D&D 5E How to "fix" (or at least help) the fighter/wizard dynamic. (+)

[S'mon]

I fixed the issue to my satisfaction about 5 years ago when I went over to 7 day long rests, keeping 1 hour short rests (to a maximum of 3/day). While I think a well played Wiz-17 remains more powerful than a Champion Fighter-17, both PCs can contribute a lot and have fun. The spellcaster PCs certainly don't see the warrior and Rogue/Monk PCs as superfluous.

Edit: I typically nerf or remove a few of the most badly designed or genre-inappropriate 5e spells, notably Simulacrum (ugh) and Animate Objects, and no summoning Pixies for umpteen Polymorphs; but no system-wide caster nerfs. I don't mess with the class descriptions, only specific spells.

 

[RainOnTheSun]

• Champion: So what does the new champion do now that all his features live in the base fighter? Not entirely sure. My temptation is to give him a mix of samurai and cavalier and lose those two subs entirely, but if we plan on keeping them, the new champion has to fall into the stereotypical "I hit it with my sword" role.

Thoughts are welcome. It doesn't fix the fighter/wizard imbalance, but it should make fighters more interesting and gives them a bit more power.

I'd think that the Champion subclass should be what you pick when you want to play someone who does amazing physical things without the roleplay assumptions of a barbarian or a monk. Increased lifting capacity, jumping distance, bonuses to athletics, moving at full speed in heavy armor.

 

[Lanefan]

Those are some hefty nerfs. One of the cool things about wall of stone is that you can use it to problem-solve by fixing bridges and stuff. And your walls are only a fourth of the size of the official ones at level 10 (plus 5e very rarely if ever makes an aspect of a spell dependent on caster level).

I'm not running 5e, and a huge number of spells in my game scale with level in one way or another. I did cut down the area per level, yes.

Wall of Force or Wall of Ice can be used to make temporary bridges, with possible drawbacks (both are slippery; ice melts and has a weight limit). Walls of Iron or Stone cannot.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Disagree.

If the average is 6 then bringing Wizard down to 6 and improving Fighter up to 6 is power-steady - neither creep nor decline.

I measure power level by the overall average, as representative of the overall power of a party containing a reasonable spread of classes; and even though the Wizards' power stays the same, increasing Fighters' power also increases the power of the party as a whole and thus forces the DM to have to adjust to deal with that increase. That's power creep, in my view anyway.

Even then, it's only (limited) power creep if the fighter buffs push them beyond the other existing front-line options. But we have the paladin.

Using your numbers, let's imagine the wizard is an 8, paladin is a 6, and fighter is a 4. If we buff the fighter, bringing them up to 6, they're just as good as the paladin. And because any party could just as easily run a paladin as a fighter for their front-line, there's no power creep. Sure, if we buff the fighter so much that we make them better than paladins, that would be power creep, but I also think you'd have to go nuts to do that since paladins are amazing.

One thing to keep in mind regarding strongholds etc. is that for most campaigns they take, relative to the time spanned by adventuring activities, a stupendous amount of time to construct. I'm finding this as a player; my namesake character is looking to build one and is staring down a potentially 10-to-20 year construction period (and is looking hard for options to speed this up!).

Another character in an older version of the same campaign started building one; there was a ten-year time jump into the current campaign and he still hasn't finished the place, though it's at least liveable-innable and functional. He did, however, have the small advantage of coming into a title of nobility, meaning he had access to loads of local labour to help with construction.

Thus, while adding strongholds to Fighters as a calss feature sounds great in theory, and I'm all for it, it won't work in practice unless said strongholds are either already in place or can magically appear in a hurry.

This is exactly what I was talking about regarding the hassles of classic domain management.

Simple solution: if it's a class feature, don't require a keep.

Have the followers be akin to well-traveled mercenaries who are able to look after themselves. Then, if you get/build a keep, it's gravy (rather than a necessity).

Regarding your own character's issues with building a keep, maybe see if you can acquire/borrow a Lyre of Building? Not sure if it's been updated for 5e, but iirc, I'm pretty sure that item was designed with the intent of making building a keep within a reasonable timeframe feasible.

 

[HammerMan]

Thanks! Hopefully @HammerMan will chime in.

Please review the 2nd Draft I just posted when you have time and let me know what you think. Thanks!

I like your ideas, but I didn't post the other day when I saw this thread cause I suck at homebrew. I'm not even good at picking out what will/ does/doesn't work. I spent almost 2 years of 3e with the martial classes being bumbed thinking it was something wrong with my stories. I had the problems, but I never had a good fix, and when I try to fix or rewrite I ALWAYs end up with other hidden problems.

Havingg said that I will read through this morning and see if I can give any ideas.

 

[HammerMan]

One thing to keep in mind regarding strongholds etc. is that for most campaigns they take, relative to the time spanned by adventuring activities, a stupendous amount of time to construct. I'm finding this as a player; my namesake character is looking to build one and is staring down a potentially 10-to-20 year construction period (and is looking hard for options to speed this up!).

in 2e we often just 'didn't use' building strongholds... the funny part is that when fighters got it even if they WANTED to take the down time often other players (espcially wizards and clerics) didn't want to. So it would have pretty much taken them out of play. We even had a game (I was a half elf M/T) where the straight wizard built a tower in like 2 days, set some wards on the 3rd and then wanted to go back to adventureing...our druid (no cleric in that game) bearly had enough time to challange to go up a level and the fighter could not even get plans drawn up in that amount of time...

come 3e taking leadership was common. Especially for the cohort.

 

[HammerMan]

I fixed the issue to my satisfaction about 5 years ago when I went over to 7 day long rests, keeping 1 hour short rests (to a maximum of 3/day). While I think a well played Wiz-17 remains more powerful than a Champion Fighter-17, both PCs can contribute a lot and have fun. The spellcaster PCs certainly don't see the warrior and Rogue/Monk PCs as superfluous.

Edit: I typically nerf or remove a few of the most badly designed or genre-inappropriate 5e spells, notably Simulacrum (ugh) and Animate Objects, and no summoning Pixies for umpteen Polymorphs; but no system-wide caster nerfs. I don't mess with the class descriptions, only specific spells.

that sounds like a good fix. SOme of the most fun games I have played in have messed with the "how long is a rest" rule.

7day long rest (with food/water and relative safety) pretty much being 'down time' is a great way to stretchy in game time as well. One of the funny things about running combat heavy dungeons(any eediton useing xp) is when you have 1st level PCs enter a dungeon and 2nd level leave, next week they enter a dungeon at 2nd, take 2 days in the mix and come out 4th level, a few days of travel later they enter a dungeon and come out 5th. a day or two later they hit that orc encampment and make it to 6th. you take a week long boat trip (fight 2 prirate enccounters) then enter the island dungeon and come out 2 days later 6th level and a boat ride back where you talk to the king and go to the dungeon ofXXX and spend 2 days leveling to 7th. on your way back you take a side trek into another plane and spend 3 days (local time) 3 hours prime material time and end up 8th level. You take a full month to BS down time and then head off to fight the necromancer at necropolis and spend almost a week fighting off and on... and your 10th level when you face him but you find out that the lich he works for is worse... you spend a month researching and have 3 encoutners during this 'down time' as the lich is sending undead after you... so you plane shift to a mystic outworld liabrary and end up over the course of a week doing 3 side quests that end up leveling you to 11... then back to the king explain what is going on, spend 3 days finding out that the advisor is evil kill him, find an item given by the lich, and head off toward the lich's phylactory (no need for travel time at 11th level you can jus t'get there') and you fight through a dungeon and get and smash the phylactory welcome to 12th level... lich is now scared and sends something big (like a death knight) and over the course of a day or two you are 13th... then you go to the lich's hide out and fight through to get to him, he planeshits to his own demi plane before you get to him but you can follow... welcome to 14thlevel the end game and a demi plane week long adventure killing the lich and comeing home...

20 weeks 1st-14th level and that is about 5 months... what in September you had problems with goblins and by Valentines day you are plane hopping and killing liches...

now that may seem contrived but in the last (ugh) 32ish years I have seen less then a year of in game time for 1st-20th

 

[HammerMan]

Even then, it's only (limited) power creep if the fighter buffs push them beyond the other existing front-line options. But we have the paladin.

Using your numbers, let's imagine the wizard is an 8, paladin is a 6, and fighter is a 4. If we buff the fighter, bringing them up to 6, they're just as good as the paladin. And because any party could just as easily run a paladin as a fighter for their front-line, there's no power creep. Sure, if we buff the fighter so much that we make them better than paladins, that would be power creep, but I also think you'd have to go nuts to do that since paladins are amazing.

in a perfect world there would be 8's in front line combat, 8's in stradagy control, 8's in party buffing and 8's in explore/social classes. there may ALSO be 7's and a 9 or two... but they would all be close and a hard choice.

if you have a 4 and a 6 as your options for front line (I would throw in a 5 with ranger) then buffing the 6's to 8's and the 4's to 7's seems best... but if you by mistake over do one and make it a 9 it wont be too bad.

 

[Fanaelialae]

in a perfect world there would be 8's in front line combat, 8's in stradagy control, 8's in party buffing and 8's in explore/social classes. there may ALSO be 7's and a 9 or two... but they would all be close and a hard choice.

if you have a 4 and a 6 as your options for front line (I would throw in a 5 with ranger) then buffing the 6's to 8's and the 4's to 7's seems best... but if you by mistake over do one and make it a 9 it wont be too bad.

I'm not talking about buffing any 6s to 8s. I'm talking about buffing a 4 to a 6 (well below the ceiling of 8). I don't think it's likely that a reasonable person with a modicum of common sense is going to overshoot and make the fighter stronger than the wizard. I'm not saying that it can't conceivably be done, but rather that the design would have to be so over-the-top that it would be obvious to practically anyone that it was overpowered. It isn't something that I can see happening by accident.

 

[DND_Reborn]

So, while I am all for adding some martial maneuvers to fighters, I decided to take a step back. Here is a the Fighter (with some martial maneuvers):

Now, for the exploration/social pillar. Giving some feature at 6th level would help with that, but personally I don't want to give too much since that would take away from other classes more designed than to excel at those pillars. (Again, IMO part of the issue is that other classes are really too good at combat for Fighters to be "the best".)

The bonus ASI/feat normally at level 6 could be used for a feat that would help in other pillars:

Exploration:

• Athlete (easier jumps, better climb speed)
• Dungeon Delver (traps & secret doors)
• Healer (useful if injured during exploration)
• Keen Mind (always know north, recall landmarks)
• Lucky
• Magic Initiate (jump, spider climb, etc.)
• Mobile (+10 speed, Dash ignore difficult terrain)
• Observant (bonus passive scores)
• Resilient (DEX saves since Fighters have STR/CON)
• Ritual Caster (all sorts of spells!)
• Skilled (physical skills, but also Nature, etc.)

Social:

• Actor (infiltration)
• Keen Mind (recall information on NPCs)
• Linguist (languages for interaction, making ciphers)
• Lucky
• Magic Initiate (charm person, etc.)
• Observant (bonus passive scores, would be better if it helped Insight as well)
• Resilient (WIS saves to resist attempts by others to charm or control)
• Ritual Caster (again, all sorts of spells!)
• Skilled (social skills and Perception/Insight)

True, a couple of these involve "magic", but many don't and can certainly help make a fighter more effective in those pillars. But IME we see Fighters mostly concentrate on combat-oriented feats or using the ASIs. This then to me is a player's choice, but they might feel like there is no choice if they want to keep up with combat. So, maybe adding the maneuvers will help allow players to feel free to take these other feats so they can excel in exploration/social.

What about 13th, 14th, and 17th levels?

This is where Fighters can get the features to allow them moments to rival the powers of Wizards. It also fits nicely into the 3rd and 4th tier structure for the people who felt the fixes work better by putting it into the tier structure.

13th Level
This level gives us an extra use of Indomitable. Personally, I think that is pretty weak, and like the idea others have said about making it a "20" instead of a reroll. Maybe at 9th level you get a reroll, but at 13th level it becomes a 20 instead?

However, since this is when casters get 7th level spells, I would rather see a more significant feature here.

14th Level
We have yet another ASI or feat choice. IMO it is a bit late in the game for helping the exploration or social pillars again, but the feats above certainly could be taken for those purposes. Options could also be the second use of Action Surge, or a "Heroic' Surge like I previously posted.

17th Level
Getting another Action Surge use is pretty powerful, but IMO it falls short of what casters are getting with 9th level spells.

However, other classes suffer in power compared to full casters in these tiers, not just Fighters. This is where I also think reducing maximum spell levels to 6th or 7th for up to level 20, and keeping 8th and 9th levels for 21+ and epic play is better and levels the field more between classes.