D&D General Chris just said why I hate wizard/fighter dynamic

[Ruin Explorer]

Which is why a lot can be done to correct the imbalance. The real issue is the direction you want to go:

You either decrease the power of casters to bring them down to the martial level, or elevate the martials to bring them up to the casters. Or, try to find a happy medium between the two extremes...

Personally, I am for bringing casters down, many others want to elevate martials.

I tend to agree re: pulling casters down. I think we could elevate martials a bit, just with some more interesting ability design (without necessarily going "full superhero", just like keeping it in the literary fantasy/action hero zone), but the top end stuff with casters, and really anything above level 5 spells gets so dominant that it can very quickly become the focus of play even in 5E (especially given the sheer number of spells they can cast at that point). So I think slower progression of spell levels and capping spells at like L6 or L7, and just reconsidering every spell above that level. Really direct combat spells weirdly are not the main issue, it's all the rest.

 

[Yaarel]

Oh for Morrus @co. to make a version of A5E (or supplement for it) for whichever of e6/e8/e10 they like most!

The epic boons need recalibrating for the same reason that feats need it.

But the boon is worth about a level. I dont think there needs to be a special system. Advance levels normally, but switch to boons instead of class features, after level 10 or whichever level.

 

[Yaarel]

I tend to agree re: pulling casters down. I think we could elevate martials a bit, just with some more interesting ability design (without necessarily going "full superhero", just like keeping it in the literary fantasy/action hero zone), but the top end stuff with casters, and really anything above level 5 spells gets so dominant that it can very quickly become the focus of play even in 5E (especially given the sheer number of spells they can cast at that point). So I think slower progression of spell levels and capping spells at like L6 or L7, and just reconsidering every spell above that level. Really direct combat spells weirdly are not the main issue, it's all the rest.

I feel it is better to design D&D with the understanding that levels 11 to 20 means "superheroes".

Meanwhile, levels 21 to 25 means "epic" world-creating characters.

Moreorless, levels correlate magnitude.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I have played the 3e system, but am unfamiliar with that supplement.

Book of 9 Swords, where they made good versions of the martial characters using the template for spells.

4-chan of course couldn't help but come up with a stupid name attempting to diminish it by comparing it to D&D's target of unresolved sexual tension, anime.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

4-chan of course couldn't help but come up with a stupid name attempting to diminish it by comparing it to D&D's target of unresolved sexual tension, anime.

This line should be in a museum. That is horrifically true.

I feel it is better to design D&D with the understanding that levels 11 to 20 means "superheroes".

I'd also be fine with that, but even then, I think we need to pull down casters a bit, because too many high-level spells in 5E still amount to "LOL I fixed everything" and just completely negate efforts from others. Or if not pull them down directly, change a lot of high-level spells so they work in ways which require cooperation, not just a wizard snapping their fingers.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

I feel it is better to design D&D with the understanding that levels 11 to 20 means "superheroes".

Meanwhile, levels 21 to 25 means "epic" world-creating characters.

Moreorless, levels correlate magnitude.

This is just one of those matters of taste where I think what WotC "ought" to do is just go with the majority opinion, (and I don't know what that is).

Personally, I'd prefer if 21+ was the 'super hero' category and everything below 20 was still mostly a mortal even if they represented one-in-several-billion skill levels relative to the average joe.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is just one of those matters of taste where I think what WotC "ought" to do is just go with the majority opinion, (and I don't know what that is).

Yeah I dunno either but I imagine WotC has some idea. Given that 40+ players are only 13% of the market, and the bulk of the market has basically been raised on superheroes and quasi-supeheroes, I suspect they'd be more open to it than us coffin-dodgers.

 

[Oofta]

I want my martial characters to be just that, martial characters. I don't want them to be magic users by another name. My solution is to throw so enough encounters at the group that the casters can do awesome things once in a while, martials can do cool things all the time.

 

[Yaarel]

I'd also be fine with that, but even then, I think we need to pull down casters a bit, because too many high-level spells in 5E still amount to "LOL I fixed everything" and just completely negate efforts from others. Or if not pull them down directly, change a lot of high-level spells so they work in ways which require cooperation, not just a wizard snapping their fingers.

Cooperation is important for D&D design.

Heh, I need to look at each high-level spell on a case-by-case basis, but maybe I could tolerate that.

 

[Yaarel]

Personally, I'd prefer if 21+ was the 'super hero' category and everything below 20 was still mostly a mortal even if they represented one-in-several-billion skill levels relative to the average joe.

But why rewrite the game? Level 11+ is already "superhero", and players can easily stop after level 10 − and apparently most games do anyway.

The game works fine now. Just stop at 10.