Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9220061" data-attributes="member: 7030563">It is not nearly this simple.&nbsp; It depends how you define martial, which specific classes and subclasses you are talking about and the specific build choices made.If by martial you mean 100% non-caster (i.e. not Paladin, Ranger, Eldritch Knight, Shadow Monk,&nbsp; Arcane Trickster and not using any feats or races that give you spell) AND you assume they have equal and average ability rolls, AND if there is not disproprtionate magic items.&nbsp; If this is the case - I will readily admit that most optimized full casters are better than most optimized non-casters above level 7 if all these caveats are true.That is a heck of a lot of caveats though and it assumes a lot that is not typical in most games.&nbsp; In particular, very few players actually build optimized characters in any class and relatively few build complete non-casters.&nbsp; When you put that all together class is not a significant driver of imbalance in most games at any level.&nbsp; The others things mentioned above are bigger drivers.Also the reverse is true as well below 5th level, put all those caveats together and most optimized full casters are weaker than most optimized non-casters below 5th level.If the martial is interested in interupting casters the player will presumably take the feat.&nbsp; If&nbsp; not then why is it something we need to offer?I have only actually seen two players take the Mage Slayer feat, one was on a fighter I was playing that took it at 19th level in campaign where the BBEG was Vecna, a high level Wizard type.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9220061, member: 7030563"] It is not nearly this simple. It depends how you define martial, which specific classes and subclasses you are talking about and the specific build choices made. If by martial you mean 100% non-caster (i.e. not Paladin, Ranger, Eldritch Knight, Shadow Monk, Arcane Trickster and not using any feats or races that give you spell) AND you assume they have equal and average ability rolls, AND if there is not disproprtionate magic items. If this is the case - I will readily admit that [U]most[/U] optimized full casters are better than [U]most[/U] optimized non-casters above level 7 if all these caveats are true. That is a heck of a lot of caveats though and it assumes a lot that is not typical in most games. In particular, very few players actually build optimized characters in any class and relatively few build complete non-casters. When you put that all together class is not a significant driver of imbalance in most games at any level. The others things mentioned above are bigger drivers. Also the reverse is true as well below 5th level, put all those caveats together and [U]most[/U] optimized full casters are weaker than [U]most[/U] optimized non-casters below 5th level. If the martial is interested in interupting casters the player will presumably take the feat. If not then why is it something we need to offer? I have only actually seen two players take the Mage Slayer feat, one was on a fighter I was playing that took it at 19th level in campaign where the BBEG was Vecna, a high level Wizard type. [/QUOTE]

Verification