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

[doctorbadwolf]

A modicum of basic search-fu would have revealed that it was not that long ago that I was having a fairly nice chat with Lanefan about rituals and spells, drawing in discussion of 4e and OSR, as they don't necessarily share 5e's problems regarding the "fighter wizard dynamic." I personally found that line of discussion more interesting than engaging in a pointless debate with people denying the existence of the problem.

But that really has no bearing on the issue of your untruthfulness in depicting the arguments of others in a fair light. It's just a "WhatAboutYou?" distraction.

Speaking of which, I think I'm gonna make the new swordmage thread I was meaning to make, now that I've tested and found wanting the idea of combining the basic ideas of the swordmage as "esoteric orders of arcane warriors" and the basic idea of the monk. In spite of being able to describe both concepts with the same phrasing, there is enough difference in what specific types of abilities make them sing, that it's worth keeping them separate. Combining them would require making the base class very generic, which I'm I can't help but be painfully bored by.

I think the monk can be addressed with some optional variant features and houserules to some existing abilities, and the swordmage can do more arcane-themed stuff rather than more "mystical martial arts tradition" stuff. In large part, having one be a spellcaster while the other has little if anything that is explicitly magical, is enough difference.

 

[Minigiant]

False. The 5e Fighter is designed to be the warrior, and be assymetrically balanced against broader classes by being the best at dealing damage, with it's subclasses determining the rest of it's design and role.

It's actually both. The Fighter is the warrior it is designed to deal the most damage. It is also designed to get its breadth from the subclasses and magic items allowed by the DM to be appropriate to the setting.

The issue is this is never explained. And most media don't follow such paradigms.

So people who like the paradigms of other media often get upset by the 5th edition fighter because it doesn't match a low of popular media and the reason is never explained by the books not the designers.

 

[Cadence]

Literally just got to this in the Dying Earth:

"The thousand knights, riding half-living, half-metal flyers from Canopus, had thrown themselves against the Bohul war-wagons, but for the most part had been destroyed by fire-rays before they could do damage in return."

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

When was the last time you posted something other that "you're wrong" or high level magic destroys the game, that wizards "doesn't care about the 10+ game"? Because I just did a quick search and I don't see anything. Same for @doctorbadwolf for that matter.

Mod Note:

Making it personal? Check. Getting a warning point? Check.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I mean all creatures immune to non-magical weapons.

AFAIK, all creatures immune to non-magical weapons are affected by silver.

Certainly there are creatures resistant to non-magical weapons, and silver doesn't change that, they are still resistance to non-magical silver weapons.

Regardless, to my knowledge all creatures can be damaged by either a normal weapon or a silver one, even if they have resistance.

In other words, I don't know of any creatures which can only be injured by magical weapons. It is part of the 5E design by magic items aren't needed.

Of the assorted creatures that are immune to bludgeoning, slashing and piercing damage by nonmagical weapons, it is generally only the were-creatures that can still be hurt with silver weapons.
Liches for example don't have that addendum, so they are as immune to a silver weapon as a steel one.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's actually both. The Fighter is the warrior it is designed to deal the most damage. It is also designed to get its breadth from the subclasses and magic items allowed by the DM to be appropriate to the setting.

The issue is this is never explained. And most media don't follow such paradigms.

So people who like the paradigms of other media often get upset by the 5th edition fighter because it doesn't match a low of popular media and the reason is never explained by the books not the designers.

You have taken your idiosyncratic conception of how the game works and decided that it is the intentional design of the game. No actual evidence supports this.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The "aristocratic" setting tends to be normal for us, because we have a living world, where the new characters are the children of the semi-retired high-level characters. In principle, the level 1 characters have virtually infinite gold.

Our solution is all magic requires "attunement". There is a limit to the number of items (bodyslots) and consumables possible. High-level items are present but unusable by lower level characters. Likewise, even level appropriate magic requires the character to be in tune with the intention of the original magic item creator. So a DM can arbitrarily have magic items present that are out of sync with the intentions of the player character.

It is impossible to buy and sell magic items, because the items themselves often "refuse" to cooperate. The intention of the creator is an important theme.

In fact, despite the local ubiquity of magic items, the setting is a defacto low-magic setting, in terms of scarce access to magic items.



Regarding red tape, like paying taxes, lifestyle costs are abstract, and use the costs in the Players Handbook equipment section straightforwardly. Bribes risk criminal investigations that discredit the family.




The gp spell component is an ongoing dissatisfaction with commercial flavor. Moreover, the gp costs are inconsistent, and it is difficult to see a pattern in order to remedy it. Generally, instead of a gp, there is a ritual requirement to either prepare or cast it, that can only be done once per day, week, month, or year, depending on the nature of the spell, in order to prevent spamming it.


A "spellbook" can be written on stones, staves, leaves, patterns within crystal, imbued into furs or feathers, etcetera. Anything can be magic or transmit magic. The gp requirements feel like a nonstarter.


Similarly scarce, each spellbook is unique to the creator, and if a spellbook exists at all, it may or may not be accessible.

You're welcome to make those changes in your game, of course, but bottom line if you are not using the gp rules for wizards, you are not playing by the rules. That's fine, but the onus is then on you to balance these issues yourself (if they are issues for you), or to find a 3rd party to do it for you. WotC has no obligation or apparently desire to change the rules to suit your playstyle.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You are incorrect.

The designers made 5e, from the ground up, able to handle a no-magic setting with little modifications.

That modifications are:

• Allowing warriors to silver their weapons by a certain level
• Severely limiting the usage of very supernatural monsters

At no point was it said the DMs wouldn't have to do anything.
If you run a no magic setting, that goes for the monsters and enemies too.

The base game of 5th edition is magical though. If you run that, the game assumes ~1 magic item per 4 levels and a bonus magic item at 14 and 18 as the bare minimum of play per PC. Plus oodles of potions.

So you think the 5e designers were lying? That they said the game doesn't assume magic items but they didn't really mean it?

 

[nevin]

ok guys I played in a 12 level game I've been in for awhile. The barbarian put on his helm of teleportation grabbed a siege engine and teleported up above two airships and dropped the siege engine. Exploding the airship all it's cargo of bombs and taking out the other airship behind it. Completely overshadowing my mages big plan too deal with them. Completely F'd the DM's narrative and direction of the game. with his underpowered barbarian who could stand next to the siege engine while 8 martials and a caster attacked him. It's a shame martials suck.

If your problem with Wizards is they mess with the narrative and that make them too powerful then IMO your problem is you want a game on rails. I gaurrantee our DM's Empire will somewhere down the road attempt to recapture the narrative. That's what every high level game I've ever heard anyone reminice about loved. They got to drive at least once in the big epic game. Same for any other system I've talked with people about. If your rules straight Jacket the players so the DM has an easier time of it the things you lose are fun and trust.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Again everyone is confused. That's why I say the info is not said out loud.

5th edition was designed with magic items. It was also designed that the magic items don't factor in the math so you can turn it up or down without doing any math. This is different from 0e-4e where monster AC and HP were chosen with the assumption of +X items. Instead of math, the DM of 5e adjusts frequency,

The base unaltered game assumes a fighter has 2-4 uncommon permanent magic items, 1-2 permanent magic items, 1-2 very rare permanent magic items and 1 legendary permanent magic items at level 20.

So the fact that 5e has magic items is proof that they are assumed, despite their claims to the contrary?