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

[DND_Reborn]

Just because part of the game isn't played by many players doesn't mean that part should suffer in design or balance.

 

[Minigiant]

Nah. All these work either well or at least OKish. It is far cry from 3e situation where at higher levels non-casters couldn't really contribute. Is it perfect? No, not at all, I certainly have my gripes too. But things work well enough that most people don't even notice any issues and those who do generally don't feel it is a huge deal. It's more like blemishes than major flaws.

People don't usually play high level to see the problem.

However of those who do, a large percentage complain about it.

Designing 20 levels of a game and having at least 25% of fans who run all those levels conservatively say 8 levels of it isn't good is nowhere close to "good enough to not attempt to fix".

 

[Aldarc]

I've played and DMed to 20th, my current group is 15th. Nobody has had a problem with those classes. One person's major flaw is another person's works reasonably well.

If changes were made that addressed this for other people who have experienced problems with it, would the game still work "reasonably well" for you?

 

[Panzeh]

Honestly, my hot take is that 'sits around and swings a sword' is not really that interesting an archetype so, if I were to run D&D again, i'd work up some kind of homebrew 'sergeant' class based more around leading NPC minions who are the classic idiots with weapons paradigm. Something like the old warlord but a bit more fleshed out. It'd be something they'd have from 'go', rather than a high level thing, just at go, you have five guys, or something to that effect.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or alternatively mistake the game's popularity for its design quality.

For those sensitive to this sort of critique, this again is not to say that 5e D&D or D&D is a badly designed game or that its popularity is somehow wrong. Instead, it falls within the scope of what @Jaeger rightly points out as "good enough." A similar "good enough" design argument was made by Snarf Zagyg as well, namely his "Cheesecake Factory" piece. Places like Waffle House in the U.S. South or McDonalds worldwide are incredibly popular, but I don't think anyone would dare claim that they have "good quality" food, and for those eager to gaslight me by claiming that I am somehow being an elitist snob against the plebs, I say this as someone who enjoys both eating establishments.


5e's success has been used as a shield by some against making any changes to the game's shortcomings, weaknesses, or sore spots.

It is the defense the company would use.

 

[Oofta]

Saying It’s not as bad as it was in 3e isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement either.

But yea, Most classes in 5e work very well in tier 2 and toward the end of tier 1. That’s where most of the game is played for most groups.

High level play is kind of a chicken and the egg. Because there's no higher module support and minimal monster support unless you want fiends again, people don't play that level. That and a lot of DM's and players get tired of the current campaign and want to start something different.

I'd like to see a wealth by level chart with options for low, medium and high magic/power games. It would make it easier for people to jump into higher level games if they want. That, and while I have reservations about making spells powers like they're doing in the most recent book because running a higher level caster is a pain when you're the DM.

I've run campaigns to the upper level limits many times, but I understand why people don't.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Honestly, my hot take is that 'sits around and swings a sword' is not really that interesting an archetype so, if I were to run D&D again, i'd work up some kind of homebrew 'sergeant' class based more around leading NPC minions who are the classic idiots with weapons paradigm. Something like the old warlord but a bit more fleshed out. It'd be something they'd have from 'go', rather than a high level thing, just at go, you have five guys, or something to that effect.

There are 6 full caster classes (counting warlock here), and 2 more built almost entirely around magic, and 2 more half-casters. There are 3 classes built around not-magic.

There's no reason we couldn't have 5 or more non-caster classes. (Champion, battlemaster, swashbuckler, assassin, expert, warlord, barbarian), 3 or more half-casters (+ swordmage and hexblade) and still have a functional game. It would approach too many classes for new players to grok, but I haven't seen proof it would.

Assuming a total overhaul of the existing classes that are trying to cover that design/fictional space.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

People don't usually play high level to see the problem.

However of those who do, a large percentage complain about it.

Designing 20 levels of a game and having at least 25% of fans who run all those levels conservatively say 8 levels of it isn't good is nowhere close to "good enough to not attempt to fix".

Did I say that I don’t think that it should be fixed? Because earlier in this thread I definitely said it should be fixed and suggested how. But I still don’t think it is a major flaw. It’s just that it is a good idea to fix more minor issues too.

 

[nevin]

People don't usually play high level to see the problem.

However of those who do, a large percentage complain about it.

Designing 20 levels of a game and having at least 25% of fans who run all those levels conservatively say 8 levels of it isn't good is nowhere close to "good enough to not attempt to fix".

Most people I talk to that complain about high level either don't like high powered games or are confused by having a high level game where gods, npc, kings, and other heroes go after those who interfere with their goals. High level games since 1e have always assumed you are playing a campaign and consequences occur, enemies learn your weaknesses and use them against you.. imo theree is no way for anything but DM to balance the game once you pass 10th level.

Locking down high level so players can't do super heroic things is just playing low level games but calling then high level

 

[Oofta]

I fully believe that these are not issues for your particular group. Whatever y’all are doing has made it work.

But I also think it’s fair to acknowledge that the way you all play isn’t going to be for every group and maybe not even most groups.

what might be interesting is to see what build and items your fighter has vs the build, items and spells the groups wizard has. With a bit of info about typical combat tactics and the like - and what a typical adventuring day looks like.

In part it might just be attitude? I cheered when our wizard finally got to cast meteor storm to wipe out a small army of decently high level monsters. Could my fighter do that? No, but then again I only remember that particular situation happening once. Meteor storm is an amazingly deadly spell under the right circumstances, at a point it's up to the DM to ensure those circumstances don't happen too often.

One of the things that helps balance things out is that I use the gritty rest rules, I get 4-10 encounters before a long rest. Frequently there's only 1 short rest in there. But a typical combat encounter? Not sure there is one, but I regularly have situations where there's limited line of sight and monsters coming in from multiple directions. I also switch up the goals of the monsters.

I have a group of 6, a fighter, paladin or warlock (long story), rogue, wizard, monk, cleric. Most of them have a couple of rare items and a few uncommon items. A standard level 14 fight was in a dense forest at night with limited visibility when the group was attacked by werewolves. Two Loup Garous (CR 13) along with a half dozen werewolves (CR 3) attacked. The werewolves were more of a distraction, the real goal of the encounter was to capture the party's warlock and spirit her away for other reasons. Creatures attacked from multiple directions, the Loup Garous used their legendary actions to pounce and separate the party.

They just leveled so a level 15 fight was against fire giants - a regular fire giant (CR 9), a dreadnaught (CR 14) and a custom fire giant lord (CR 17ish) that had some cool legendary actions and an area effect. The only one not practically dead at the end of the encounter* was the fighter. The tactics on this one were pretty straightforward and as a change of pace it was all in an open area. The dreadnaught just kept bulldozed everyone in sight because most of them were grouped up (the wizard bravely ran away), the fire giant soaked up turn or two of actions before going down. The custom fire giant just came in swinging and used an area effect attack based on a red dragon's breath weapon. I also used

So in the first fight, it was a smash and grab in an environment that didn't lend itself to area attacks. Second was a straight up brawl. Another recent encounter was the group holding off waves of The Hungry while the wizard worked to finish casting the hut spell. In a another 15th level fight the cleric had banished the leader so everyone just focused fire on the cleric until he failed concentration, at the levels they're fighting I generally assume the monsters know what they're doing. IIRC correctly the 14th level fight was one of 6 encounters before a long rest, the 15th will likely be 4 depending on what they do next which is why it was tougher.

Not sure if any of that helps though, setting up high level encounters is a whole separate thread.

*I realized later I had run the dreadnaught wrong, it likely could have been a TPK if I had.