D&D 5E A simple houserule for martial/caster balance.

[Micah Sweet]

Sure. There is a social contract aspect at work here. Players are generally all on the same team and all.

That said, a conversation that starts with.. "Hey, you remember how your character could regularly shut down a fight with your spells and none of your fellow players could do something similar.. " is a conversation I think that most fair-minded players should entertain.

Maybe so, but following that up with, "my solution is to remove all your spells after 3rd level. You don't get those anymore. Bask in the knowledge that your character is no longer unfair" is a no-go with anyone I have ever gamed with.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Maybe so, but following that up with, "my solution is to remove all your spells after 3rd level. You don't get those anymore. Bask in the knowledge that your character is no longer unfair" is a no-go with anyone I have ever gamed with.

That's just a phrasing issue.

"I'd like it if your other players could share the spotlight a bit more. What I'm planning to do is reduce some of the power in your intended class's spellcasting. You will still be able to cast as often. You just won't have as much access to spells that can single-handedly end a fight."

And then you proceed with normal rational dialogue and negotiation. Maybe you go through with it and maybe you don't, but resentment isn't a necessary outcome, and, in a game played with friends, it doesn't seem that egregious to give up some amount of power so that some of your friends have a little more time to shine.

 

[le Redoutable]

you could build a recovery value based on spell level, like in
9-th Level Spells recover at the rate of 1 spell per week
( or even you recover your highest spell in a month or a year )

 

[Jer]

Sure. There is a social contract aspect at work here. Players are generally all on the same team and all.

That said, a conversation that starts with.. "Hey, you remember how your character could regularly shut down a fight with your spells and none of your fellow players could do something similar.. " is a conversation I think that most fair-minded players should entertain.

The thing is - this feels backwards. The problem being perceived isn't that this character is too good, the perceived problem is that the other players would also like to be that cool. And there's not really a reason to not let them be.

This is why I prefer 13th age for high level games - everyone has fun toys to play with and an opportunity to shine.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's just a phrasing issue.

"I'd like it if your other players could share the spotlight a bit more. What I'm planning to do is reduce some of the power in your intended class's spellcasting. You will still be able to cast as often. You just won't have as much access to spells that can single-handedly end a fight."

And then you proceed with normal rational dialogue and negotiation. Maybe you go through with it and maybe you don't, but resentment isn't a necessary outcome, and, in a game played with friends, it doesn't seem that egregious to give up some amount of power so that some of your friends have a little more time to shine.

Then the question becomes, are your martial players complaining about class balance, or are you? If the latter, you should discuss your concerns with the entire group, not just the people you intend to punish.

And changing the approach to making a giant nerf doesn't make it not a giant nerf. My players wouldn't fall for that.

 

[FrogReaver]

The thing is - this feels backwards. The problem being perceived isn't that this character is too good, the perceived problem is that the other players would also like to be that cool. And there's not really a reason to not let them be.

This is why I prefer 13th age for high level games - everyone has fun toys to play with and an opportunity to shine.

When you really set down and work through it, you quickly realize just how much martials would have to be given to compare to tier 4 wizards. There’s a sizable segment that doesn’t want superheroic d&d martials even at high levels and you get far into that realm if you try to bring martials up to casters.

That’s what I meant earlier when I said under playstyle considerations the nerf works better.

 

[FrogReaver]

Then the question becomes, are your martial players complaining about class balance, or are you? If the latter, you should discuss your concerns with the entire group, not just the people you intend to punish.

And changing the approach to making a giant nerf doesn't make it not a giant nerf. My players wouldn't fall for that.

Often players don’t complain about anything. Amongst bear strangers that’s weird. Even amongst friends it’s a little off.

Framing this as a punishment is just wrong. Balancing things is not a punishment to anyone.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Often players don’t complain about anything. Amongst bear strangers that’s weird. Even amongst friends it’s a little off.

Framing this as a punishment is just wrong. Balancing things is not a punishment to anyone.

So it's the DM's job to tell players what they should have an issue with, and change the rules for their own good?

 

[FrogReaver]

I think this seems more of a case where ignorance is bliss.

I can go with that.

 

[James Gasik]

You joke, but darts had to be nerfed in Combat and Tactics! The high rate of attack led to dart specialists outdamaging basically everything else, because that d3 damage didnt matter when you attacked 6 times a round and added your strength, specialization, etc on each damage roll!

Oh I remember, but my groups never adopted Combat and Tactics; we saw things like that and were like, nah. But builds like that would quickly run into problems in 2e when you face monsters that need magic weapons to hit- where are you going to get two dozen magical darts?