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

[Crimson Longinus]

Generally I like that feel, but in practice it virtually removes the threat of death from combat from a shockingly early level.

Sure. I would be fine with Revivify being the only way to bring back death people and it being a higher level spell.

But why Revify works for me whereas the other spells don't, is the short time window. So once that is up, we know that the person is gone gone, and the characters can react to it naturally and drama can ensue. The existence of resurrection spells of long use windows makes death just weird. It won't feel like death, because you know it is at least in theory reversible. So dead characters are not really dead, they're just incapacitated for now. And I really do not like that narratively and dramatically.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Generally I like that feel, but in practice it virtually removes the threat of death from combat from a shockingly early level.

If you don't like it, why not simply make diamonds scarce and difficult to acquire? If the party has managed to scrounge together one casting of raise dead (or two of revivify) and don't know when they're going to get their hands on more diamonds, then they have some safety net. However, the threat of death is tangible (more than one or two deaths will result in permadeath).

It makes sense in the campaign world (if diamonds are used as spell components to revive the dead, then not only are they in demand, but they are regularly destroyed). Plus, no rule changes are necessary.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I know that you dislike having stakes or consequences

You're really going to have to stop misrepresenting my position.

I like varied stakes and interesting consequences, not... what we've been given and told to like.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure. I would be fine with Revivify being the only way to bring back death people and it being a higher level spell.

But why Revify works for me whereas the other spells don't, is the short time window. So once that is gone, we know that the person is gone gone, and the characters can react to it naturally and drama can ensue. The existence of resurrection spells of long use windows makes death just weird. It won't feel like death, because you know it is at least in theory reversible. So dead characters are not really dead, they're just incapacitated for now. And I really do not like that narratively and dramatically.

I get that. I want any kind of resurrection to be extraordinarily difficult, so that death feels like a consequence even if it is reversed. The problem with Revivify is that most people die in combat, so the opportunity to use Revivify is almost always available. The small time window rarely matters.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You're really going to have to stop misrepresenting my position.

I like varied stakes and interesting consequences, not... what we've been given and told to like.

What consequences do you prefer, and do you think that WotC is likely to give them to you?

 

[Minigiant]

The Fighter should be the best at dealing damage-per-round. But other classes are swapping out damage to contribute to combat in other ways.

D&D is primarily a combat game. Because all classes need to contribute to the combat pillar equally, to make one class superior to all other options, thus the only viable option for combat, feels like a nonstarter.

Personally I thing DPR being too much the focus of combat is part of the problem.

There are more aspects of combat than DR and that narrow-mindednesd seems like par of the issue. The fighter should have the option to hit the tops of speed, AC+HP, or wounding

 

[Yaarel]

Personally I thing DPR being too much the focus of combat is part of the problem.

There are more aspects of combat than DR and that narrow-mindednesd seems like par of the issue. The fighter should have the option to hit the tops of speed, AC+HP, or wounding

I agree there is more to combat than damage-per-round, but it is vital, and I feel the Fighter should be the best at it.

At the same time, the Fighter needs some versatility in combat, and subclasses to branch into other aspects of combat as well.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

You're really going to have to stop misrepresenting my position.

I like varied stakes and interesting consequences, not... what we've been given and told to like.

I was snarkier than was needed, but I feel that a problem with your posts if that you tend to throw around a lot of oneliners about how everything in 5e is terrible, and rarely give nuanced explanation of what you would actually like to see and how it would work. So it is not really a misrepresentation, it is the impression your posts give.

 

[Minigiant]

I agree there is more to combat than damage-per-round, but it is vital, and I feel the Fighter should be the best at it.

At the same time, the Fighter needs some versatility in combat, and subclasses to branch into other aspects of combat as well.

I feel the Fighter shouldn't have the highest damage per round. That could go to special barbarian, ranger, and rogue builds.

Fighters to me should have the highest combination of lethality, survivability, and mobility. What's scare about the fighter is not the damage but that you can't stop the damage. A barbarian can be tricked, a paladin can be knocked out of ranger, a rogue is easily to kill, and a ranger can be pushed into an unfavored scope.

But a fighter DPR should be hard to stop. They are tough, work at multiple ranges, have options, and their attacks always work.

On thing I disliked about the D&D fighter is it's low versatility.

 

[Yaarel]

Designwise, the Fighter can split into two separate classes:
• Knight (heavy infantry) - with heavy armor, tanking, and social savvy.
• Skirmisher (light infantry) - with light or no armor, finesse, and exploration mobility.

These then can each have various archetypes. The Paladin and Eldritch Knight, Samurai and Cavalier, and Warlord, can be Knights. The Ranger and Monk, Swashbuckler and Barbarian, can be Skirmishers.

The Rogue (special ops) remains something different, and might take on the sniper (artillery) as well.