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

[Fanaelialae]

If Wizards are the ones with the shenanigans that break the game, shouldn't the focus be on nerfs? Rather than buffing other classes so that too are unbalanced? It would seem simple to nerf on class than to buff other(s) and also have to rebalance encounters, etc.

IMO, high level play is all about shenanigans that "break the game". That's a big part of the fun of high level play. (And I say this as a DM who has run multiple high level campaigns.)

 

[S'mon]

If Wizards are the ones with the shenanigans that break the game

That was more a 3e thing IME. Even without nerfing any spells, I don't think they break the game in 5e.

 

[Staffan]

IMO a fighter with some charisma and big strength can outskill a rogue in intimidate!
I just throw the idea, there is a lot of work to do with it.

I don't mind a fighter being better than a rogue in some skills, particularly if they're just "regular" skills for the rogue and not expertise skills. The problem is when the fighter gets more skills than the rogue, which is what would happen if you combine "free proficiencies for fighting styles" with "more fighting styles".

 

[Staffan]

If Wizards are the ones with the shenanigans that break the game, shouldn't the focus be on nerfs? Rather than buffing other classes so that too are unbalanced? It would seem simple to nerf on class than to buff other(s) and also have to rebalance encounters, etc.

Wizards are just the ones with the access to the widest range of shenanigans. All primary casters have them to some degree.

 

[Krachek]

I don't mind a fighter being better than a rogue in some skills, particularly if they're just "regular" skills for the rogue and not expertise skills. The problem is when the fighter gets more skills than the rogue, which is what would happen if you combine "free proficiencies for fighting styles" with "more fighting styles".

the bonus skill can be allowed later in the progression as well as other bonus or features. there is already other classes archetype that receive extra skill during their progression.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If Wizards are the ones with the shenanigans that break the game, shouldn't the focus be on nerfs? Rather than buffing other classes so that too are unbalanced? It would seem simple to nerf on class than to buff other(s) and also have to rebalance encounters, etc.

This has been brought up and (at least for me) has already been done as well. Here is the new full-caster spell progression. Note, full casters don't even get a 1st level spell until 3rd level.

We also have revised progressions for half-casters and sublcasses.

 

[Pauln6]

Is there any merit in letting fighters choose one battlemaster manoeuvre at level 2, which they can then use at will but without adding superiority dice? So skill check manoeuvres would be off limits since, without superiority dice, they are just normal skill checks but others might just give the fighters a few at will tricks.

I think Riposte would need a nerf so that it only does superiority die damage + Str/Dex so that if using at will, it would inflict only Str or Dex damage (still very useful for a swashbuckler fighter-rogue). I think lunging attack is probably the only other problem since giving at will 5ft extension on attacks is a bit much.

Maybe Superior Technique lets you choose a second at will manoeuvre in addition you your 1d6 die to add to one of your rolls.

One other possibility is to ask battlemasters to pick one of the fighting styles in Tashas and allow them to use any manoeuvres off that list at will without adding superiority dice and then any they choose outside that list would require superiority dice like now.

 

[Yaarel]

This has been brought up and (at least for me) has already been done as well. Here is the new full-caster spell progression. Note, full casters don't even get a 1st level spell until 3rd level.

View attachment 151478

We also have revised progressions for half-casters and sublcasses.

I love casters. The above schedule looks unacceptable.



A more constructive approach would be to design a low-magic setting, that lacked fullcaster classes.

Then I can pick other settings where players can enjoy caster classes.

 

[Yaarel]

[doublepost]

 

[DND_Reborn]

I love casters. The above schedule looks unacceptable.

LOL I love them too, probably more

And I am perfectly happy with it because it does represent a low-magic setting.