D&D 5E Casters vs Martials: Part 2 - The Mundane Limit

[Stormonu]

It's the "get a natural 20" that really irks me. You can't plan for it, it just happens out of the blue - and that's a big problem. It should be an active ability, not circumstantial.

For that matter, abilities that would allow the character to consciously trigger criticals - rather than be at the mercy of chance - would be nice abilities as well.

 

[Minigiant]

Frankly, I think there's a big enough gulf in what the heroic vs mythic crowds want that no one solution is going to satisfy both.

The best solution was always to have them be separate classes. However there is always a fight to not add new classes fro some reason.

Other forms of media have figured out how to have "Heroic Character with High Tech or Magic items" and "Mythic Character with Extraordinary or Superhuman power" coexist. However D&D always has to fight kicking and screaming until it relents (or wants more book sales) and creates a new class with its own new power and limitations.

 

[Scars Unseen]

The best solution was always to have them be separate classes.

I'm not sure I really agree with that. It's a solution, sure. I wouldn't call it a complete solution. I think that if non-magical characters are to play on a level playing field with D&D's current interpretation of magical characters, there are fundamental aspects of the game that need to scale to match. Likewise, for a better realized heroic style play, you could get away with simply making less powerful magical classes in general, but I wouldn't say that on its own would be a great fix.

At the very least, the DMG would need to explain the different power levels and which classes work well played at the same table, and which ones don't. Going further, using the idea I posted above, instead of having to design completely different classes (which would quickly crowd out design space if you were trying to give sufficient options for all tiers of play), you could still have your "basic" classes, but then have class features designed for one tier or another, letting each table decide what fits and what doesn't for a given campaign. You could also go with options like TSR-style hit die limitations for lower tiers at higher levels or design a feature to boost lower levels for an epic tier campaign.

I know a lot of focus here is on how to make the martial classes more epic, but to look at it from the other direction, you don't need a separate arcane class to make a lower powered wizard. Just limit the epic spells to epic tier games and maybe limit the number of spells they get, and you're pretty much there. Likewise, it's possible to take the same basic concept for a martial class, and then add new abilities for epic tier playstyle. Not exclusively; there's definitely room for more classes specific to one style or another. But there's a lot of levers to pull. No need to lean on only that one.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The problem is, they tried that.

I assume that was 4E (which I didn't play)? Because, otherwise, I haven't seen it.

And now people crow about how terrible a decision it was. How it ruined the game. How it made Fighters able to shoot lightning bolts out of their hindquarters or Warlords able to shout hands back on or whatever other nonsense they felt like spewing about 4e. (That last one actually got used by an actual designer--Mearls--in an actual, official podcast about D&D Next. He immediately said he was joking, or rather "I'm being ridiculous," but for God's sake, did he need to repeat tired, naughty word edition-warring on official channels?)

Again, I never experienced any of that, but I'll take your word in good faith.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm not sure I really agree with that. It's a solution, sure. I wouldn't call it a complete solution. I think that if non-magical characters are to play on a level playing field with D&D's current interpretation of magical characters, there are fundamental aspects of the game that need to scale to match. Likewise, for a better realized heroic style play, you could get away with simply making less powerful magical classes in general, but I wouldn't say that on its own would be a great fix.

I disagree. The Magical classes of D&D already scale from Tier 1 to Tier 2 to Tier 3 to Tier 4. The half casters and Rogue scale to T3. And the nonmagical classes except the Rogue scale up to T2 with subclasses scaling to T3.

We don't have a "Hawkeye/Batman in the Avengers/Justice League" where all the character of every power are treated as nearly same level of threat and importance in D&D. Some classes hit a cap and get bypassed. Recognizing and building pass that cap is by far the easiest and least damaging solution. However a portion of the community frankly whines when anything they don't use gets any attention.

Zero Sum Gaming Thought is a plague on gaming culture as a whole.

At the very least, the DMG would need to explain the different power levels and which classes work well played at the same table, and which ones don't. Going further, using the idea I posted above, instead of having to design completely different classes (which would quickly crowd out design space if you were trying to give sufficient options for all tiers of play), you could still have your "basic" classes, but then have class features designed for one tier or another, letting each table decide what fits and what doesn't for a given campaign. You could also go with options like TSR-style hit die limitations for lower tiers at higher levels or design a feature to boost lower levels for an epic tier campaign.

This is a problem already. Post level 12 D&D is a cluster-mess. It is only tolerated because campaigns that start at level 1 rarely get to the Paragon tier.

I think you are confused on the reality of what is requested. No one (from what I've seen) is asking for mythic power at lower levels. What is requested is mythic martials at upper mid and high levels so those part of D&D can be played.

This is why conversations over The Mundane/Martial Limit are important. The question of what to do when martial PCs escape the bounds of reality at level 11 isn't dicussed by the community.

 

[Scars Unseen]

The Magical classes of D&D already scale from Tier 1 to Tier 2 to Tier 3 to Tier 4.

But there is no Tier 1 caster class and, separately, a tier 4 caster class. Nor is there an option for high level tier 2 caster play.

No one (from what I've seen) is asking for mythic power at lower levels. What is requested is mythic martials at upper mid and high levels so those part of D&D can be played.

Likewise, you misunderstand what a lot of people who are against your proposal are actually against. People who want gameplay to peak at heroic tier don't want to play just within the first 10 levels. They want to play at heroic tier throughout all of the levels. That's why your suggestion isn't a complete solution: it only encompasses what you want, not what you want and also what people who don't want that want. Saying "well just play at lower levels if you don't want epic tier play" isn't a solution. Being able to scale the game to the style of play you want regardless of level can be.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I remember a while ago I was looking at what I considered the "classic" D&D bosses and mid/high and higher levels:

CR 13 - Beholder, Rakshasa, Storm Giant, Vampire
CR 14 - Ice Devil
CR 15 - Purple Worm, Vampire Spellcaster/Warrior
CR 16 - Iron Golem
CR 17 - Death Knight, Dragon Turtle
CR 18 - Demilich
CR 19 - Balor
CR 20 - Pit Fiend
CR 21 - Lich
and of course adult dragons (CR 13-17).

Some epic games (IME) have even gone against ancient dragons, devil/demon lords, demigods, or the Tarrasque (in prior editions or 5E).

Now, I was looking at this list and CR vs. party of PCs, and I realized that IMO to keep these bosses "deadly", PCs really need to be capped around 15th level or so (or even lower, maybe 12th or 13th for the lower CR bosses above). Only when you want to use the more "epic" opponents can you have PCs of higher levels, especially by tier 4.

A problem as I see it is few tables ever reach the epic/paragon/superhero tiers in play. My groups have only done it once, but part of that is also because I (as DM and player) have little interest in playing at that level of power. I would think more the people who want to play at that high of a level would more likely start higher, but I could easily be wrong.

Anyway, since few games reach that point, maybe WotC didn't do as good a job developing 5E martials for it. The casters already had the magic from prior editions, so that was easy enough to carry over, but in the process martials go sort of left behind. WotC did the work, testing it, and at the time I suppose maybe it seemed acceptable to the play testers and designers? Regardless, there are some exceptions sure, but by and large they are lackluster compared to the mighty magics beginning in tier 3 through 4.

If people want a superhero/epic tier 4 implementation, it really wouldn't matter to me or affect my 5E games. We won't reach that point most likely.

I will conclude by acknowledging our games have been using the Faster Feature variant I developed a long time ago. Our PCs reach their full feature list by level 15, but spells aren't accelerated (as I've mentioned before, we've rather nerfed spellcasting in general to keep magic "rarer" or "more special/magical" at our table) to match it, so spells lag a bit.

 

[Minigiant]

But there is no Tier 1 caster class and, separately, a tier 4 caster class. Nor is there an option for high level tier 2 caster play.

You are confused on what the tiers are. Read PHB pg 15 and DMG 36-37.

Level 1-4: Apprentice Adventurers and Local Heroes
Level 5-10: Skilled Adventurers and Heroes of the Realm
Level 11-16: True Paragons and Masters of the Realm
Level 17-20: Epic Superheroes and Masters of the World

A level 3 sorcerer plays like an apprentice. A level 17 sorcerer is an archmage that kings discuss with the council about.

Likewise, you misunderstand what a lot of people who are against your proposal are actually against. People who want gameplay to peak at heroic tier don't want to play just within the first 10 levels. They want to play at heroic tier throughout all of the levels. That's why your suggestion isn't a complete solution: it only encompasses what you want, not what you want and also what people who don't want that want. Saying "well just play at lower levels if you don't want epic tier play" isn't a solution. Being able to scale the game to the style of play you want regardless of level can be.

That's not what they are arguing because said people are not arguing to strip half the spells out of D&D.
If you want 20 level of heroic play, casters need a major nerf. Like nerfed harder than 4th edition nerfed magic.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If you want 20 level of heroic play, casters need a major nerf. Like nerfed harder than 4th edition nerfed magic.

I can attest to the truth of this statement!

I know many 5E players would be in for a quite a shock if they played in our games given some of the nerfs we've done for casters (and even more so with nerfs we considered but pulled back on).

 

[Vaalingrade]

This is why conversations over The Mundane/Martial Limit are important. The question of what to do when martial PCs escape the bounds of reality at level 11 isn't dicussed by the community.

Let's look at the attitudes holding martials back and creating that limit:

• "The world is Earthlike and martials should be limited to what Earth people can't do. Also, I'm not fully aware of what Earth people can do".
• "Any level of complexity means an ability is a spell and therefore belongs to spellcasters.
• We have 'enough' crunch and so shouldn't add things for martials. But thank you for all the new spells, Wizards.