D&D (2024) Can A Spell Caster Out Damage a Martial Consistently?

So DM dependant. The campaign I run puts a high premium on even short rests.. To the point that a "long rest" option was something that my players have actively chosen over a high gold reward. If your DM likes to run frequent peril, or the characters being on the run from an army, then the fighter becomes the most consistent dmg output.

TorgoTheWhite said:

So DM dependant. The campaign I run puts a high premium on even short rests.. To the point that a "long rest" option was something that my players have actively chosen over a high gold reward. If your DM likes to run frequent peril, or the characters being on the run from an army, then the fighter becomes the most consistent dmg output.

Click to expand...

Resting is always DM dependent. Hit them camping or have enemies with dispel magic.

This week I was impressed how balanced the game at level 4 felt with a bard, a cleric, a warlock, a fighter and a rogue who carried on after a medium to hard fight, taking a short rest and took on a hard to deadly fight afterwards.

In the first fight to to some bad luck, full casters spent more than half of their spells and extra abilities from class and feats and also the fighter and warlock had to spend all they had.
In the second fight, some luck on the players side allowed them to get in a better position than expected and by spending all their resources, including those from feats, they could turn a close fight into a win.

And all classes seemed to be able to contribute equally. Probably the next fight would have tipped the scale in favor of the non casters and the warlock. But the game seems well balanced around one short rest in tier 1.

UngeheuerLich said:

This week I was impressed how balanced the game at level 4 felt with a bard, a cleric, a warlock, a fighter and a rogue who carried on after a medium to hard fight, taking a short rest and took on a hard to deadly fight afterwards.

In the first fight to to some bad luck, full casters spent more than half of their spells and extra abilities from class and feats and also the fighter and warlock had to spend all they had.
In the second fight, some luck on the players side allowed them to get in a better position than expected and by spending all their resources, including those from feats, they could turn a close fight into a win.

And all classes seemed to be able to contribute equally. Probably the next fight would have tipped the scale in favor of the non casters and the warlock. But the game seems well balanced around one short rest in tier 1.

Click to expand...

Level 3 and 4 change thins a lot

Leve 4 might be new sweet spot.

ECOM3 seems to be only one who's gone to high level. I've done 12 stress test limited play and one groups just hit level 9.

Zardnaar said:

Level 3 and 4 change thins a lot

Leve 4 might be new sweet spot.

ECOM3 seems to be only one who's gone to high level. I've done 12 stress test limited play and one groups just hit level 9.

Click to expand...

I am looking forward to test level 5 amd how extra attack and 3rd level spells, or the rogue's uncanny dodge and cunning action will change things. I don't expect short rest/no rest classes to be worse than at level 4.

I think 5.24 works better than 5.14. Weapon masteries did a lot to help the rogue and the fighter to make them shine. And steady aim and the enhanced champion abilities also make sure that they don't feel useless. Sapping with a long sword helped the fighter controlling the heavy hitting melee guy, the rogue being able to attack with a short sword and after a hit following up with a dagger to still do sneak attack damage after having used a bonus action dash after being commanded to approach. Little things that just added up.

UngeheuerLich said:

I am looking forward to test level 5 amd how extra attack and 3rd level spells, or the rogue's uncanny dodge and cunning action will change things. I don't expect short rest/no rest classes to be worse than at level 4.

I think 5.24 works better than 5.14. Weapon masteries did a lot to help the rogue and the fighter to make them shine. And steady aim and the enhanced champion abilities also make sure that they don't feel useless. Sapping with a long sword helped the fighter controlling the heavy hitting melee guy, the rogue being able to attack with a short sword and after a hit following up with a dagger to still do sneak attack damage after having used a bonus action dash after being commanded to approach. Little things that just added up.

Click to expand...

Weapon masteries help a bit it's mostly revised class features.

2014 there were 4 classes I would play 1-20. I think 5.5 raises that to 8 or 9.

2014 I would look more at 1-10 but you get the idea.

Zardnaar said:

Level 3 and 4 change thins a lot

Leve 4 might be new sweet spot.

ECOM3 seems to be only one who's gone to high level. I've done 12 stress test limited play and one groups just hit level 9.

Click to expand...

Ive played to high level a lot. IME high level play is less balaned than low level play both in 5E and 202

I don't really think that is a negative though.

As i said before I dont see class being a big driver in imbalance. In the two 2024 games i played to level 20, a single class champion fighter was the most OP compared to other players at the table at level 20.

Don't take that out of context, I am not saying a Champion is the most OP class at level 20. I am saying a specific Chamion was the most imbalnced compared to the other PCs at the table in 2024 games I have played.

ECMO3 said:

I really don't see a need for a bar on number of short rests a day and don't see anything good coming from it. I don't see what it would solve in games I play and interfere into the story and the DMs game building.

Click to expand...

I see the trouble.... you are too limited in your thinking when it comes to the lack of a bar with 5e resting mechanics. It's not just the number of rests classes designed to maximize 5mwd style nova->SR->repeat where the rules as written are stacked against the GM pushing back against excess when players like "Bob"§ who feels that such gameplay is normal expected and required by their class. The absence of a bar is also an issue with the rules when Bob§ feels that just about anywhere the party is not actively in combat should be good enough for all of the rests his class requires, past editions avoided that with simple words like needing a "good" night's sleep quiet prayer/meditation /study and similar very low bars the GM could easily use to avoid the fight Bob would drag it out to be. Likewise there is also a missing bar by not even having a fleshed out recovery that provides a functionally distinct alternative∆ to the all or nothing recovery when players feel that the solution to any interrupted rest is to take another until the GM gives up on trolling them. By choosing to double down while failing to meaningfully address those kinds of excess it doesn't matter if someone has never seen a GM allow more than 2 SR/24 hours because the rules themselves actively sandbag the GM who cares to push back when a player like Bob starts voicing outrage about RAI surveys and fun

And back to the topic, all of those lead to a scenario where SR classes can consistently very much out damage pretty much every other class round after round

§ just to have a hypothetical player name
∆ yes there was gritty realism and the healkit thing but both introduce new problems and neither provides much in the way of a meaningful shift when that problem is present.

tetrasodium said:

I see the trouble.... you are too limited in your thinking when it comes to the lack of a bar with 5e resting mechanics. It's not just the number of rests classes designed to maximize 5mwd style nova->SR->repeat where the rules as written are stacked against the GM pushing back against excess when players like "Bob"§ who feels that such gameplay is normal expected and required by their class. The absence of a bar is also an issue with the rules when Bob§ feels that just about anywhere the party is not actively in combat should be good enough for all of the rests his class requires, past editions avoided that with simple words like needing a "good" night's sleep quiet prayer/meditation /study and similar very low bars the GM could easily use to avoid the fight Bob would drag it out to be. Likewise there is also a missing bar by not even having a fleshed out recovery that provides a functionally distinct alternative∆ to the all or nothing recovery when players feel that the solution to any interrupted rest is to take another until the GM gives up on trolling them. By choosing to double down while failing to meaningfully address those kinds of excess it doesn't matter if someone has never seen a GM allow more than 2 SR/24 hours because the rules themselves actively sandbag the GM who cares to push back when a player like Bob starts voicing outrage about RAI surveys and fun

And back to the topic, all of those lead to a scenario where SR classes can consistently very much out damage pretty much every other class round after round

§ just to have a hypothetical player name
∆ yes there was gritty realism and the healkit thing but both introduce new problems and neither provides much in the way of a meaningful shift when that problem is present.

Click to expand...

Call me limited if you want but I think this is overengineering the problem and not something that will improve the game. I don't think it needs to be addressed at all. If one DM gives 20 short rests a day and another gives 1 long rest every 3 days, making characters get 2 levels of exhaustion, I don't see a problem with that.

IMO you are trying to fix something that isn't broken.

I have never had Bob voicing outrage at any of my tables and if he was I just wouldn't play with Bob.

I also have no problem with SR classes consistently out damaging everyone else. Every one of the tables I play at has the PC that outperforms everyone else and it is awesome.

I have played gritty realism and we found it less fun, but that is me (and my group).

I also played a ton of 1E in the 80s where you had to rest for weeks to be all better, and in play I like the 5E version where 1 night and you are all better, 1 hour and you are mostly better.

EzekielRaiden said:

Fighters only get their damage from making attack rolls, Champions doubly so. It really isn't hard to exceed that--by a country mile!--if the party long rests too often and short rests infrequently, even if it wasn't "needed".

I've crunched numbers on this more than once, though admittedly not with the 5.5e tweaks in most cases.

Click to expand...

The concern I have with crunching numbers like that is the assumption that everyone takes a long rest just because the spell casters want to take a long rest. I think that's a silly assumption.

If the party can ignore the better part of the 24 hour cycle required to benefit from 8 hours of long resting then other classes can fit in as many short rests as they want within that time frame until they also need to take a long rest.

Spellcasters waiting out the day until they can long rest again are doing zero damage in the meantime. Not waiting out the day and continuing to adventure because other classes can keep playing is continuing to do damage. Resting to recover spell slots is not something we can label as consistent damage if it's based on nova casting over shorter time frames.

In the groups I played with we played through the adventuring day. Spellcasters were cautious using spells in case they ran out of slots; and if they did then they used cantrip, rituals, and magic items. The adventure didn't pause for them. The only place I've every experienced 5MWD is in online discussions.

Zardnaar said:

I've had fairly poor luck with summons due to concentration mechanic.

I'll be playing soon tempted to try a Warlock summoner.

Click to expand...

I appreciate concentration. It was a step in the right direction to keep spellcasters more reasonable than 3.x casters along with removing caster level from most spells and less spell slots with which to cast. Monster hit point inflation also curbed casters a bit from a different angle.

3ed did favor casters a lot more.

Zardnaar said:

ECOM3 seems to be only one who's gone to high level. I've done 12 stress test limited play and one groups just hit level 9.

Click to expand...

I don't know how ECOM3 has time to play all those characters to those levels.

I've played short campaigns that start at higher levels and the luxury of skipping lower level grown pains makes building the character different from having to play through those levels as well. When I play a long term campaign from 1st level it usually takes well over a year and closer to two years to get to 20th level playing weekly. I play to those levels but it takes a long time to get there.

A person would have to level up almost every session to get to 20th level in six months playing weekly.