Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6188421" data-attributes="member: 6681948"><p>So the solution to the Wizard is the removal of the Wizard. Fair enough, I suppose. </p><p></p><p>Where do all those magic items come from under this model, as these casters strike me as unlikely to possess a wide array of prerequisite spells? Maybe we return magic items to rarities, but I do rather like having a functional item crafting system (even if it becomes much more costly and complex, to enforce a greater rarity of magic items).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I’m definitely onside for better skill packages for the non-magical classes. It may be counterintuitive to give, say, fighters more base skill points than wizards, but fighters don’t devote a significant portion of their time to training and research in magic, leaving less time to pursue other skills (easy fluff).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While I can’t comment on the individual systems, I agree that focusing attention on giving non-spellcasters abilities outside of combat is very much mandated. Whether that’s on a metagame level (hero point type mechanics, for example) or more specific abilities linked more directly to the character is very much a matter of taste, but either seems a reasonable approach. I think the metagame approach is foreign to 3.5 and prior editions (again, I can’t speak as confidently to 4e/5e), so I’d lean to specific out of combat abilities (ideally a roster of choices, rather than a fixed level by level progression) for non-casters.</p><p></p><p>I’d also lean strongly to WAY more spells that are on neither the Wizard nor Cleric list, but restricted to specific other classes, domains, archetypes, etc. One of the biggest advantage the Wizard and Cleric share is expansion materials. This book or that adds a new base class, with its own spell list – drawn largely from existing spells, with some new spells in that book available to these new classes, but typically also to the base classes. When another book is published, the new spells are generally usable by the new classes that book creates, perhaps another class or two it focuses on – and wizards and clerics again.</p><p></p><p>While we’re at it, any spell not intended to be combat-useful (I see you over there, Teleport!) gets a 10 minute+ casting time and/or other modifications making it less combat useful (maybe Teleport makes an audible noise and a bright flash on arrival, and those Teleported are Dazed for a minute, no saves or resistances). Not quite “ritual”, but an easy way to avoid abuses while leaving its main purpose (such as long distance travel) intact.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He can’t ambush a Lizard Man and question it with Intimidation? </p><p></p><p>A couple of problems. First is the language barrier, but isn’t that why so many people speak Common. The second is that stealth - whether by magic or mundane means – tends not to be a group activity, so the party is split.</p><p></p><p>A bigger problem – we’ve kind of gotten used to magic solving everything. So let’s give some special abilities to our “stuff of legend” fighters and rogues to rival the special abilities available to their spellcasting counterparts.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Does Polymorph still alter all your gear (Large size War Troll)? I hope so! Arrow demons are outsiders off the Polymorph list (no Outsiders). Still lots of good optons – but better when applied to teammates than to self.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yet that’s not what Pathfinder beefed up. I think there are two group dynamics here. One is “if the team can do it, that’s good enough”, so Teleport is seen as a facilitator for the team, not glory for the Wizard. The other, however, sees it more individually, and the Fighter player wants his turn to help the whole team out. Noncombat abilities for the non-spellcasters would go a long way to helping out the second dynamic and does no harm t the first.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The war troll and the dragon both have 10’ reach, I think. Again, should be a good battle, but will be a team battle.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>During which time that Dragon may be herding his lizardmen followers to ambush the spell-expired, encumbered heroes/hobos as they emerge from his lair.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dragons like the Hover feat. Solid Fog slows it (for its 20’ radius, 20’ high), while the Wall is a 10’ square per level. These will certainly inconvenience the dragon, but I don’t envision it plummeting from the sky. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I remain with the question whether Shivering Touch is more the problem than spellcasting in general. Let's ad third level spells that target each other characteristic in the same manner and see how that works out. Better yet, how about a Fighter or Rogue feat that allows them to Confuse, reducing a mental stat of any one target by 3d6 with virtually no ability of the target to avoid the effect. That seems similar to Shivering Touch as suggested to be applied in these scenarios. Let's give it to them at 5th level, when wizards get 3rd level spells. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It was the charge levied against spellcasters. Interesting to see your example of sorcerers when the suggested solution above is to eliminate wizards in favour of sorcerers.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sounds like a scenario designed to frustrate the fighters – I wonder how CR of the encounters compare to the Fighter’s level.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So what’s the redesign? The sorcerer shift didn’t do the trick, apparently. ToH can still be designed to favour spellcasters over fighters (any scenario can be designed to favour some abilities over others, so that’s neither here nor there – a good array of challenges is the answer there).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t find it obscure, or overly difficult. What is the penalty for a low STR for a non-melee combatant if we ignore encumbrance? To me, that 7 STR should be just as defining as a 19 INT – characters are made interesting by both their strengths and their weaknesses.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The Haversack is an item designed to do the same. The disk reminds me more of a mule (or mule train), but we’d hate to use something mundane rather than a spell, right? As someone else noted, you want to carry some gear.</p><p></p><p>I don’t think encumbrance balances spellcasting so much as it provides some penalty for dumping STR. I like the concept that every stat has at least SOME meaning to all characters.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6188421, member: 6681948"] So the solution to the Wizard is the removal of the Wizard. Fair enough, I suppose. Where do all those magic items come from under this model, as these casters strike me as unlikely to possess a wide array of prerequisite spells? Maybe we return magic items to rarities, but I do rather like having a functional item crafting system (even if it becomes much more costly and complex, to enforce a greater rarity of magic items). I’m definitely onside for better skill packages for the non-magical classes. It may be counterintuitive to give, say, fighters more base skill points than wizards, but fighters don’t devote a significant portion of their time to training and research in magic, leaving less time to pursue other skills (easy fluff). While I can’t comment on the individual systems, I agree that focusing attention on giving non-spellcasters abilities outside of combat is very much mandated. Whether that’s on a metagame level (hero point type mechanics, for example) or more specific abilities linked more directly to the character is very much a matter of taste, but either seems a reasonable approach. I think the metagame approach is foreign to 3.5 and prior editions (again, I can’t speak as confidently to 4e/5e), so I’d lean to specific out of combat abilities (ideally a roster of choices, rather than a fixed level by level progression) for non-casters. I’d also lean strongly to WAY more spells that are on neither the Wizard nor Cleric list, but restricted to specific other classes, domains, archetypes, etc. One of the biggest advantage the Wizard and Cleric share is expansion materials. This book or that adds a new base class, with its own spell list – drawn largely from existing spells, with some new spells in that book available to these new classes, but typically also to the base classes. When another book is published, the new spells are generally usable by the new classes that book creates, perhaps another class or two it focuses on – and wizards and clerics again. While we’re at it, any spell not intended to be combat-useful (I see you over there, Teleport!) gets a 10 minute+ casting time and/or other modifications making it less combat useful (maybe Teleport makes an audible noise and a bright flash on arrival, and those Teleported are Dazed for a minute, no saves or resistances). Not quite “ritual”, but an easy way to avoid abuses while leaving its main purpose (such as long distance travel) intact. He can’t ambush a Lizard Man and question it with Intimidation? A couple of problems. First is the language barrier, but isn’t that why so many people speak Common. The second is that stealth - whether by magic or mundane means – tends not to be a group activity, so the party is split. A bigger problem – we’ve kind of gotten used to magic solving everything. So let’s give some special abilities to our “stuff of legend” fighters and rogues to rival the special abilities available to their spellcasting counterparts. Does Polymorph still alter all your gear (Large size War Troll)? I hope so! Arrow demons are outsiders off the Polymorph list (no Outsiders). Still lots of good optons – but better when applied to teammates than to self. Yet that’s not what Pathfinder beefed up. I think there are two group dynamics here. One is “if the team can do it, that’s good enough”, so Teleport is seen as a facilitator for the team, not glory for the Wizard. The other, however, sees it more individually, and the Fighter player wants his turn to help the whole team out. Noncombat abilities for the non-spellcasters would go a long way to helping out the second dynamic and does no harm t the first. The war troll and the dragon both have 10’ reach, I think. Again, should be a good battle, but will be a team battle. During which time that Dragon may be herding his lizardmen followers to ambush the spell-expired, encumbered heroes/hobos as they emerge from his lair. Dragons like the Hover feat. Solid Fog slows it (for its 20’ radius, 20’ high), while the Wall is a 10’ square per level. These will certainly inconvenience the dragon, but I don’t envision it plummeting from the sky. I remain with the question whether Shivering Touch is more the problem than spellcasting in general. Let's ad third level spells that target each other characteristic in the same manner and see how that works out. Better yet, how about a Fighter or Rogue feat that allows them to Confuse, reducing a mental stat of any one target by 3d6 with virtually no ability of the target to avoid the effect. That seems similar to Shivering Touch as suggested to be applied in these scenarios. Let's give it to them at 5th level, when wizards get 3rd level spells. It was the charge levied against spellcasters. Interesting to see your example of sorcerers when the suggested solution above is to eliminate wizards in favour of sorcerers. Sounds like a scenario designed to frustrate the fighters – I wonder how CR of the encounters compare to the Fighter’s level. So what’s the redesign? The sorcerer shift didn’t do the trick, apparently. ToH can still be designed to favour spellcasters over fighters (any scenario can be designed to favour some abilities over others, so that’s neither here nor there – a good array of challenges is the answer there). I don’t find it obscure, or overly difficult. What is the penalty for a low STR for a non-melee combatant if we ignore encumbrance? To me, that 7 STR should be just as defining as a 19 INT – characters are made interesting by both their strengths and their weaknesses. The Haversack is an item designed to do the same. The disk reminds me more of a mule (or mule train), but we’d hate to use something mundane rather than a spell, right? As someone else noted, you want to carry some gear. I don’t think encumbrance balances spellcasting so much as it provides some penalty for dumping STR. I like the concept that every stat has at least SOME meaning to all characters. Agreed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fighters vs. Spellcasters (a case for fighters.)
Top