D&D (2024) Martial/Caster fix.

[Distracted DM]

4e works better at high level mostly because the other editions are barely functioning at high level.

I don't have a problem with the spirit of the statement, but the wording makes it sounds like the games didn't work at all at high level, ya know? They do work at high level. I remember high level 3e as a player, it was ... "fine." It was cool to have your build/power/etc cranked out, but boring long-term. I THINK it worked fine in AD&D etc. I haven't experienced it in 5e as a player, but as a GM I detest it... but it runs, it's not like it's unplayable, it's just not a great experience if you're engaging with the combat frequently and/or inconsequentially... which is a/the core pillar of the game.

 

[Minigiant]

This is why combat maneuvers are a must for martials. They provide a list of thematic options that are the equivalent of spells.

Combat maneuvers should NOT be a must.

At least isn't the resource using side.

There should be a basic standard that all Martials should start with. Then the option to stay basic, go advance, or jump to expert.

But these shouldn't be tied to subclass.

That's the beauty of how a Weapon Mastery or Martial At Will system could work. Each player chooses how complex they want to be.*

*There should also be a simple pew pew caster.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't have a problem with the spirit of the statement, but the wording makes it sounds like the games didn't work at all at high level, ya know? They do work at high level. I remember high level 3e as a player, it was ... "fine." It was cool to have your build/power/etc cranked out, but boring long-term. I THINK it worked fine in AD&D etc. I haven't experienced it in 5e as a player, but as a GM I detest it... but it runs, it's not like it's unplayable, it's just not a great experience if you're engaging with the combat frequently and/or inconsequentially... which is a/the core pillar of the game.

Out the book, those edition didn't work at high level. The Martial/Caster problem was worse. And much of your enjoyment of the mechanics of your PC was heavily DM and table dependent on skewing and house rules.

 

[ezo]

Out the book, those edition didn't work at high level.

IME AD&D at high levels played perfectly well, and the few experiences I've had with 5E at high level plays fine. While I never played 3E D&D much, I did play d20 SW to high levels and it worked well IME, also.

The Martial/Caster problem was worse.

Or non-existent if you didn't see it as a problem.

And much of your enjoyment of the mechanics of your PC was heavily DM and table dependent on skewing and house rules.

Well, you certainly cannot know this, or what determined someone's enjoyment of other editions. FWIW, we didn't use any house-rules for AD&D or d20 SW, and although I personally love tweaking 5E, much of the time we play almost entirely without house-rules for it as well, as the house-rules I would love to use are a dramatic shift which with my players is not worth doing.

 

[Minigiant]

Yawn. This again? Just give fighters "sword magic" and be done with it.

Or just design a weapon system with branching levels of complexity.

IME AD&D at high levels played perfectly well, and the few experiences I've had with 5E at high level plays fine. While I never played 3E D&D much, I did play d20 SW to high levels and it worked well IME, also.


Or non-existent if you didn't see it as a problem.


Well, you certainly cannot know this, or what determined someone's enjoyment of other editions. FWIW, we didn't use any house-rules for AD&D or d20 SW, and although I personally love tweaking 5E, much of the time we play almost entirely without house-rules for it as well, as the house-rules I would love to use are a dramatic shift which with my players is not worth doing.

I was going off the design that 1e and 2e were both designed not to be played completely straight and intended for your table to add supplemental rules, variant rules, or house rules.

So by high level, very very few people if any were playing by the book.

 

[ezo]

I was going off the design that 1e and 2e were both designed not to be played completely straight and intended for your table to add supplemental rules, variant rules, or house rules.

So by high level, very very few people if any were playing by the book.

I can't speak to what anyone else was really doing, just what myself and the people I played with for decades did. At high level, we still played it without variants or houserules. If, by "supplemental" rules, you mean Unearthed Arcana, Oriental Adventures, etc. for 1E or the Complete Guide books in 2E, yes we used those--as written.

IME people ignored rules they didn't understand (especially in 1E) or didn't like (like racial level limits), but most of those were simplified by 2E and used, again, as written, or removed in 2E.

In fact, I can honestly say I played B/X, BECMI, 1E, and 2E without a single "house-rule" from '78 to around 2000. I'll admit some of the rules (again especially when we were younger in 1E) we might have done wrong, but we used them as we thought they were meant to be used. Even obscure rules like checking for disease on a regular basis from the 1E DMG, or the 1E grappling and wrestling rules.

 

[Horwath]

martials need more attacks, all of them.

fighters at levels 5,9,13,17,20
barbatians/monks at levels 5, 11, 17
paladin/rangers at levels 5, 13
rogues at levels 9, 17

battlemaster maneuvers merged with weapon masteries that can be used at will with d6 dice(not all of them) some are limited and kept with battlemaster.

 

[ezo]

I'd rather see martials deal greater damage than have more attacks, personally.

 

[Minigiant]

I can't speak to what anyone else was really doing, just what myself and the people I played with for decades did. At high level, we still played it without variants or houserules. If, by "supplemental" rules, you mean Unearthed Arcana, Oriental Adventures, etc. for 1E or the Complete Guide books in 2E, yes we used those--as written

Using those rules is not out the book. Meaning just the core books.

IME people ignored rules they didn't understand (especially in 1E) or didn't like (like racial level limits), but most of those were simplified by 2E and used, again, as written, or removed in 2E.

Ignoring rules is also not playing out the book

Which is my point. 1e and 2e were not designed to be played straight. TSR and Gygax wanted you to feel the need to buy more books or subscribe to their zines. ESPECIALLY for high level play.

 

[Remathilis]

I'd rather see martials deal greater damage than have more attacks, personally.

But then a longsword's damage is based on the wielder and not the sword, so it no longer has objective reality and disassociates into madness. At least, it does if your a hobgoblin.