D&D (2024) Martial/Caster fix.

[CreamCloud0]

i think we need some definitions. So a Ranger, paladin or High elf champion are not martials on this discussion?

by my standards, the first two are not, the latter is.

 

[Minigiant]

IMO it's an unsolveable problem (for D&D and its derivatives).

1. You can't make martials like spellcasters because it'll make people mad.
2. You can't nerf spellcasters because it'll make people mad.
3. You can't give martials spell-like abilities because it'll make people mad.

I've "solved" it for my own table by simply giving martials spells via their weapons. It's basically a 4E "encounter" power.

But would that solve the issue across the entire community? No, because [see #1].

There is an option.

You have to display actual examples of martials at various levels and build the classes to that.

The core issue is the designers of D&D and most D&D clones have no desire to run nor look at the progression of martial classes past level 7 or so.

Just progress the barbarian from Angry Warrior Dude to the Hulk. If you get to level 20, and haven't created a Hulk... throw away the draft and start over.

 

[cbwjm]

I think of rangers and paladins as more martial than caster (as in warriors with a few spells). I don't really think that their spell casting ability tips them more into the spellcaster than the martial side.

Same with the artificer, they're an expert 1st then a caster.

I don't consider any martial that has very limited casting ability from their race as a caster at all.

If I was going to create a manoeuvre system for martials then both paladin and ranger would get them, though fighter would be the best with them.

 

[ECMO3]

by my standards, the first two are not, the latter is.

Ok. Then we accepted that spells are ok on a martial (i.e. High Elf Champion), so logically spells are a viable way to balance them at very high levels with full casters. This approach also works for balancing half-casters (and weaker full casters) as well.

It is still a very complexc issue though as the fix changes level to level and class to class.

 

[ECMO3]

I think of rangers and paladins as more martial than caster (as in warriors with a few spells). I don't really think that their spell casting ability tips them more into the spellcaster than the martial side.

Personally, I think Martial and Caster are talking about two different things, two different traits and they are not exclusionary.

IMO Paladins, Rangers, High Elf Champions, Valor Bards, Bladesingers and Hexblades are all martials. They are also all casters. I don't feel like being one of those means you are not the other.

Just like you can be an athlete and you can be a gamer and if you play both D&D and Basketball you are both an athlete and a gamer.

I don't consider any martial that has very limited casting ability from their race as a caster at all.

For me caster is a lot easier to define than martial. If you can cast any spells at all you are a caster. Whether it is one cantrip once a day or a full complement of spells up to 9th level, if you cast you are a caster.

Martial is much more ambiguous -martial weapons proficiency or sneak attack both qualify in my opinion, but it is a lot muddier. I have seen other people throw out extra attack as the qualifier, but then no one under level 5 is a martial .... so it is a lot more ambiguous.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Ok. Then we accepted that spells are ok on a martial (i.e. High Elf Champion), so logically spells are a viable way to balance them at very high levels with full casters. This approach also works for balancing half-casters (and weaker full casters) as well.

It is still a very complexc issue though as the fix changes level to level.

no, high elf champion got a pass because none of it's spellcasting came from it's class or subclass, the champion subclass is a pure martial subclass, although the character gains some ability to cast from it's species that doesn't influence the fundamental majority design of the character enough to make it a caster, it isn't integrated enough, it's casting is bells, whistles and ribbons but not part of the core mechanism, in a similar vein, a character taking the magic initiate feat wouldn't be enough influence to make a champion count as a caster either.

 

[Minigiant]

Personally, I think Martial and Caster are talking about two different things, two different traits.

IMO Paladins and Rangers and High Elf Champions are all martials, so are Valor Bards, Bladesingers and Hexblades. They are also all casters. I don't feel like those terms are exclusionary.

Just like you can be an athlete and you can be a gamer and if you play both D&D and Basketball you are both an athlete and a gamer.



For me caster is a lot easier to define than martial. If you can cast any spells at all you are a caster. Whether it is one cantrip once a day or a full complement of spells up to 9th level, if you cast you are a caster.

Martial is much more ambiguous -martial weapons proficiency or sneak attack both qualify in my opinion, but it is a lot muddier. I have seen other people throw out extra attack as the qualifier, but then no one under level 5 is a martial .... so it is a lot more ambiguous.

This issue isn't martial classes.

The issue is martial features.

The whole argument is what martial class feature is equal to a 5th or higher level spell.

Half casters most or less combine a low strength martial features with low strength casting features.

A 1.5 power attack with a 1.5 power attack with a 4th level Smite to make a effect that is 7 power turn and equal to a 7th level spell.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If I was going to create a manoeuvre system for martials then both paladin and ranger would get them, though fighter would be the best with them.

That's exactly how it works in Level Up.

 

[Corinnguard]

So a Ranger, paladin or High elf champion are not martials on this discussion?

Like @CreamCloud0 said, the first two are martials. The High Elf Fighter (Champion) is also martial, one that benefits from the use of some spell-like abilities thanks to their species.

 

[ECMO3]

This issue isn't martial classes.

The issue is martial features.

The whole argument is what martial class feature is equal to a 5th or higher level spell.

Half casters most or less combine a low strength martial features with low strength casting features.

A 1.5 power attack with a 1.5 power attack with a 4th level Smite to make a effect that is 7 power turn and equal to a 7th level spell.

A few of the higher level martial features are equal or better than a 5th level spell (Indomitable for one off the top of my head).

I don't think there is an "issue" at all, and I am totally fine with the imbalance. Personally, my 2024 play experience indicates some of the martial features need to be nerfed (indomitable being one of them). I think spells should be more powerful than martial features and high level spells WAY more powerful. Spells are quite literally magic, while martial features are generally not.

All I am saying is the easiest and simplest way to fix the imbalance is to give the weaker classes (martials, half-casters, weaker casters, whatever) more spells/slots at the level where the imbalance exists. This works and it is simple, easy and underpinned by a well developed, well understood and well playtested spell casting system.