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

[Mordhau]

Agree.

Spells like Spider Climb removes the sort of ability a Master Thief could have. The best balance IMO would be to augment martials a bit, and pull back on casters to match. In the other thread posters cited numerous cases of how D&D archmages, etc. had powers that far exceeded what historical myths provided (often), so I'd be all for WotC reining back on casters a bit.

I think we need to think about the original context here. The average level people play at has drifted higher since the early days of the game, and the kind of basic dungeon exploration has similarly reduced. We elso tend to have a bit more fous on the players as players of individual characters, rather than the party as a group playing a cooperative game with shared resources (such as in certain modern boardgames)

In early D&D, at the lower levels, magic user spells were party resources. Spending a spell slot memorising Knock or Spider Climb was a significant party investment. A thief could attempt to climb walls or pick locks all day long but if you really needed to suceed then you might want the resource that guarantees success.

So in some ways, those spells serve the kind of role that metacurrencies might in more modern games, in that they give the party a chance to be much more likely to succeed when you really need to by spending a resource. So we shouldn't be just thinking about whether the Wizard having these spells is bad for the Rogue, we should probably also be thinking about the fact that, in the modern paradigm, the Rogue not having much opportunity to make choices about which rolls really matter is also an issue. (This is one of the reasons why Arcane Trickster is so good. Having access to Invisibilty and Misty Step does so much to mitigate the risk of a single bad roll when scouting).

 

[Minigiant]

The problem with requiring non-overlapping magisteria is that magic inevitably gobbles up as much of the possibility space as it can. Even 5e, the alleged "no bloat!" edition, adds spells with nearly every book published--and the spells already present cover an enormous swathe of possible actions.

That's kinda my point.
The limitations of martialness and the limitations of magic should be community decided fluff and not community argued logic.

We should decide and stick to "This is what martial power can't do" and "this is what magical power can't do". This way no one cares when there are overlaps on effects as long as you don't break a rule.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think we need to think about the original context here. The average level people play at has drifted higher since the early days of the game, and the kind of basic dungeon exploration has similarly reduced. We elso tend to have a bit more fous on the players as players of individual characters, rather than the party as a group playing a cooperative game with shared resources (such as in certain modern boardgames)

In early D&D, at the lower levels, magic user spells were party resources. Spending a spell slot memorising Knock or Spider Climb was a significant party investment. A thief could attempt to climb walls or pick locks all day long but if you really needed to suceed then you might want the resource that guarantees success.

So in some ways, those spells serve the kind of role that metacurrencies might in more modern games, in that they give the party a chance to be much more likely to succeed when you really need to by spending a resource. So we shouldn't be just thinking about whether the Wizard having these spells is bad for the Rogue, we should probably also be thinking about the fact that, in the modern paradigm, the Rogue not having much opportunity to make choices about which rolls really matter is also an issue. (This is one of the reasons why Arcane Trickster is so good. Having access to Invisibilty and Misty Step does so much to mitigate the risk of a single bad roll when scouting).

All good points!

I suppose having a Master Thief with (effectively) a Spider Climb type super feature might not be so bad, and it would free up the Wizard to have a different spell prepared (that the Master Thief can't do). But then we still have the same issue: the Wizard can do it, and the other things as well, but the Master Thief can't.

I think that, partly, is the crux of the issue.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Putting it together - High Level Martial Examples

So taking what we have brainstormed, lets put out some examples of high level martial abilities that could take over some "magic only" areas while still maintaining some martial flavor. Note: These are just for examples, I'm not trying to make them super polished or come up with the best names or anything.

Perfect Lie - On occasion, you can tell a lie so convincingly, that it causes the target the question their own memories. If you get a natural 20 on a deception check, and the check was a success, you may adjust the targets memory as if using the Modify Memory spell. The modified memory must be relevant to the lie in question (determined by the DM). A person subject to this ability can not be affected by Perfect Lie again for 1 week.

Honestly, I wouldn't require a natural 20. 5e dropped many example of DC for skill use. A DC 30 check is "Nearly impossible". What is possible and impossible depend on what is peak ability for a skill use within the game world. Let's take Deception as you propose. It can, obviously, allow you to have your party enter a stronghold by passing something for a gift. Ulysses did this in Troy, and that was DC 20 to me (people actually thought it would work when the plan was described to them, so it wasn't extraordinary, just a very smart thing to THINK of it). How would you rule a character specializing in Deception who would try to do the same, bypassing most of the defences? What could higher DC checks do? What DC would you assign to convincing Martin Guerre's wife that you're her husband returning from war after a few years? What DC for starting a panick about a plot to kill a king, resulting in many people being convicted despite it being fake news, like Titus Oates did with the popish plot? Nearly impossible would be even more extraordinary Deception use than that. Convincing someone who was a direct witness of the truth, recently and with an interesting in remembering the scene correctly, that his memory is fuzzy, would be in the 25-30 range, and well within ability of even a mid-level liar. When a character is made prisonners by two guards, what is the DC for convincing one to kill the other in order to keep the (inexistant) bounty for the character's head for himself?

We lack example of high DC range as they will depend on how fantastic you want your world to be. But for example, a DC 30 Athletic check allow one to escape Dimensional Shackles, a rare magical item preventing evasion, including magical one. I'd allow Athletics, on the same basis, to let someone push through a Wall of Force. It's a "only" a DC 20 check to break chains and manacles after all.

What DC would you assign to Errol Flynn's "ladder of axes" scene where he climbs a wall using a few axes he threw just before? Sure, if you ask for 30, then your definition of mundane might not align with the definition of one who would assign 15 to this maneuver...

I think the "perfect lie" is the way to go, powerwise, if you want to change the balance of classes to something more to your liking, but the baseline of what skill checks can do is very fuzzy in the first place, with extreme variability (Athletics doesn't let you reach the actual world records, yet it allow a random commoner to break manacles 5% of the time, and I suppose real life people don't escape manacles daily when they are arrested (or we'd build better manacles...)

What is the DC of the religion check to pass as a cultist? That you're a priest of the cult? To pass as a priest in an oecuminical council? To start a schism splitting the religion into two hostile groups, leading to centuries of wars and massacres between them?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Agree.

Spells like Spider Climb removes the sort of ability a Master Thief could have. The best balance IMO would be to augment martials a bit, and pull back on casters to match. In the other thread posters cited numerous cases of how D&D archmages, etc. had powers that far exceeded what historical myths provided (often), so I'd be all for WotC reining back on casters a bit.

The problem is, they tried that. 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?)

You can't put this genie back in the bottle. There's a too-vocal, and too-influential, minority of players that really do want spellcasters to simply be more powerful than non-spellcasters--or, at the very least, to be more innately, by the rules powerful, because (as they assert) the DM should always be able to fix any and all intra-party imbalance, and if they can't, well, they're just not a good enough DM yet.

 

[Stalker0]

The problem is, they tried that. And now people crow about how terrible a decision it was. How it ruined the game.

The issue with 4e was less mechanical and more presentation. 4e had some very innovative ideas, but it really had trouble bringing the "feel" of dnd to the game. Even the books read like textbooks more than game books.

Similar in the use of martial powers. 4e gave martials abilities that border on spells...but with no flavor to explain how/why they work. That is partly why this thread exists, to find the line of where we can give martial characters abilities "in flavor", and where we have to draw the line and say "no that's just too crazy for a martial to get".

For a 4e example, take the power "Come and Get It". This was an ability that forced creatures near the fighter to instantly move to the fighter and take attacks. Its a commonly cited "problem ability" from 4e detractors....and honestly their concerns are understandable. Why does a reasonably intelligence creature just suddenly dive at the fighter and ultimately to their doom, just because the fighter wants them to?

This is an example of "Will Manipulation" done badly. The idea of a martial driving creatures away through fear is reasonable in flavor. The idea of a martial knocking people around and giving them a mental effect has decent flavor. The idea that a martial can command enemies and control their movements.... that crosses the line of reasonability.

 

[Mordhau]

I don't think anyone really knows what the major issues were with 4e.

Many of the things that were supposedly dealbreakers barely raise an eyebrow in 5e.

Most likely it was a whole lot of things combined that caused the backlash.

I'd be wary of saying things shouldn't be done because of 4e, both because things that were rejected when part of the 4e mix may be accepted in a different context, and because there's now a whole new generation of gamers that have come along since then.

 

[Stormonu]

Bah, the "martials can't have nice things" can go die in a fire. Like many of the suggestions above, you can give the martial character abilities that knock on superhuman characteristics without being strictly magical. I think several of the ones listed above are actually underpowered or hobbled by trying to be too tame. For the best results, take out reference to any spells and write in the actual ability, word for word. For example:

Perfect Lie (10th level). You must be proficient in Deception. Once per long rest, when you use your Deception skill and the check was a success and you have at least one minute to speak, you can affect the target's memory of an event that it experienced within the last 24 hours and that lasted no more than 10 minutes. You can permanently eliminate all memory of the event, allow the target to recall the event with perfect c!arity and exacting detail, change its memory of the details of the event, or create a memory of some other event.

You must speak to the target to describe how its memories are affected, and it must be able to understand your language for the modified memories to take root. Its mind fills in any gaps in the details of your description. A modified memory doesn't neeessarily affect how a creature behaves, particularly if the memory contradicts the creature's natural inclinations, alignment, or beliefs. An illogical modified memory, such as implanting a memory of how much the creature enjoyed dousing itself in acid, is dismissed, perhaps as a bad dream. The DM might deem a modified memory too nonsensical to affect a creature in a significant manner. The modified memory must be relevant to the lie in question (determined by the DM).

 

[Scars Unseen]

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. What I would suggest, then, is to divorce the concept of tiers of play from the leveling structure altogether, or if not that, then allow for more of a sliding scale of start and finish points. Just because someone wants to keep things closer to the mundane than to the fantastic doesn't mean they want to only play within the first 5-10 levels of character growth; it just means they want a certain style of game throughout. And someone who wants their warriors to be epic in the very literal sense of the word probably isn't looking for the kind of zero to hero approach that some older player go to OSR games for.

One way to approach this would be to explicitly labels tiers and then tie class features, spells, skill use limitations, even HP and maybe ASI limits to those tiers. So in a game being played on a heroic tier, for example, spells tagged for the epic tier would be unavailable. These spells and abilities would be available for the entire level range, meaning that any given group could decide where and if each tier of play begins. Want a "realistic" war campaign where player characters owe their superiority to simple skill and experience, while casters are much the same with a bag of tricks instead of a well hones sword technique? Doable. Want a legend of myth, where god blessed heroes grapple with dragons? Done. Want something closer to the former, but with individual abilities from the latter given out as treasure to give otherwise mundane characters one fantastical trick up their sleeve? Why not?

This way would probably require an extra book or two to cover all tiers of play, but frankly, I don't see much of a way to satisfy both crowds without doing that anyway.

 

[Minigiant]

Bah, the "martials can't have nice things" can go die in a fire. Like many of the suggestions above, you can give the martial character abilities that knock on superhuman characteristics without being strictly magical. I think several of the ones listed above are actually underpowered or hobbled by trying to be too tame. For the best results, take out reference to any spells and write in the actual ability, word for word. For example:

Perfect Lie (10th level). You must be proficient in Deception. Once per long rest, when you use your Deception skill and the check was a success and you have at least one minute to speak, you can affect the target's memory of an event that it experienced within the last 24 hours and that lasted no more than 10 minutes. You can permanently eliminate all memory of the event, allow the target to recall the event with perfect c!arity and exacting detail, change its memory of the details of the event, or create a memory of some other event.

You must speak to the target to describe how its memories are affected, and it must be able to understand your language for the modified memories to take root. Its mind fills in any gaps in the details of your description. A modified memory doesn't neeessarily affect how a creature behaves, particularly if the memory contradicts the creature's natural inclinations, alignment, or beliefs. An illogical modified memory, such as implanting a memory of how much the creature enjoyed dousing itself in acid, is dismissed, perhaps as a bad dream. The DM might deem a modified memory too nonsensical to affect a creature in a significant manner. The modified memory must be relevant to the lie in question (determined by the DM).

Even that reads to spell-y.

A rogue telling the guard that they remembered wrong should be different from the mage magically changing their memories via arcane energy. If I were to describe the differences, my list would be.

Perfect Lie

• Uses a Charisma Check
• The longer you talk, the farther back you can modify a memory
• The farther back the memory,the easier the memory is to alter.
• Memory cannot be erased. A new memory must be given to replace old one
• Memory can only be restore with evidence or contradictions
• Target is not Charmed

Modify Memory Spell

• Uses a Wisdom Charisma Saving throw (this should be a Cha save as you are attacking their sense of self)
• The higher the spell slot use, you can modify a memory
• Memory modification difficulty not affected by time distance
• Memory can be erased
• Memory can be stored via spells
• Target is Charmed

Perfect Lie - On occasion, you can tell a lie so convincingly, that it causes the target the question their own memories. You are proficient in Deception, If you get a natural 20 on a Charisma (Deception) check, and the check was a success, you may adjust the target memory as by making another Charisma (Deception) vs the target's Passive Insight. If the memory is under a week ago, the target has a +5 bonus to this check. If the memory is over a year ago, the target automatically fail the check

The modified memory must be relevant to the lie in question (determined by the DM). The modified memory replaces the old memory. You must speak to the target to describe how its memories are affected, and it must be able to understand your language for the modified memories to take root. Its mind fills in any gaps in the details of your description. You speak to the target for the a length of time equal to half the time of the memory's duration of a maximum of ten times your Charisma score. Strong evidence or a logical contradiction can cause the target to regain their true memory.