• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Out of Combat Utility Analysis

Capricia

Banned
Banned
Previously, I took a look at the Cleric and the Fighter, working from their Starter Set character sheets.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?356155-Analysis-of-the-Fighter-and-Cleric&p=6320288

It was a very limited in scope look, seeing as it had one build of each and went to level 20. Now though with Basic DnD out and all the character rules open to see, I think it’s a good time to expand that to all four classes.

However, I’m only going to look at two pillars: exploration and social interaction. Two-thirds of the game.

attachment.php



Exploration can be divided into movement through the world and interaction with objects and situations that require their attention. It includes long-distance travel, moving through a dungeon, and dealing with puzzles and traps.

Social Interaction is talking to people and things. As you might expect, it has the least rigid rules, but there are still Bluff skills and Dominate spells.

As well as judging the four classes, I’ll also include the Backgrounds system itself, to see just how much of a chunk of abilities it makes up.

Okay, let’s start!

Backgrounds

Background is something everyone has, and it’s not restricted at all by class choice. The benefits are laid out rather straightforward:

attachment.php



One feature, two skills, and two tool proficiencies or languages. Features can range in utility from “farmers let you sleep in their barn” to “you know where you can learn anything”. Tool proficiencies likewise range from the always useful Thieves’ Tools to...card games. Yeah.

For this, I’m going to say that skills are equal and worth 3 points each. A tool proficiency is usually worth less, at 2 points. Features are one point. So two skills, two tools, and a feature is a total of 11 points of “stuff” for a background.


Skills: 6
Tools: 4
Feature: 1
Total score: 11


Fighter

Fighters have proficiency with zero tools and two skills. The Champion archetype has the remarkable athlete feature, which gives half the bonus to untrained checks. And, it increases the length of running jumps by the the strength mod. A fighter with 20 strength would jump 25 feet rather than 20 feet, more than double the distance a wizard with only 10 strength could jump.

And that’s it. So let’s take a closer look. Remarkable Athlete’s check bonus varies from +2 to +3--you get it at level 7 when your prof bonus is already +3--and can apply to a lot of things. But it’s a +2 to +3 bonus that comes up rather rarely. In the typical adventuring day, you might need to force open a door, break ropes that are binding you, craft a basket, and hold your breath. On 10% of these checks, a +2 bonus is going to turn a failure into a success.

For instance, if you normally would roll a DC 10 check to “Steer a chariot around a tight turn” and you normally rolled with a +2 bonus from your 14 Dexterity, then you would succeed on a roll of 8 or higher, fail on a roll of 7 or lower. Remarkable Athlete means that you don’t fail on the 6 and 7. The other 18 results will be the same regardless of Remarkable Athlete.

Which is why it’s wrong. Remarkable Athlete offers a very minor bonus for generally rare circumstances. Outside of initiative checks, these untrained checks are probably going to come up between 0 and 3 times a day. You could go whole weeks of play without Remarkable Athlete making a single change in outcome. I think it’s a bit generous to even give it the 3p value of a single skill.

This is bad design, and it’s also old. Part of what gives 5e an advantage compared to past editions is that there generally aren’t that many tiny, circumstantial bonuses. Advantage/Disadvantage replace a lot of it, but you can also see it a lot of other places that when giving out class features, it’s things that simply work, rather than things that make things that might not work, work slightly better.

The extra jump boost is even worse. Unbelievably bad. Painfully bad. So clearly and obviously bad I’m not even going to bother trying to explain, and I will think less of you if you have to ask why, and much less if you disagree. 1 point

Skills: 6
Remarkable Athlete’s skill boosts: 3
Jumping: 1
Total: 10

Rogue

Okay, time for the skillmonkey! Rogues have 4 skills, proficiency with Thieve’s Tools. Of note is that now Thieve’s Tools replace Disable Device and Open Lock, and you need both the equipment and the proficiency to even attempt the check. It’s more than worth three points on its own.

Rogues also have Expertise, which doubles two and then four skills’ proficiency bonus. Three points each.

Thieves’ Cant allows them to pass hidden messages to other thieves, and also lets you recognize open messages that thieves might place around town or in dungeons. One point.

Reliable Talent means you can’t roll less than 10 on most checks, which is really powerful, and the capstone lets you turn failure into a success once per rest. Reliable Talent is rather binary in what it does. If you need to roll an 11 or more on the check, it’s pointless. If you only need a smaller number, it effectively makes up that difference for you. For example, an 11th level rogue with 20 Dex and Proficiency and Expertise in Acrobatics has a bonus of +12. Reliable Talent means that you succeed on every check with a DC lower than 22. Without it, you would fail on a roll of 1-9. Since it applies to all six skills and all tool proficiencies, proficiencies and adds such a hefty bonus, I would rate this at at 15. 2 for each skill, 1.5 for each tool boost. This might be conservative.

The Thief archetype lets you jump a little bit further. The double climb speed doesn’t really apply except in combat situations, so we’re not counting it. 1 point.

Supreme Sneak means you are really super good at sneaking, and Use Magic Device is as powerful as the plot devices the gm throws at you. Pretty great if you find that giant robot that only the extinct dragonborn can pilot. Worthless if the gm forgets you have it. 3 and 2 points.

Skills: 12
Thieves’ Tools: 3
Expertise: 12
Thieves’ Cant: 1
Reliable Talent: 15
Jumping: 1
Supreme Sneak: 3
Use Magic Device: 2
Total: 48

So, right away, you can see that a fighter is going to have 21 points of out of combat utility with the help from his background, while the rogue will have 59. Thus, rogues have about three times the utility of a fighter.

What about the magic users though? After all, THIS is in the rules:

attachment.php



Cleric

Two skills. 6 points

3 to 5 cantrips. Let’s say that 3 are utility and two are for combat. One point for Light, two for Thaumaturgy being so useful, and 4 for Guidance which is just going to come up a whole bunch because it applies to pretty much everything outside of combat. So 7 points.

Divine Intervention is a bit wonky. Once per day with a 10-19% chance, then autosuccess. However, its use in downtime can’t really be understated. With a few weeks, you can ask god for a miracle. That means that a level 10 cleric could spend a few weeks praying and cast True Resurrection, or bring down a city with an Earthquake, or any number of other things the GM is going to allow. During your standard adventure, you can also use it for a low-chance shot to punch way above your weight and accomplish something really handy. Still, with those limits, I’d rate it at a 5.

As for spells, you start with 4 prepared, eventually getting 25. You can cast 2 at 1st level, and 22 at 20th. Ritual casting means you can cast the spell for free as long as you have ten minutes.

So how do you value spells? With 5e’s extremely flexible spellcasting, Clerics learn every spell on their list automatically, can change which spells they have prepared each day, and can cast the spells from whichever slot they want as long as they hit its minimum.

How much impact does a spell have?

A lot. The thing about spells is, they expand your capabilities. You can’t make an untrained Detect Magic or Augury check. You can’t roll Stealth to try and make everything within a radius completely silent. Being able to Fly changes the game’s exploration encounters in a way that being able to jump an extra 5 feet if you get a running start isn’t.

So lets put the value of a spell at 5 points. 25 spells prepared each day, that’s a total value of 125 points. Ritual Casting means that you basically don’t have to give up any combat resources for utility purposes, so I’d rate it at a 10. It’ll be worth more and more of course with each new ritual that’s released.
So, for the cleric

Skills: 6
Cantrips: 7
Divine Intervention: 5
Ritual Casting: 10
Spellcasting: 125
Total: 153

Wizard


For the wizard, I’m going to say that each spell slot is worth 6 rather than 5. That’s because there’s going to be more wizard spells than cleric spells and wizard spells have more of a focus on utility than cleric spells.

Skills: 6
Cantrips: 7
Ritual Casting: 10
Spellcasting: 150
Total: 173

Conclusion

With backgrounds factored in, the out of combat resources and abilities of characters looks something like this:

Fighter: 21
Rogues: 59
Cleric: 164
Wizard: 184

Put another way, you could say that the rogue is three times as useful out of combat as the fighter, while the cleric is eight times as useful, and the wizard nine times.

But wait, you might say, there’s no guarantee that a cleric is going to need to use all 25 of those spells! Doesn’t matter. A rogue has no guarantee that they will get to use their skills. Unlike the rogue, a cleric can convert his out of combat utility into combat utility, with the spellcasting.

But wait, you might say, sure a cleric can do amazing things, but a fighter can use their skills ALL DAY. Doesn’t matter. There is a finite number of challenges that our heroes can face in a given day. Sure, if you’re not in rush for time, you can try to unlock a door for an hour. But you have one chance on that Bluff you give to the bandits, one chance to make the jump, one chance to not go sliding down the oiled ramp, one chance to remember that crucial bit of info. And at the higher levels, the number of challenges is going to be smaller than the number of spells you can cast each day.

But wait, you might say, it’s not like a cleric can do everything! Except...that’s how spells work. Rogues and fighters are all about zero sum. It’s a given that with the player’s handbook, there will be other fighter builds, ones that can replace Remarkable Athlete with something more useful. Only...you will then lose access to Remarkable Athlete forever. Same with rogue features. Getting something new means giving something up.

Not so with spells. The player’s handbook is going to give us literally HUNDREDS of new spells, and each of those spells is going to expand the caster’s capabilities. Each of them can be swapped in and out on a daily basis. Each of them is a marked increase in the power of the class.

But wait, you might say, who really cares about this noncombat rules nonsense? I’m all about combat and/or roleplaying. Good for you. If this sort of thing doesn’t interest you, then there’s really no point in reading this analysis.

But wait, you might say, I disagree with your math! Each spell prepared shouldn’t be worth 5 or 6 points! It should be worth X points instead! That’s fine. You can plug in whatever value you’d like for the various Comprehend Language and Teleports and Wishes that you like. That’ll give you different numbers, to be sure, but this is the rough value that I give what are, to be fair, a bit intangibles. Going into finer detail--is Stealth more valuable than Medicine?--is a bit beyond the scope of what I'm doing here. The reason I put them so high is because of both the flexibility of the spells--there is no lost opportunity cost to preparing a utility spell compared with a combat spell, aside from the lost slot, of which you have 25--and the way they so vastly expand what a character is capable of doing. It’s like the books says

“Without the sheer magical power and versatility of the wizards (and druids), every threat would be magnified tenfold.”
 

Attachments

  • 16b549cceb.png
    16b549cceb.png
    78.1 KB · Views: 6,368
  • a261a641ba.jpg
    a261a641ba.jpg
    62.9 KB · Views: 6,175
  • 082eedf73c.png
    082eedf73c.png
    61.4 KB · Views: 5,711

log in or register to remove this ad

Sadras

Legend
But wait, I do say, remove magic from your campaign. Problem is now sorted.

Also this exercise is extremely unfair, you cannot analyse the two pillars in isolation. If a caster utilises 5 spells in 1 combat thereby dropping their 25 spells to 20, you need to decrease the "exploration/social" points you have assigned to the caster by 25 points (5 x 5 using your math), but you don't have to drop any points for the fighter. And that is just 1 combat! You need to factor the average number of combats in per day before you can make a decent comparison.

And as for the pillars being exactly equal my answer to that is you have a Monsters Manual, you don't have a
Social Interactions Manual or an Exploration Manual - you have chapters on those. I admit we have seen a Wilderness Guide and a few other others over the course of D&D history but that does not make the pillars equal.
 
Last edited:

Capricia

Banned
Banned
Also this exercise is extremely unfair, you cannot analyse the two pillars in isolation. If a caster utilises 5 spells in 1 combat thereby dropping their 25 spells to 20, you need to decrease the "exploration/social" points you have assigned to the caster by 25 points (5 x 5 using your math), but you don't have to drop any points for the fighter. And that is just 1 combat! You need to factor the average number of combats in per day before you can make a decent comparison.

Two things. First, say the wizard casts 4 level 2 spells in combat throughout the day. Then he needs to cast Comprehend Languages. Party's screwed! Oh wait, no, he can just use a level 3 slot. You can prepare 25 spells, cast 10...and you will will have 25 spells prepared.

Second, if you do get to the point that the wizard is running low on spell slots at the higher levels...that means that the wizard has been pulling more than their share of weight and absolutely dominating things with powerful, campaign and combat trivializing effects. The more spells they cast, the less flexible they become, but that also means that the more value they've added to the party.

3e3493cde3.png



And as for the pillars being exactly equal my answer to that is you have a Monsters Manual, you don't have a
Social Interactions Manual or an Exploration Manual - you have chapters on those. I admit we have seen a Wilderness Guide and a few other others over the course of D&D history but that does not make the pillars equal.

Yes, the pillars aren't equal. DnD is all about the combat to be sure. But spells take up a third of the basic rules with literally hundreds more to come, and even though they tilt towards combat, a hearty chunk of them are about snapping the other two pillars in half.

But, say for instance that the Combat Pillar is three times as important as the other two combined. For a "balanced" game then, you would need the Fighter to be three times as good at fighting as the Wizard. The fighter would weep with joy if it could be just as good as the wizard at combat.
 

Uchawi

First Post
That is one of my biggest fears with 5E, that we are back to the days of casters being very flexible with the choices they can make. Probably the most flexible they have ever been, and martial types will be relegated to feat chains (optional rules), with no maneuvers or similar meta structures within the class that increases choices over levels.

So you will see an onslaught of products that advertise 100 new spells or magic items, but nothing for maneuvers. And I see no hope of that changing based on what is presented in the basic edition.

We can all debate what utility means, or how often pillars are used versus just roleplaying, but the underlying currents in the design focus does not predict a rosy future for someone like myself that wants more versatility and ability present in martial characters; without having to rely on optional rules and magic items not being assumed in the game.
 

Nagol

Unimportant
That is one of my biggest fears with 5E, that we are back to the days of casters being very flexible with the choices they can make. Probably the most flexible they have ever been, and martial types will be relegated to feat chains (optional rules), with no maneuvers or similar meta structures within the class that increases choices over levels.

So you will see an onslaught of products that advertise 100 new spells or magic items, but nothing for maneuvers. And I see no hope of that changing based on what is presented in the basic edition.

We can all debate what utility means, or how often pillars are used versus just roleplaying, but the underlying currents in the design focus does not predict a rosy future for someone like myself that wants more versatility and ability present in martial characters; without having to rely on optional rules and magic items not being assumed in the game.

We can hope the focus on the combat pillar is an artefact of the Basic game and the PH will build out capabilities for the other two. I suspect I'm wrong, but we can hope.
 

Sadras

Legend
That is one of my biggest fears with 5E, that we are back to the days of casters being very flexible with the choices they can make. Probably the most flexible they have ever been, and martial types will be relegated to feat chains (optional rules), with no maneuvers or similar meta structures within the class that increases choices over levels.

So you will see an onslaught of products that advertise 100 new spells or magic items, but nothing for maneuvers. And I see no hope of that changing based on what is presented in the basic edition.

Hopefully, and I'm stating this is my personal preference, you are right and they offer nothing more for the fighter in terms of combat manoeuvres. You want martial manoeuvres and the like, 4e does a brilliant job of that. As for 5e, I prefer it streamlined so they offer a few tips and guides about what the fighter could do t certain levels, nothing more, and the rest is player and DM fiat. Leave the system lose and flexible.
I do not want a character sheet with myriad of powers, please, otherwise I might as well play 4e.

And yes 5e is supposed to be the all inclusive system, modular and all, but if they go down the power route why would anyone who likes powers choose 5e over 4e, it makes absolutely no sense to me. I would certainly not want pages of the DMG wasted on powers because that is a certain style of play which generally has rules that take up quite a few pages - perhaps a book on its own would suffice for those that support this style of play.

We can hope the focus on the combat pillar is an artefact of the Basic game and the PH will build out capabilities for the other two. I suspect I'm wrong, but we can hope.

This I can get behind.
 

Sadras

Legend
Yes, the pillars aren't equal. DnD is all about the combat to be sure. But spells take up a third of the basic rules with literally hundreds more to come, and even though they tilt towards combat, a hearty chunk of them are about snapping the other two pillars in half.

But, say for instance that the Combat Pillar is three times as important as the other two combined. For a "balanced" game then, you would need the Fighter to be three times as good at fighting as the Wizard. The fighter would weep with joy if it could be just as good as the wizard at combat.

If you would like a perfect balance, you would need to modify the system or play a different game. Throughout the 2-year playtest one could easily see which direction they were heading, certainly one could based on the last playtest packet. So the "basic" playstyle is certainly not new to anyone here.

The balance you seek with your numbers, suggests you might need to limit the spells a caster gains, perhaps even remove some of the more contentious ones (invisibility, fly...etc) and then see about curbing some other special features until your numbers are in harmony with what feels right for you and your group. But, I ask, before you go ahead and do all that - have you actually tested the system by playing it for 3-4 sessions to see what the player of the fighter in the group actually says or how the group feels about the games inherent "designed-balance" or is this solely based on a cold read-through of the rules?

Our experience has been that everyone in the group feels like they have contributed equally and everyone is essential, but that is our experience, I certainly cannot argue if your table has yielded different results.
 
Last edited:

We can hope the focus on the combat pillar is an artefact of the Basic game and the PH will build out capabilities for the other two. I suspect I'm wrong, but we can hope.

Yep. This is why the PHB is make-or-break for running 5E for me. Unless it expands what can be done with the stuff Fighters and Rogues have, I don't think it's likely I'll want to get more books as a DM.

Just as a point of order, I find it completely idiotic that spellcasters, especially Wizards, who have supposedly devoted so much learning to their craft, get the exact same number of skills, as, say Fighters, and only two less than Rogues. I think one easy semi-fix would be to simply give all non-full casters a couple of extra skills. It's particularly a bad problem given INT and WIS support 5 Skills each - so even if you aren't Proficient, you've got a big bonus to important skills just for being a Wizard, Cleric or Druid (CHA is next with 4 - and is, surprise-surprise, associated with the other "full caster" classes - Bard and Warlock).

A Fighter's best stats are LIKELY (not certain, merely likely) to be STR and CON - STR supports 1 skill, albeit a really solid one (Athletics), and CON supports a magnificent 0 skills. Rogues are at least likely to be good at DEX (3 skills, all of which most Rogues will possess) and might have a good CHA (again, 4 skills).

So the casters have got all their spells, particularly Cantrips, which are staggering utility in practice, I find, Ritual Magic, which pure utility-jam, just as many skills aaaaaand their stats are generally better! I was thinking that the much lower number of spells/day would help, but I'm pretty sure Ritual Magic will flip that upside-down.

I mean man what... It is definitely not like a Fighter is so good at Fighting that it somehow "makes up" for this, either.

EDIT - PLEASE NOTE: 4E also did a shoddy job here! But it is shocking to see things not only not improve, but arguably get worse, because whilst a 4E Fighter and a 5E Fighter pretty much "suck equally" in the out-of-combat department (4E can choose to suck less by taking Utilities, at least, but that can detract from combat performances - or like the Fighter in my group, can use Feats to acquire Arcana and Ritual Casting, he provides a ton of utility that way!), a 5E Wizard is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of a 4E Wizard in terms of utility, and a 4E Wizard was ALREADY ahead of virtually all other 4E classes in utility (thanks to innate Ritual Casting and Cantrips, as well as better stats for more skills).

It's sad because one of my main expectations for 5E was "Well, they'll at least make it so there's more balance out-of-combat!".

Well, they kind of did - but only among full casters - all of whom have Cantrips and Ritual Casting now (I believe), whereas in 4E, those classes largely didn't have those features.
 
Last edited:

Nagol

Unimportant
<snip>

Well, they kind of did - but only among full casters - all of whom have Cantrips and Ritual Casting now (I believe), whereas in 4E, those classes largely didn't have those features.

Yeah, the deficiency of the non-casters in identifying where to go, getting to the location, surviving the environment long enough to attempt the mission, noticing hidden facets of the location, and successfully extricating themselves once complete, is no better now. Casters are a bit more deficient in helping their comrades on some of those now too as Concentration will limit the number and duration of buffs and the spell pool selection will limit which spells can be taken by mid-level.

I do think ritual casting as a "thing" is being overblown. There are a grand total of seven ritual spells in the basic game: Augury, Comprehend Languages, Commune, Detect Magic, Divination, Identify, and Silence. (Silence?).

Granted that's seven more things than the non-casters get, but all but one are divinatory abilities.
 

I do think ritual casting as a "thing" is being overblown. There are a grand total of seven ritual spells in the basic game: Augury, Comprehend Languages, Commune, Detect Magic, Divination, Identify, and Silence. (Silence?).

Granted that's seven more things than the non-casters get, but all but one are divinatory abilities.

Fair point. I need to re-read 5E's spells section!

I do wonder if this will stay true post-PHB, though.
 

Remove ads

Top