Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8496380" data-attributes="member: 6987520">Yes, that is certainly another issue. I can of course only answer for myself, which I have. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Where do I see each of these sitting compared to full casters? I would be happy to see tier 3 at the Street Fighter level, personally, and reserve the tier 4 levels for the mythical martials with "superheroic" level capabilities.If full casters (not just Wizards, really) stayed the same, I feel martials definitely need improvement over the current classes. These improvements would reflect not just a power-level shift, but also additional features to make them more relevant in other pillars of the game.Do I feel these changes need to make them rival full casters at the highest levels? Certainly not, because I see the potential for their agency elsewhere, and IME (limited though it may be at tier 4 with only one campaign making it to level 20) I feel keenly the importance of at-will vs. extremely limited usage (e.g. spells at tier 4, where at best you have 6 slots per long rest).Of course I understand even with the "standard adventure day" of 6-8 encounters, a 20th-level full caster could likely use a single 6th+ level spell in each encounter they are likely to face. I don't think anyone will deny those spells can certainly change the course of an encounter, especially 8ths and 9ths! But so can the features of martials at those levels, even if not so strongly.Yes, the goals differ. But from the OP (correct me if I am wrong [USER=5889]@Stalker0[/USER]) the first aspect was to examine magic and it ballooned into a hot debate about martials being unequal to casters. Part of the issue is how wide-spread and prevalent magic is to D&D, when it can accomplish virtually anything and make martials obsolete.I am all for nerfing magic and have done so at my own table in numerous ways. But a lot of people want to keep casters at their current power and bring martials up to that level.Yes, it will require some creative solutions, but the REAL problem as I see it is few people are trying to find any kind of solution, and prefer to just keep debating the topic over and over.I have posted a few times offering drafts for features to make martials better and (surprise, surprise) have received little feedback or comment on them. Frankly, as you know I am more than willing to work on this, so at this point I really don't care (for myself) if people want "superheroes" or whatever, as long as they start putting in the time to develop it.Otherwise, if people just want to whine or debate the merits of having better and more powerful options for martials, there's little point in me bothering to follow it any longer. After a dozen pages in Part 2, and many more in Part 1, we've basically accomplished nothing.And so this returns us to the OP and the breakdown of magic in D&D (having nothing, in and of itself, to do with martials).I think martial features can certainly be different from spells, and others might be spells if it is supported by the narrative of the feature. But the sum of it all (IMO) is this:1. Magic is powerful. It allows casters to do things that without it they simply couldn't in most cases (if not all).2. Because magic is so prevalent it detracts from roles other classes (martials) can play or fill.3. Martials as designed in 5E fall short of the bar, rather drastically in some respects (when PCs can't even match IRL accomplishments).4. Different groups want to see martials improved to different levels, some don't want to see any change at all.And probably more...I am going to bed. I have a long day tomorrow. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification