Zardnaar
Legend
If a blaster I'm thinking ignore fireball or acid sorcerer and transmute.
We are using chromatic orb a lot for blasting.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D (2024) Can A Spell Caster Out Damage a Martial Consistently?
- Thread starter Zardnaar
- Start date
If a blaster I'm thinking ignore fireball or acid sorcerer and transmute.
We are using chromatic orb a lot for blasting.
evilbob
Adventurer
Hey again @EzekielRaiden!
You might hate me for this but we just finished up a 1-16 campaign (just over a year) where the average number of encounters per LONG rest was probably... less than 2.
"Why?!" "Blasphemy!!" All fair points. And truthfully: I did it because fights take too long and they aren't usually narratively interesting. For me, personally, if a dungeon takes four battles I'm done. I don't care if we found the macguffin or not, I am finished. Next song.
I know there are a lot of assumptions and math about balance and pacing and all, but over 16 levels, this never felt unfair. If anything: at high levels when we switched to 5.5 the martials still felt too strong. (Druid, cleric, monk, ranger, and at the end another fighter.) There are SO many ways to get your resources back now that just skipping all that and long resting often... didn't change much. In my experience: 2 battles per long rest (sometimes with a short rest between) was fine. YMMV.
You might hate me for this but we just finished up a 1-16 campaign (just over a year) where the average number of encounters per LONG rest was probably... less than 2.
"Why?!" "Blasphemy!!" All fair points. And truthfully: I did it because fights take too long and they aren't usually narratively interesting. For me, personally, if a dungeon takes four battles I'm done. I don't care if we found the macguffin or not, I am finished. Next song.
I know there are a lot of assumptions and math about balance and pacing and all, but over 16 levels, this never felt unfair. If anything: at high levels when we switched to 5.5 the martials still felt too strong. (Druid, cleric, monk, ranger, and at the end another fighter.) There are SO many ways to get your resources back now that just skipping all that and long resting often... didn't change much. In my experience: 2 battles per long rest (sometimes with a short rest between) was fine. YMMV.
CreamCloud0
Hero
i would be interested in seeing how each class's design in 5e would need to change if they were rebalanced on the basis that 'an adventuring day' really was 2-3 battles/24 hours.
Zardnaar
Legend
Kind of already been done in 5.5.
evilbob
Adventurer
I agree with Zard. IMO you see it now.
L
With 5.5 there are still a lot of design elements standing in the way of making it really work. Many of those are to big for the GM to trivially tweak into line so that the gameplay itself shifts to make the target's repositioning really hit home. A few easy examples are things like the triviality of rest/recovery to erase the risk of death spiral through reckless resource burn. Another easy example would be way cantrips neovancian prep & removal of meaningful SR ate into power budget for spells that are now shared almost more than ever without really doing anything about the now smeared niches different caster classes had.
I don't think it's the same target being discussed. 5.0 was so incredibly far from ithe 2-3/24hr target that any movement towards there will look like it was "kind of" achieved by virtue of being on the same planet as the target.
With 5.5 there are still a lot of design elements standing in the way of making it really work. Many of those are to big for the GM to trivially tweak into line so that the gameplay itself shifts to make the target's repositioning really hit home. A few easy examples are things like the triviality of rest/recovery to erase the risk of death spiral through reckless resource burn. Another easy example would be way cantrips neovancian prep & removal of meaningful SR ate into power budget for spells that are now shared almost more than ever without really doing anything about the now smeared niches different caster classes had.
I have 5e in mind, haven't played 5.5 yet. It is the same edition basically, just a little bit modified and moderately more complex (weapon properties slowing battles down). Probably it goes up to 3 in 5.5 because of Prayer of Healing.
I really can't understand why you are asking for a 'rule' that forces a 'house rule', that doesn't make any sense.
Realistically speaking, almost no DM runs 6-8 encounters per long rest frequently. In my case, it is 4-6 encounters most of the time but there are cases for fewer too. Depends on the story, it is not all formulaic and shouldn't be. If you want my opinion, players who are obsessed about balance make BAD players, always whining about items other characters got and think that are stronger than theirs, etc. It is not a strategy game, it is an RPG. Every time I am interviewing someone I don't know who wants to join the table, as soon as I hear the word 'balance', he is out.
Yes, everyone has to be useful, else it's boring for the useless character but useful ≠ balanced. There are cases and cases where different characters are more or less useful and it is the DM's duty to employ them. The DM has to work on the campaign, he can't just sit down and expect the rules to run the table. That doesn't work.
Yes, everyone has to be useful, else it's boring for the useless character but useful ≠ balanced. There are cases and cases where different characters are more or less useful and it is the DM's duty to employ them. The DM has to work on the campaign, he can't just sit down and expect the rules to run the table. That doesn't work.
You made the anecdotal claim about GM's you've encountered, the plural of anecdote is not data.
What is the Oberoni Fallacy?
In my travels across the internet, I've occasionally seen mention of a logical fallacy relating to roleplaying games called the Oberoni Fallacy. What is this fallacy, and where does it come from?
rpg.stackexchange.com
Where did I spoke about 'data'?You made the anecdotal claim about GM's you've encountered, the plural of anecdote is not data.
What is the Oberoni Fallacy?
In my travels across the internet, I've occasionally seen mention of a logical fallacy relating to roleplaying games called the Oberoni Fallacy. What is this fallacy, and where does it come from?
You used the term, not me.
Similar Threads
