D&D General Requesting permission to have something cool

[nevin]

you can add anything you want. But pretending that abilities aren't rules and spells aren't rules are a quick way into rules paralysis.

 

[nevin]

Well I won't waste time arguing that, since I always make my own worlds and adventures - I know that I was consistent in applying the concept, with unique NPCs being the only ones with PC classes. [In fact, I even took it a step further and wrote rules for "upgrading" existing NPC class levels to PC class levels. For a player who wanted to join the game by taking over an NPC that already existed, and having them grow under the PCs' tutelage.]

I think NPC classes came about as a failed way to shut down' the powergamers who wanted to conflate a profession skill with actually living and working in the profession. I just give actual working professional's extra bonuses to thier rolls or the ability for most things to simply work through an issue and fix something a player can't. Because they have the depth of experience and the resources to pull on. Problem with that is the only way to prevent that kind of power gaming is a steady no, no, no because anything you add is just another set of rules for the min maxer to find a loop hole in. More rules more loop holes.

 

[rmcoen]

Fair -- I give "working professionals" increasing levels of proficiency bonus and/or Expertise, without giving them levels. So total agreement there.

My suggestions were colored by the general consensus I have encountered that no one wants to nerf the casters. so that does mean boosting the martials.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You're totally right about rules begetting more rules. I have absolutely seen that in action in this and other games. ("These [insert sci-fi weapon here] bypass shields!" "Oh, but these shields resist being bypassed!")

The shield throw example was an off-the-cuff idea as I was typing. But the "reskinned counterspell" isn't a new rule, it's taking an existing concept and changing the special effect. Still 60' (can only throw the aerodynamic shield so far), still has to see the target (so the shield can be thrown at it), isn't necessarily guaranteed (depends on spell level and skill check), and could, in theory, be prevented (like counterspell vs. counterspell) by other defensive options -- perhaps in this case, a shield spell blocks the thrown shield. And maybe the 17th level battlemaster hurling that shield had to spend his only d12 Superiority Die to do it, leaving him with only d10s and d8s for the rest of the fight.

And keep in mind - WotC invents new spells with every product release, from cantrips and 1st level spells right up to 9th level. Why can't they (or we) add "higher level" BMstr moves? They don't add new defenses against magic (that I recall, anyway). And "mundane" defenses already exist for every character and creature (AC and saves, Atheltics or Acrobatics skill checks), so no changes required there. The monk can already "avoid the battle tactic" with his AC, his Deflect Missiles and Patient Defense class features, and so on.

Because only BMs use BM maneuvers in WotC 5e. It's too narrow a focus.

 

[Corinnguard]

Because only BMs use BM maneuvers in WotC 5e. It's too narrow a focus.

It would be better if all of the martials had access to combat maneuvers, not just the Fighter. Why should the Fighter have all the fun?

 

[nevin]

The basic idea of complex class has lower floor/higher ceiling, simple class is dead-on effective isn't going to give you caster supremacy, by itself.

There's the additional step of insisting that casters must be complex, and non-casters must be simple, so that the ceiling of the former is always higher than the latter.

D&D obviously takes that step, and, when it didn't go far enough, attracted a surprising amount of nerdrage.

The idea has other issues, though, like low floor/high ceiling sounds fair, if the average lies in about the same plane as the simpler character's consistent performance. Thing is, it might if perfectly designed and measured over the population of all characters of each class, but it probably won't in terms of actual play experience. The floor is mainly going to be experienced by the less skilled player learning that, no, you aren't allowed to play a caster, you must play a Champion. The ceiling is going to be consistently hit - if not exceeded - by system masters.

If you do want to make the game more complicated by balancing it around different tiers of class complexity, the balance target should be to give the simple characters solid, viable effectiveness as their floor, and a slightly higher ceiling if played optimally, then give the complex classes basically no floor, just, when misplayed, they die or something, and a design ceiling of viable effectiveness (which would, inevitably, be exceeded by system mastery, since perfect balance is impossible). Thus, players looking for a challenge would pick the complex classes, and those looking for a fun power fantasy, could be directed to the simpler options.

D&D in the 80s gave indications of going for that, at least, in the single digit levels.

But, absolutely, each broad concept should have both a simple and a complex option, something D&D only flirted with at the very end of 4e. Essentials had already, 2 years in, re-introduced simple martials/complex casters, but, the game could still be played with all prior options, giving both simple & complex martial options - with the introduction, 2 years later, of the Elementalist sorcerer in HotEC, the very last supplement to feature sub-classes, at all, an simple arcane caster option finally existed, as well.

Well as someone who likes to play casters, I think the issue is that they tried to make casters as easy to play as the less complex classes. What needs to happen is combat spells and change the world spells need to be separated and then once you decide the limit of world changing ability that any spell should be able to do when cast as a quickie combat spell then you can make the rules for the big stuff that should require ritual castings, resources, additional caster's etc, etc, depending on what change to the world you are bringing. Then you can balance combat casting with every other character and then for world bending magic, if it takes a ritual with 20 casters to cast miracle or wish then any of the party members can do it with equal difficulty as a ritual.

 

[nevin]

It would be better if all of the martials had access to combat maneuvers, not just the Fighter. Why should the Fighter have all the fun?

well once upon a time all of these combat maneuvers where just things some player just tried in a game.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well as someone who likes to play casters, I think the issue is that they tried to make casters as easy to play as the less complex classes.

5e definitely did that, yes. Spontaneous casting is easier than 3e prepped casting and much easier than old-school memorization & looking for new spells to add to your book in-game.
Really, it's been a continuous, if not exactly even, trend throughout the games history. Casters retain complexity, flexibility, & power, but shed restrictions & limitations.

What needs to happen is combat spells and change the world spells need to be separated and then once you decide the limit of world changing ability that any spell should be able to do when cast as a quickie combat spell then you can make the rules for the big stuff that should require ritual castings, resources, additional caster's etc, etc, depending on what change to the world you are bringing. Then you can balance combat casting with every other character

A straightforward change could also be to balance the number/power of slots around the combat pillar (since it's decidedly time-important), and use rituals &c in the other two.

and then for world bending magic, if it takes a ritual with 20 casters to cast miracle or wish then any of the party members can do it with equal difficulty as a ritual.

A world-bending ritual could easily involve the whole party, even, with caster & non-caster participants, quests to make the ritual possible, defense against it being sabotaged, etc....

 

[Micah Sweet]

It would be better if all of the martials had access to combat maneuvers, not just the Fighter. Why should the Fighter have all the fun?

I quite agree. This is why I just play Level Up. This whole argument is just academic to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

well once upon a time all of these combat maneuvers where just things some player just tried in a game.

Yeah, the DCC fighter way is definitely just as valid a method.