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

[Zardnaar]

Exactly. The damage spells don't keep up to hit point inflation and a lot of control spells don't actually end combats. The "but spellcasters" characters spinning their wheels without the martial support to work with.

Have theorycrafted some all cleric, bard, or warlock parties.

But you need the striker builds. BG3 could probably test the theory.

 

[Asisreo]

What we are saying, @Ashrym, is that Wizards really do still have the ability to Just End Fights. With perfect reliability? Hell no! But what, praytell, does a Fighter have that could even come close to "I have a 20% chance of ending this fight before it begins"?

Action Surge.

Its...a bit strange how we can pretty much excuse a wizard's luck in a situation that massively benefits a particular tool in their toolbox, but we do not afford the fighter the same thing.

If two or three fighters spend their first turn just whacking at a single boss monster, with good rolls and maybe a crit or two, they could end the encounter before it began. Same if they were fighting even two or three enemies that were more "glass cannon" built.

And I mentioned two or three fighters, but really a single fighter with really good luck could kill a single monster before anyone else gets a chance to act.

Ypu may say "that's poor combat design," and I agree, but I'd also say that having a bunch of enemies weak to a single spell all inside that spell's range and without a counter to it is also bad combat design. And we were just talking about what was possible, not what was likely to happen in a well-designed game, so it should fundamentally be no different.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

My point was that we cannot pretend that spell slots are always available. They run out and casters without spell slots to use tend to be a poor choice for defense, damage (which is what this thread is about), or some of their utility.

Problem:

WotC itself explicitly (through Crawford) said parties weren't fighting enough combats, and weren't taking enough short rests. This explicitly and specifically affected short-rest classes.

Action Surge.

...I'm sorry. What?

Action Surge has a chance to single-handedly end combats now? What?

Its...a bit strange how we can pretty much excuse a wizard's luck in a situation that massively benefits a particular tool in their toolbox, but we do not afford the fighter the same thing.

I have done no such thing. I have said that as a Wizard, you need to accept that sometimes your spells will fail. Whenever I do calculations of expected damage taken or expected damage output, I do exactly the same thing: presuming that SOME attacks will fail and other attacks will succeed, but that you should always continue making attack rolls, because the chance that you might miss is 100% worth it.

How is that in any way treating one side different from the other?

If two or three fighters

....

So now it's not just Action Surge. It's two or three entire characters spending Action Surge.

Do you not see the problem here?

And I mentioned two or three fighters, but really a single fighter with really good luck could kill a single monster before anyone else gets a chance to act.

Kill a single monster--yes. If it isn't a massive sack of HP...which most "solo"-type monsters are in 5e.

But now who's talking about luck? You aren't just presuming some luck. You're presuming extremely good luck to get there--hits on all of your attacks, with some being crits. And even then, you're not just assuming Action Surge, because a level 3 Fighter that uses Action Surge gets...one extra attack. If a single extra attack "ends a fight" then it wasn't worthy of being called a fight in the first place. You're talking about at least a 5th level Fighter, and probably an 11th level or higher Fighter...which means if we're comparing apples to apples, we should be looking at an 11th level Wizard as well. Who can bring tools far more deadly and devastating than a mere fear spell.

Ypu may say "that's poor combat design," and I agree, but I'd also say that having a bunch of enemies weak to a single spell all inside that spell's range and without a counter to it is also bad combat design. And we were just talking about what was possible, not what was likely to happen in a well-designed game, so it should fundamentally be no different.

I mean, if we're going to talk about what is likely to happen in a well-designed game, then any conversation where that game is 5.x is going to be extremely short.

 

[Zardnaar]

Problem:

WotC itself explicitly (through Crawford) said parties weren't fighting enough combats, and weren't taking enough short rests. This explicitly and specifically affected short-rest classes.


...I'm sorry. What?

Action Surge has a chance to single-handedly end combats now? What?


I have done no such thing. I have said that as a Wizard, you need to accept that sometimes your spells will fail. Whenever I do calculations of expected damage taken or expected damage output, I do exactly the same thing: presuming that SOME attacks will fail and other attacks will succeed, but that you should always continue making attack rolls, because the chance that you might miss is 100% worth it.

How is that in any way treating one side different from the other?


....

So now it's not just Action Surge. It's two or three entire characters spending Action Surge.

Do you not see the problem here?


Kill a single monster--yes. If it isn't a massive sack of HP...which most "solo"-type monsters are in 5e.

But now who's talking about luck? You aren't just presuming some luck. You're presuming extremely good luck to get there--hits on all of your attacks, with some being crits. And even then, you're not just assuming Action Surge, because a level 3 Fighter that uses Action Surge gets...one extra attack. If a single extra attack "ends a fight" then it wasn't worthy of being called a fight in the first place. You're talking about at least a 5th level Fighter, and probably an 11th level or higher Fighter...which means if we're comparing apples to apples, we should be looking at an 11th level Wizard as well. Who can bring tools far more deadly and devastating than a mere fear spell.


I mean, if we're going to talk about what is likely to happen in a well-designed game, then any conversation where that game is 5.x is going to be extremely short.

I've seen action surge get into the 200+ damage range. Think you can double that in 2024.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I've seen action surge get into the 200+ damage range. Think you can double that in 2024.

Care to lay on me how, exactly?

Because even if you're getting wall to wall crits on 3xEA and using the -5 attack/+10 damage feat that applies and wielding a high-die weapon that's also +3 and adds extra dice, I'm not convinced.

That is, the static damage there would be: 3 (magic weapon) + 5 (ability mod) + 10 (GWF) = +18. Six attacks gets you 6x18=108 damage. Six consecutive crits (which, I will note, even a 15th level Champion Fighter is very unlikely to see: that's less than one in every 87 thousand Action Surge rounds), assuming a +1d6 magic weapon of some kind, you're still looking at 6x6x3.5 = 128. Meaning it only made it across the finish line because I made the extremely unlikely interpretation that every attack was not just a success but a crit. (Admittedly, if you get a really fancy weapon that does +2d6 bonus damage, then it's a bit more feasible.)

So unless you're talking about someone who was already buffed to hell and back...by spellcasters!...or wearing fancy magic equipment...that was created by spellcasters!...I'm really not sure how you're getting these numbers.

And even then, I had to presume a 15th+ level Fighter and magic items, something folks on ENWorld and elsewhere are all too eager to completely strip away from the party. "You never need them!" Which implies the DM is manipulating things to favor martial characters. Oh, and would you look at that...

The DM is actively putting her thumb on the scale to favor martial characters over caster characters

I already mentioned this.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So, the real question is whether that portion of the player base wants the narrative that this is exclusive to them.

Enough of the vocal ones absolutely do, yes. Some of them even post on this forum!

Like, if given time a fighter could bank expertise dice, or something, so that they also get a power boost with preparation, then the problem becomes less of an issue. You just rebalance the entire game around having a prepped and unprepped state.

Hmm. Perhaps.

 

[Asisreo]

But now who's talking about luck? You aren't just presuming some luck. You're presuming extremely good luck to get there--hits on all of your attacks, with some being crits. And even then, you're not just assuming Action Surge, because a level 3 Fighter that uses Action Surge gets...one extra attack. If a single extra attack "ends a fight" then it wasn't worthy of being called a fight in the first place. You're talking about at least a 5th level Fighter, and probably an 11th level or higher Fighter...which means if we're comparing apples to apples, we should be looking at an 11th level Wizard as well. Who can bring tools far more deadly and devastating than a mere fear spell.

No, I mean a single fighter could potentially rush down and kill a single-monster moderate encounter without crits if they roll high. Obviously hitting is required but you don't really have to crit.

I'm also technically not even including shenanigans that could end encounters much higher CR than them.

 

[Mort]

I mean, if we're going to talk about what is likely to happen in a well-designed game, then any conversation where that game is 5.x is going to be extremely short.

I really gotta wonder why you spend so much time engaging on topics about a game you clearly don't like very much?

 

[ECMO3]

Care to lay on me how, exactly?

Because even if you're getting wall to wall crits on 3xEA and using the -5 attack/+10 damage feat that applies and wielding a high-die weapon that's also +3 and adds extra dice, I'm not convinced.

The Champion in our current game at 18th level will hit 200 pretty regularly with Action Surge.

He crits on an 18, wields a Vicious Maul and has GWM (2024 version).

He also has a Belt of Giant Strength and a Hammer of Thunderbolts, which boosts Strength quite a bit.

In terms of math, keep in mind a high level Champion with GWM is usually going to get 7 attacks, not 6, when they action surge (or 9 attacks at 20th level) and if he is 19th or 20th level the Irresistible Offence feat is going to let him add his strength score to damage on those crits, which is going to be another +20 or more damage per crit.

With those things in mind, at 20th level, even using no magic at all, a maul with a 22 strength, BOII and GWM is going to average 48 damage on a crit. At 20th level 9 straight Crits (admitedly not likely) is going to do 432 average. This is not something I have seen in play, nor anything close to this, but it illustrates the top damage with no magic at all is way above 200.

Admittedly, if you get a really fancy weapon that does +2d6 bonus damage, then it's a bit more feasible.

Well Vicious weapons do that now and they are not really all that fancy and up the average crit damage at 20th level to 62, with GWM, BOIII and no other magic.

 

[Ashrym]

Problem:

WotC itself explicitly (through Crawford) said parties weren't fighting enough combats, and weren't taking enough short rests. This explicitly and specifically affected short-rest classes.

This isn't a problem and something I've addressed but worth repeating. We cannot use a perceived issue with the previous rules to make assumptions on the current rules after changes. That doesn't make any sense. Anything we discuss needs to be based on evidence after the rules updates.

You're arguing that the players aren't playing the system as the system was designed to be played and then blaming the system for the actions of the players.

"I can take a long rest anytime I want" is a metagaming approach and something easily prevented by simply not doing it, and something a DM can easily enforce by not putting the campaign on hold because players think they have a pause button for the rest of the world.

It's really not that hard for the DM to have activities occur while the players are resting. Replacing locks, calling in extra guards, relocating treasure, and sending a hunting party after the PC's are all legitimate organic responses to the party leaving to rest.

Because even if you're getting wall to wall crits on 3xEA and using the -5 attack/+10 damage feat that applies and wielding a high-die weapon that's also +3 and adds extra dice, I'm not convinced.

There are no -5/+10 feats in 2024 rules.

IME a high level battle master who unloads superiority dice on a great weapon build using action surge tend to be ~150 damage while also applying frightened, disarmed, and what ever else in the process. Or do that to 6 or 7 opponents frightening and toppling each.

For significant abilities I'm more inclined to point to things like the berzerker's intimidating presence, the rogue's devious strikes, or a monk's stunning strikes, or warrior of shadow shadow arts abilities.