone who, at a minimum, tries to put some thought into their setting, story, scenes, encounters, and NPCs, you most likely won't have this problem.
It feels like, at least to me, the people discussing this refuse to look at other variables and build static encounters.

 

[Minigiant]

IMO. There's 2 effective ways to incentivize less 5MWD's.

Or you give classes more shortrest/encounter power and less longrest/daily power.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Not going to lie, that was funny.

And I beg to differ. The "so-called" math people purport is flawed to such an insane level, that it would make any high school math teacher throw up.

The assumptions and over-simplifications in the exercise are truely profound. They are entirely in favor of the fighter, tho. The analysis is really looking for any indiction of balance, at all, the slightest numeric evidence that it could exist.
The more detail you bring in, the worse it's going to look, because DPR is not just the fighter's best thing, it's virtually his only thing, and the wizard has so many other things he could be doing with those slots besides blasting 1-3 enemies.

My remark is specifically about trusting the DM.... I can run one encounter per day and never have a class imbalance unless I, as DM, want there to be

You can. You can do it with the 1000 orcs or with any other use of DM force or illusionism - if your players trust you because you always deliver a fun session, its just that much easier.
(there arguments against that sort of thing, that it erases player agency &c, but when it's down to just your & your players, it's a personal relationship, a social contract, whatever, it's unique to each group)
You can also formally introduce all manner of rule changes, or less fromally ad hoc rulings. Like you say, at that point, it's all on the DM.

But, that doesn't excuse the system in any way.

 

[Tony Vargas]

IMO. There's 2 effective ways to incentivize less 5MWD's.

You could also have less incentive in the first place. Shifting resources from long to short rests (and making short rests actually short could do that)
And you could directly incentivize pressing on with momentum mechanics. Like, IDK, Inspiration for winning an battle that goes away if you rest. Any sort of resource that you accumulate over the 'day' that re-sets on a rest.

1. PC's need time pressure. One time pressure example I've thought about adopting are doom clocks from other games. Essentially when the PC's intentionally rest when it's not really warranted you tick the doom clock and something bad happens due to their dilly dallying. Then provide a mechanism for resetting doom clocks (likely a longer rest).

Time pressure is just the 1000 orcs, again, tho. Formalizing it with a clock makes it clearer to the players and more abstract, so you might get less frustration with the 1000 orcs - or you might get frustration that the clock is too abstract.

2. Give them incentives for finishing quests quickly. One thing I'm thinking about would be something like - NPC: I'll give you 1000 gold for this but 100 less for each day longer than X it takes you. Alternatively you could build it into the loot systems - the gods take notice when you are pushing yourselves to the limits and bestow their favors upon you. You have a better chance of acquiring better loot the more encounters you complete before taking a long rest.

That's a carrot to the time-pressure stick, which is likely to be less frustrating, but may still feel forced.

But, the most effective thing you could do to solve the whole 5MWD issue screwing up balance, is not to have some classes that get huge amounts of rest-resources alongside others who have few or none besides hp. Simply give every class some long, short, and at-will resources... 5e already does this with most classes, the proportions are just very different. Let all casters recover a few lower-level spells with a short rest, and their few highest level spells only with a long rest. Let non-casters have more short rest resources like action surge, and more long-rest ones like Rage.
This solves all three issues.
3. Balance: the classes balance, and stay balanced regardless of whether they have a long or short day.
2. Stakes: the party can reserve resources or rest strategically to bring the most power to the most difficult or important encounters, they can push themselves when they're sufficiently determined.
1. Pacing: the DM's campaign can progress naturally, as nothing needs to be forced.