D&D 5E Class Analysis: Fighter and Bard

[Andor]

You've said multiple times that Wizards are far more powerful than Fighters, including in this very same post.

You've also said multiple times that if that's a problem for the Fighter they should take levels in another class.

Are you seriously denying this?

I'm telling you you're badly misreading my words. Power is a general term and applys to many endevours. If the power you're talking about is trouncing people in melee combat the fighter butchers the wizard, as your own chart shows. As your own posts indicate however you are fully aware that the disparity between a Wizard and a Fighter does not lie in DPS.

So how do you accomplish Non-DPS actions in D&D? Skills. Feats. Spells. Class Features.

Class features are to me the crudest way to do things, because I don't generally like to view classes as existing in some tangible sense within the game world, YMMV. If you give a high level fighter the ability to throw a boulder across a continent, why can't the Barbarian do it?

Now the problem you seem to be having is that the most potent abilities tend to lie under the heading of spells. Some characters don't have access to those abilities and you want them to have equivilent tricks. Or actually you don't, but you won't admit that.

It's not magic, and that's the whole point. Beowulf doesn't swim a fjord in armour, he swims the North Sea. For five days and five nights. While fighting sea monsters. He doesn't hold his breath for an hour to reach Grendel's mother, he holds it for a day, and he doesn't cast Water Breathing to do it. When he fights her, his ancient artifact sword bounces off, so he switches to his bare hands, trusting that they'll be more effective.

He does not cast spells. He is not magic. Dispel Magic, Counterspell and Antimagic Field would do nothing to Beowulf.

Of course it's magic. It's a myth and he is a Mythical hero. If you want to make a counter-arguement kindly make a video of yourself holding your breath for 5 days. Physically possible? No? Then it's magic.

D&D is set in a magic reality, but the baseline day to day experience of people in that world is essentially identical to ours, unless you bring in "magic". It has to be so or the experience of that reality becomes so abstract to the players that immersion in the game or sympathy to the plight of the characters is harder to generate. Abstractness of in world effects was one of the major complaints leveled at 4e and WotC had to move back from that to achieve primary design goals. So to move to levels of wahoo past the action movie threshold you need to label the effect magical.

More to the point let's give you everything you asked for. Okay? Your fighter can now hold his breath for 5 days. He can swin a freezing tempest wearing full plate. He can rip a leg off the Tarrasque and beat a dragon to death with it.

Happy? No, you're not, because we have done exactly nothing to address your actual problem which is that the Wizard can still fly, teleport, speak with the dead, or conjure a house. The cleric can bring back the dead or speak with the Gods. No matter how Hulk like you are, you're still stuck resolving problems with violence.

It's bad form to quote myself but I'll repeat the point you ignored.

To be equal in all venues and for all pillars of the game either the fighter is magic and no different from the wizard or the wizard is limited to blowing stuff up and no different from the fighter. If you want both to exist and to be different then there must be differences and those differences must be meaningfull. The ability to fly, to teleport, conjure a wall are different in kind from the ability to smash stuff. They enable different approaches to problem solving, or they aren't really different at all. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

At the end of the day the question you need to ask is, can I have fun playing D&D? If you can't is it really because Beowulf needed to say a 10 minute chant before holding his breath for a day? Because that's all 5e asks him to do.

 

[Uskglass]

I

Of course it's magic. It's a myth and he is a Mythical hero. If you want to make a counter-arguement kindly make a video of yourself holding your breath for 5 days. Physically possible? No? Then it's magic.

High level characters in D&D can fall from 200 feet heights (or more) and reliably survive on impact with solid ground. That's physically impossible. Is that magic? If so then it means HP are magic.
If you like to call all that magic, that's ok, it doesn't bother me (we can even call it The Force for what matters). But let's draw a line at spells (intended as the mechanical constructs used in D&D): the fighter should not have to be a spellcaster.

At the end of the day the question you need to ask is, can I have fun playing D&D? If you can't is it really because Beowulf needed to say a 10 minute chant before holding his breath for a day? Because that's all 5e asks him to do.

Why have classes at all then? Let's just have a single magic user template to customise through spells selection.
And no: Beowulf is a man of action. He doesn't have time for 10 min chants or prayers, and even if he had he wouldn't bother.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Obviously we're not all going to agree whether a level 20 martial character should be Beowulf or Odysseus or Robin Hood. That's a matter if preference. But I think we certainly CAN agree that a level 20 fighter should be exceptional when he's in his element on the battlefield. That, I would argue, is far from impossible even with a totally "mundane" fighter. Double the champion's damage, and I don't think you'll hear another word about how 5e is a "caster edition," despite the fact that the wizard will still have all his tricks for bypassing hp. So the question that this thread first raised is whether a fighter is outclassed on the battlefield, and that is a point we can actually come to conclusions on through math and analysis.

To that end: I've been think about magic items. It's hard because we don't have the DMG, but extrapolating from 3e and the playtests, and official 5e adventures we've seen, it seems fair to say that the most common and iconic magic items for casters add to the quantity of his powers (e.g. scrolls, wands, rods, pearls of power), whereas the most common and iconic items for martial characters tend to add to the effectiveness of his existing attacks and abilities (+x weapons and armor, cloak of elvenkind) or else add new powers, often unlimited in use (boots of flying). This means that in combat, the fighter will get more power every round, while the wizard will get more longevity. And since a big part of the reason wizards are overpowered in combat is because they are able to "nova," and because some DMs don't force them to fight enough encounters to end up spamming cantrips, that added longevity probably won't be nearly as visible in combat as the fighter's added power.

"No fair, magic items aren't supposed to be included in the core math!" you say. They're not, but that mostly means that you don't have to change around numbers too much when you add magic items (for example, because bonuses are capped at +3 instead of 5 or 6), and that CRs wouldn't assume you were loaded to the gills with magic. (Good luck even hitting the AC of an elder
dragon in 3e without magic items.) If you interpreted that to mean that powerful magic items wouldn't exist in this edition, you haven't been paying close attention.

 

[Andor]

There is no 'magic'. Magic is flavor. There are just mechanics, and what a number of people here is asking for is having mechanics which are specific to each class allowing all characters to stand roughly on equal ground along progression.

If you like to call all that magic, that's ok, it doesn't bother me (we can even call it The Force for what matters). But let's draw a line at spells (intended as the mechanical constructs used in D&D): the fighter should not have to be a spellcaster.

I'm having some trouble understanding how those two thoughts go together. If a spell is just a mechanical construct without 'magic' why does it bother you to use it? Are you also bothered by the Battlemasters dice?

Let me ask you guys this: What needs to be done to the Champion to make him acceptable? Double his damage? Give him an instant-kill daily power? Does the Barbarian also need a lift? What about Rogues? What needs to be done to them? Is it possible to have the class you want, while achieving the Champions design goal of being a mechanically simple class to play, with minimal resource tracking?

And as a followup, do you think the Champion/Rager/Thief with the changes you want would be acceptable to the portions of the player base 5e is try to draw back into the fold?

 

[Cybit]

Obviously we're not all going to agree whether a level 20 martial character should be Beowulf or Odysseus or Robin Hood. That's a matter if preference. But I think we certainly CAN agree that a level 20 fighter should be exceptional when he's in his element on the battlefield. That, I would argue, is far from impossible even with a totally "mundane" fighter. Double the champion's damage, and I don't think you'll hear another word about how 5e is a "caster edition," despite the fact that the wizard will still have all his tricks for bypassing hp. So the question that this thread first raised is whether a fighter is outclassed on the battlefield, and that is a point we can actually come to conclusions on through math and analysis.

To that end: I've been think about magic items. It's hard because we don't have the DMG, but extrapolating from 3e and the playtests, and official 5e adventures we've seen, it seems fair to say that the most common and iconic magic items for casters add to the quantity of his powers (e.g. scrolls, wands, rods, pearls of power), whereas the most common and iconic items for martial characters tend to add to the effectiveness of his existing attacks and abilities (+x weapons and armor, cloak of elvenkind) or else add new powers, often unlimited in use (boots of flying). This means that in combat, the fighter will get more power every round, while the wizard will get more longevity. And since a big part of the reason wizards are overpowered in combat is because they are able to "nova," and because some DMs don't force them to fight enough encounters to end up spamming cantrips, that added longevity probably won't be nearly as visible in combat as the fighter's added power.

"No fair, magic items aren't supposed to be included in the core math!" you say. They're not, but that mostly means that you don't have to change around numbers too much when you add magic items (for example, because bonuses are capped at +3 instead of 5 or 6), and that CRs wouldn't assume you were loaded to the gills with magic. (Good luck even hitting the AC of an elder
dragon in 3e without magic items.) If you interpreted that to mean that powerful magic items wouldn't exist in this edition, you haven't been paying close attention.

The most powerful red dragon in the MM would require an 11 for a 17th level fighter to hit. (Assuming 20 STR).

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

The most powerful red dragon in the MM would require an 11 for a 17th level fighter to hit. (Assuming 20 STR).

Once per round, with your highest BAB, and if I recall doing zero damage because DR, right?

 

[Cybit]

Once per round, with your highest BAB, and if I recall doing zero damage because DR, right?

Oh we are talking 3E? NO idea then.

in 5E, you would be making your 3 to 4 attacks a round needing an 11 to hit (rolling twice with advantage). 9s if you are shooting said dragon.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Yeah, I meant the 3e dragons had crazy AC, although I was speaking from memory. Looking at the SRD, they're around AC 40 for the level 20 versions. So I was right the first time: it was almost impossible for a fighter to hit them reliably (let alone a few times per full attack) without a boatload of magic items and buffs. Same deal for 4e monsters. That's what is different in 5e: the system math doesn't require you to have magic items to succeed. But a fighter who does happen to have a +1 flaming greatsword is still going to see a huge benefit from it.

 

[Uskglass]

I'm having some trouble understanding how those two thoughts go together. If a spell is just a mechanical construct without 'magic' why does it bother you to use it? Are you also bothered by the Battlemasters dice?

Actually I was making an effort to meet you on common ground. What I mean is that if you want to justify all that is supernatural in the game world as magic, to make sense of it, that's ok (I wouldn't, but it won't be a problem). The magic/non-magic point is a red herring here, and I'm trying to go past it for the sake of keeping a constructive debate that leads somewhere (which I think it is, btw, so thanks for contributing your point of view).
My point is that spells mechanics are not suitable for modelling and representing a martial archetype from myths and legends. Something else need to be figured out and provided by the system for that. For instance the Battle Master could be a viable mechanical base, but the outcome of its maneuvers would need to be way more extreme at high level.

Let me ask you guys this: What needs to be done to the Champion to make him acceptable? Double his damage? Give him an instant-kill daily power? Does the Barbarian also need a lift? What about Rogues? What needs to be done to them? Is it possible to have the class you want, while achieving the Champions design goal of being a mechanically simple class to play, with minimal resource tracking?

Talking about the Champion, as an idea it could be all about dice rolling, with little or no tactical decision involved. It's about extending the crit-fisher paradigm it's already using: there could be extra effects triggered on a high roll, others on a matched roll on advantage/disadvantage, its damage dice may explode when they roll max... you name it. This would require no additional overhead for the player and could potentially give the subclass variety and spark. We are doing high fantasy here, I want fireworks!

And as a followup, do you think the Champion/Rager/Thief with the changes you want would be acceptable to the portions of the player base 5e is try to draw back into the fold?

I think it is possible to achieve both goals. If it is not, then let's leave the Champion as is (at least fixing OA, please), but let's also have some proper alternatives through sub-classes. The Battle Master at the moment needs to spend 1 superiority die to push an enemy 15 feet on a hit and failed saving throw (!): at high level it should be able to hurl someone his size 15 meters away or so with a stunt like that.

 

[Andor]

Actually I was making an effort to meet you on common ground. What I mean is that if you want to justify all that is supernatural in the game world as magic, to make sense of it, that's ok (I wouldn't, but it won't be a problem). The magic/non-magic point is a red herring here, and I'm trying to go past it for the sake of keeping a constructive debate that leads somewhere (which I think it is, btw, so thanks for contributing your point of view).
My point is that spells mechanics are not suitable for modelling and representing a martial archetype from myths and legends. Something else need to be figured out and provided by the system for that. For instance the Battle Master could be a viable mechanical base, but the outcome of its maneuvers would need to be way more extreme at high level.

I'm glad this is calming down into a potentially fruitful discussion.

I don't think the magic/non-magic is red herring, it seems to be the major sticking point as far as I can tell.

For example suppose we add a new Fighter (or Barbarian) subclass called the Mythic Warrior. We can fluff him in a few ways but it doesn't really matter, he is explicitly intended to be a Melee Badass who can do superhuman stuff.

His powers are run by using Paladin/Ranger like spell progression. His spells either have no components, or are verbal only.

Example Spells:
Battle Cry
1st level Enchantment
Casting Time: Bonus Action
Range: 30' Sphere
Component: V
Duration: Instant

Your mighty battle cry strikes terror into your opponents. They must make a Will save or be Frightened for 3 rounds. If cast using a 3rd level slot they are Paralyzed with fear.

Ignore Weakness
4th level Transmutation
Casting Time: Bonus Action
Range: Self
Components: None
Duration: Concentration

Your might allows you to survive conditions that would kill a lesser being. You do not need to breath and do not suffer from extremes of heat or cold.

Standfast
2nd level Evocation
Casting Time: Reaction
Range: Self
Component: V
Duration: 1 Round

With a fierce cry you ready yourself to halt the coming onslaught. Until the end of your next turn you may make an unlimited numbers of attacks of opportunity and creatures struck by your attack have their remaining movement reduced to 0. If cast with a 4th level slot you may shove any creature struck up to 30' in a direction of your choice if they fail a Str save.

Now for this character there is no screwing about with potions and books and arcane gestures. He is simply a force of supernatural rage and badassery, whose abilities are throttled by the same chart that limits other supernatural buttkickers. Would this be an acceptable character? If not, is there an objection that does not lie at the metagame level of labeling his abilities as spells?