D&D 5E Martial Characters vs Real World Athletes

Actually, the fact that the list of names is not supported by the rules or game-play /is the point/. A D&D fighter cannot come close to accomplishing the things attributed to the characters of myth and legend that are held up as examples of fighters. Conversely, a spellcaster can often do the full range of things displayed by the figures of myth and legend held up as examples of them - all those examples, and more. A single of fairly high level, for instance, can duplicate not only most of the things attributed to Merlin (and, really, there aren't that many), but those attributed to Circe, Medea, and Prospero for good measure. At only 5th level, he can handle most of the actual magics displayed by Gandalf, as well, though he's not mythic, but literary.

That's really the crux of the disconnect.

The /excuse/ is 'realism,' and it's a really, really, bad excuse.
...
Actually, until we can get over the hurdle of definitions of 'magical,' supernatural, mundane, and so forth, we can't get anywhere, because the 'realism' excuse will keep getting used to cripple 'mundane' characters.

First of all, no hero in a fantasy setting is really /mundane/, they may have mundane origins, but they're out there in a fantastic world, doing extraordinary things. Secondly, something that's not precisely reaal-world 'realistic' isn't necessarily supernatural. Take your example of shattering a castle wall. People aren't strong enough to shatter castle walls. But, physical force applied to a castle wall can shatter it, and people can exert physical force, it's just a matter of degree. In a fantasy world, freed from the dull, mundane limitations of RL physics, nothing stops an increadibly strong hero (or giant or whatever) from breaking through a castle wall by main strength. It's not supernatural, because castle walls are just objects and objects can be broken by main strength, it's just an extreme example of main strength. What would be supernatural would be shattering the same wall with a spoken word, or by tracing runes on it.

Fighters don't have to be /mundane/ to avoid being supernatural. The 'realism' argument is bunk. If you want realism, avoid the fantasy genre.

It's not that simple. It's not, one side of the debate wants to play one sort of character and the other side another. It's some folks want to play non-caster characters who are equal to the sources of inspiration in genre, and the other is determined to stop them (even as casters surpass their sources of genre inspiration).

That's a double-standard, and one that has impacted the quality of D&D, as a game, and the civility of it's fanbase, throughout it's history.

I can only speak for myself here, but I personally consider "mythic hero" to be an archetype that can play just fine alongside "badass normal fighter." Hey, look over there in the homebrew forum, I wrote up a mythic hero subclass for fighter! It's even roughly balanced with the Eldritch Knight, and yet it can smash walls and leap over parapets!

Thing is, sometimes I don't want to play a character who can smash through everything. Sometimes I want to be the swashbuckler whose expert strikes find the weak spots in the dragon's armor. That's not part of some devious plot on my part to keep the martial characters sucky; I actually want to stay relevant and effective without becoming supernatural.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

While, in D&D, casting is both easy & very often free (plenty of V,S spells out there), not to mention /very/ dependable.

True, but in genre the price to be paid for magic is usually paid off-screen and is implicitly why the wizards are mad old men with the social skills of a crocodile with a toothache. As I said in another post, if I were setting up a S&S campaign the only PC caster class would be the Warlock.

Why is that a fact? Why couldn't a fighter class have enough meaningful choices to emulate any one of those?

He could, perhaps, although if you had a "Mythic Hero" subclass for the Fighter who was actually that powerful the 'balance is everything' brigade would be all over it like an avalanche. I have to admit I don't understand your fixation with the fighter, though. He isn't the only martial class, nor the best suited to portray the likes of Hercules and Chu Chualainin who were both noted berserkers.

Consider a 20th level Barbarian (Totem) who chose Bear, Bear and Eagle. He is stronger and tougher than any other man, in fact he is stronger than a Polar bear. He can hold his breath for over 7 minutes. (Not as long as Beowulf but longer than the pre-2001 world record. And he can fight the whole time.) He can carry a quarter ton of I-beams around all day without getting tired. He can jump 80' straight up. He could lift 1480 lbs and jump straight up with it 10' high. (Refluffing the eagle flight as jumping.) Naked he is harder to hurt than a man in full plate with a shield. He has more hitpoints than an Adult Red Dragon (and 3 points better AC), takes half damage from everything that doesn't poke him directly in the brain, and even if you do manage to do 530 points of non-psychic damage to him he only has to make a DC 10 save (with +12 to the check) to ignore it and keep right on fighting.

Is he Hercules? No, not quite. But he would not be ashamed to fight by his side.
 

Putting realism and versimilitude to the side for a moment, I'd like to talk about what the actual in-game dynamic that I'm GMing. Let us say that I don't want to chew through 6-8 combat encounters per day because the central focus of playing being the tension of resource ablation is not particularly interesting to me. Let us say that I want that central focus to be themed quests that the players are interested in. So that is going to include chases, parlays, espionage and other recon, perilous journeys/wilderness exploration, etc. So let us say that play is modeled upon 5+ conflicts per day. If I'm going to be in the vicinity of 5 + conflicts, 2+ need (maybe 33 - 40ish %) to be noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play. So, I'm running this game for a Fighter player and a Wizard player. Quests and the relevant thematic material and genre tropes that they each want the game to be premised upon have been transparently conveyed.

Now this is just Basic, so I'm not including outrageous spells like Animate Dead, Clone, Contagion, (Turn yourself into a friggin adult red dragon) Polymorph Self (or whatever it is in the PHB), and WIsh. Further, I'm not going to include the Wizard's own abilities to interface with the task resolution system via the large number of Intelligence and Wisdom based skills. Let us just say that the 10 nonphysical skills of which Wizards will be adept at or functional at is at least the equivalent of the Fighter's 4-5 physical skills (possibly more if they invest heavily in Wisdom and take Perception and Survival).

As we work through the tiers of play, here are the discrete packets of non-negotiable fiat power that the Wizard will have available for noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play.


Wizard:

* Fool with an illusion
* Please a crowd with actual magic or clean up a mess with the most powerful magic from Fantasia (only actually do it!)
* Manipulate stuff at range with a telekinetic hand.
* Become someone else.
* Make friends with folks who don't care to be your friend.
* Speak to folks you couldn't speak with otherwise.

then

* Poof, you're gone as you have one of the most powerful items from LotR at your fingertips.
* Locked door? What locked door?
* Gravity is meaningless.
* Make folks do stuff for you.




Tier 2:

* No. I mean gravity is MEANINGLESS.
* That giant, that impassable wall, etc is truly there.

then

* Yeah, I'm pretty much someplace else.
* How about Frodo's cloak on steroids?

then

* Remember that whole free will thing that you had? Yeah, you don't have it. Its mine.
* Remember those impassable walls that a thousand armies have fallen against? They mean nothing to me. That sucks? Yeah, well I can erect my own so its all good.
* Yeah, I can haunt the dreams or render sleepless anyone..in the world. No worries.

then

* Well, thieves guild master, the thing is, I know you like your squad of goons. I get it. They're great. Its just that, well, I like them better. So I'm taking them, thank you.
* I see everything. Everything in this world and everything in that world that is layered on top of it.
* Me and all of my homies are somewhere else. Far away. Right now. Fun!





Tier 3

* Alright, who wants to see into the future today!? <Memememememeeee> Bobby, Timmy? No, its Jane's turn today!
* Check this out. My watch is pretty cool. When I press the button at the top, it stops the hands of the clock from ticking. And by the clock I mean time. No real time. Yeah, I know its pretty awesome.




Meanwhile, our Fighter friend will be working solely in the afformentioned, bounded accuracy, task resolution system (of which the prospects of failure on medium tasks - eg anything of consequence - are not low). Throughout the tiers of play he will be performing in noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play in the following ways:

* Watch me maybe > probably climb this (as long is it isn't the razorvine covered sort in hell) wall.
* Watch me maybe > probably run this thief/bad guy down (as long as he can't fly or disappear).
* Watch me maybe > probably jump this (smallish > average > above average) pit.
* Watch me swim this moat or maybe > probably swim this rushing river.
* Watch me throw over this table and maybe > probably break this mundane object with my bear hands. Because I'm tough!
* Oh I can hang onto a wagon! Look out!
* I can be your pack mule because Encumbrance is serious business, ok?
* Watch me maybe > probably drink this guy under the table.
* I'll keep watch. You guys sleep. I'm good...maybe > probably. You're good too (assuming I'm Perception trained...and I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier).
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained + I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) get us some food in the wilderness.
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained +I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) spot some trouble before it spots us.
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained + I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) successfully track creatures.




As we all know, the Wizard's payload will progressively become more and more potent. As is the way of the Quadratic Wizard, with the advancement of tiers and his progression of power, he will just flat-out be playing a different game. He will anchor (or outright solely propel) the resolution of noncombat conflicts. His proliferation of means and his specified, non-negotiable tools will utterly outmode the mundane conflicts that the Fighter has any ability to engage with. Further, the Fighter will only ever have the means to engage with those outmoded-by-way-of-Wizard conflicts as his gameplay never, ever changes. What's more, the proportion of nonviolent conflicts:violent conflicts (the stuff the Fighter is supposed to be the master of) will skew toward the former as the Wizard attains more robust means to circumvent combat entirely (if not solely propelling, then anchoring the effort to do so).

I've GMed tons and tons of mid level, high level, and epic level D&D in every edition. Outside of 4e, this paradigm (less physical conflicts because Wizard and outmoded mundane conflicts that the Fighter might actually be able to engage in because Wizard) was utterly inescapable, even if every Fighter had a sword that could divine and a magic carpet/flying boots (again, made relevant by way of magic). And "rulings" don't make that go away. If anything, every player who has ever come to my table from past games has always had a litany of horror stories from GM rulings underpinned by the GM's notions of "realism" (which inevitably hurts only mundane characters).

Nerf the living hell out of spellcasters (mechanically) such that mundane conflicts aren't utterly outmoded or give the Fighters stuff that undoes their noncombat obseletion as the game progresses. That or live with the inevitable fallout on gameplay. That is it. Period. End of issue.
 

Putting realism and versimilitude to the side for a moment, I'd like to talk about what the actual in-game dynamic that I'm GMing. Let us say that I don't want to chew through 6-8 combat encounters per day because the central focus of playing being the tension of resource ablation is not particularly interesting to me. Let us say that I want that central focus to be themed quests that the players are interested in. So that is going to include chases, parlays, espionage and other recon, perilous journeys/wilderness exploration, etc. So let us say that play is modeled upon 5+ conflicts per day. If I'm going to be in the vicinity of 5 + conflicts, 2+ need (maybe 33 - 40ish %) to be noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play. So, I'm running this game for a Fighter player and a Wizard player. Quests and the relevant thematic material and genre tropes that they each want the game to be premised upon have been transparently conveyed.

Now this is just Basic, so I'm not including outrageous spells like Animate Dead, Clone, Contagion, (Turn yourself into a friggin adult red dragon) Polymorph Self (or whatever it is in the PHB), and WIsh. Further, I'm not going to include the Wizard's own abilities to interface with the task resolution system via the large number of Intelligence and Wisdom based skills. Let us just say that the 10 nonphysical skills of which Wizards will be adept at or functional at is at least the equivalent of the Fighter's 4-5 physical skills (possibly more if they invest heavily in Wisdom and take Perception and Survival).

As we work through the tiers of play, here are the discrete packets of non-negotiable fiat power that the Wizard will have available for noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play.


Wizard:

* Fool with an illusion
* Please a crowd with actual magic or clean up a mess with the most powerful magic from Fantasia (only actually do it!)
* Manipulate stuff at range with a telekinetic hand.
* Become someone else.
* Make friends with folks who don't care to be your friend.
* Speak to folks you couldn't speak with otherwise.

then

* Poof, you're gone as you have one of the most powerful items from LotR at your fingertips.
* Locked door? What locked door?
* Gravity is meaningless.
* Make folks do stuff for you.




Tier 2:

* No. I mean gravity is MEANINGLESS.
* That giant, that impassable wall, etc is truly there.

then

* Yeah, I'm pretty much someplace else.
* How about Frodo's cloak on steroids?

then

* Remember that whole free will thing that you had? Yeah, you don't have it. Its mine.
* Remember those impassable walls that a thousand armies have fallen against? They mean nothing to me. That sucks? Yeah, well I can erect my own so its all good.
* Yeah, I can haunt the dreams or render sleepless anyone..in the world. No worries.

then

* Well, thieves guild master, the thing is, I know you like your squad of goons. I get it. They're great. Its just that, well, I like them better. So I'm taking them, thank you.
* I see everything. Everything in this world and everything in that world that is layered on top of it.
* Me and all of my homies are somewhere else. Far away. Right now. Fun!





Tier 3

* Alright, who wants to see into the future today!? <Memememememeeee> Bobby, Timmy? No, its Jane's turn today!
* Check this out. My watch is pretty cool. When I press the button at the top, it stops the hands of the clock from ticking. And by the clock I mean time. No real time. Yeah, I know its pretty awesome.




Meanwhile, our Fighter friend will be working solely in the afformentioned, bounded accuracy, task resolution system (of which the prospects of failure on medium tasks - eg anything of consequence - are not low). Throughout the tiers of play he will be performing in noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play in the following ways:

* Watch me maybe > probably climb this (as long is it isn't the razorvine covered sort in hell) wall.
* Watch me maybe > probably run this thief/bad guy down (as long as he can't fly or disappear).
* Watch me maybe > probably jump this (smallish > average > above average) pit.
* Watch me swim this moat or maybe > probably swim this rushing river.
* Watch me throw over this table and maybe > probably break this mundane object with my bear hands. Because I'm tough!
* Oh I can hang onto a wagon! Look out!
* I can be your pack mule because Encumbrance is serious business, ok?
* Watch me maybe > probably drink this guy under the table.
* I'll keep watch. You guys sleep. I'm good...maybe > probably. You're good too (assuming I'm Perception trained...and I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier).
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained + I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) get us some food in the wilderness.
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained +I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) spot some trouble before it spots us.
* I'll maybe (assuming I'm Perception trained + I don't have a mediocre Wisdom modifier) successfully track creatures.




As we all know, the Wizard's payload will progressively become more and more potent. As is the way of the Quadratic Wizard, with the advancement of tiers and his progression of power, he will just flat-out be playing a different game. He will anchor (or outright solely propel) the resolution of noncombat conflicts. His proliferation of means and his specified, non-negotiable tools will utterly outmode the mundane conflicts that the Fighter has any ability to engage with. Further, the Fighter will only ever have the means to engage with those outmoded-by-way-of-Wizard conflicts as his gameplay never, ever changes. What's more, the proportion of nonviolent conflicts:violent conflicts (the stuff the Fighter is supposed to be the master of) will skew toward the former as the Wizard attains more robust means to circumvent combat entirely (if not solely propelling, then anchoring the effort to do so).

I've GMed tons and tons of mid level, high level, and epic level D&D in every edition. Outside of 4e, this paradigm (less physical conflicts because Wizard and outmoded mundane conflicts that the Fighter might actually be able to engage in because Wizard) was utterly inescapable, even if every Fighter had a sword that could divine and a magic carpet/flying boots (again, made relevant by way of magic). And "rulings" don't make that go away. If anything, every player who has ever come to my table from past games has always had a litany of horror stories from GM rulings underpinned by the GM's notions of "realism" (which inevitably hurts only mundane characters).

Nerf the living hell out of spellcasters (mechanically) such that mundane conflicts aren't utterly outmoded or give the Fighters stuff that undoes their noncombat obseletion as the game progresses. That or live with the inevitable fallout on gameplay. That is it. Period. End of issue.

Not really. For most of that to happen you would have to: Let Wizards rest whenever they want to without consequence, misunderstand spells, ignore drawbacks to spells (Especially in older editions) and ignore spell components. People never seem to mention any of those limitations, so I can only surmise that we're talking about games where the Wizard is resting every other encounter, doesn't need components, there's never any drawbacks, and spells are played wrong.
 

This seems to be another one of those arguments, where no one you're actually arguing with is actually listening to you. On either side.

They already know what you think, and you're just wrong.

You could just say "I disagree" and go on.
 

I've GMed tons and tons of mid level, high level, and epic level D&D in every edition. Outside of 4e, this paradigm (less physical conflicts because Wizard and outmoded mundane conflicts that the Fighter might actually be able to engage in because Wizard) was utterly inescapable, even if every Fighter had a sword that could divine and a magic carpet/flying boots (again, made relevant by way of magic). And "rulings" don't make that go away. If anything, every player who has ever come to my table from past games has always had a litany of horror stories from GM rulings underpinned by the GM's notions of "realism" (which inevitably hurts only mundane characters).

Nerf the living hell out of spellcasters (mechanically) such that mundane conflicts aren't utterly outmoded or give the Fighters stuff that undoes their noncombat obseletion as the game progresses. That or live with the inevitable fallout on gameplay. That is it. Period. End of issue.

You know the tv show Avatar: the Last Airbender had that problem. By the end of the first season the party consisted of three of the most powerful benders (read wizard/elemental monks) in the world, plus Sokka, who was a teenage guy. He openly wondered about his role in the group and more than one episode was devoted to the question. They actually essentially went on a side quest to get him levels in a prestige class at one point. The actual answer was that he was indispensible due to party dynamics, but that is a writers solution and would be table dependent in play.

Now in 5e they have a multi pronged fix to the problem.
The power of casters has been severly reigned in due to fewer high level slots, reduced save DCs and most importantly the concentration rules.
Furthermore there are no mundane classes, only (5) mundane subclasses.

The upshot of this is that the only reason to play a mundane character is because you want to play Sokka, or Samwise Gamgee. You are the voice of normality in a party of demi-gods, and your role in to ground the party in reality and remind them that not everyone is a caster/demigod/agent of fate. If you don't want to play that character, why did you? Conversely if someone does want to be Boromir in the same party as Gandalf, Legolas and Aragorn, why should he be compelled to play Hercules instead?
 
Last edited:

You know the tv show Avatar: the Last Airbender had that problem. By the end of the first season the party consisted of three of the most powerful benders (read wizard/elemental monks) in the world, plus Sokka, who was a teenage guy. He openly wondered about his role in the group and more than one episode was devoted to the question. They actually essentially went on a side quest to get him levels in a prestige class at one point. The actual answer was that he was indispensible due to party dynamics, but that is a writers solution and would be table dependent in play.

Now in 5e they have a multiple pronged fix to the problem.
The power of casters has been severly reigned in due to fewer low level slots, reduced save DCs and most importantly the concentration rules.
Furthermore there are no mundane classes, only (5) mundane subclasses.

The upshot of this is that the only reason to play a mundane character is because you want to play Sokka, or Samwise Gamgee. You are the voice of normality in a party of demi-gods, and your role in to ground the party in reality and remind them that not everyone is a caster/demigod/agent of fate. If you don't want to play that character, why did you? Conversely if someone does want to be Boromir in the same party as Gandalf, Legolas and Aragorn, why should he be compelled to play Hercules instead?

To be clear though, a level 20 fighter in 5e can kill almost anything in the world in under 20 seconds. So Samwise Gamgee he ain't.
 


You know the tv show Avatar: the Last Airbender had that problem. By the end of the first season the party consisted of three of the most powerful benders (read wizard/elemental monks) in the world, plus Sokka, who was a teenage guy. He openly wondered about his role in the group and more than one episode was devoted to the question. They actually essentially went on a side quest to get him levels in a prestige class at one point. The actual answer was that he was indispensible due to party dynamics, but that is a writers solution and would be table dependent in play.

I'm not familiar with the source material you're citing. I think M Night (maybe) did a movie (?), but I didn't see it. Regardless, I think I know what you're intending as your salient point; indispensability due to party dynamics means Fighter's role is always legitimized. However, I didn't find that to be the case when GMing late mid/high level play in 2e (even though I think the 2e C&T Fighter was second to only the 4e Fighter in its awesomeness) and definitely not in 3.x (by far the worst iteration of Fighter - a truly terrible, awful class and nerfed horribly with respect to its predecessors). In 1e UA and 4e, yes, the Fighter was a boon and his relevance endured (especially 4e).

The upshot of this is that the only reason to play a mundane character is because you want to play Sokka, or Samwise Gamgee. You are the voice of normality in a party of demi-gods, and your role in to ground the party in reality and remind them that not everyone is a caster/demigod/agent of fate. If you don't want to play that character, why did you? Conversely if someone does want to be Boromir in the same party as Gandalf, Legolas and Aragorn, why should he be compelled to play Hercules instead?

They can do this. They just need to play a lower level than the rest of the gang. While Boromir was an accomplished warrior, he wasn't even close to being in the league of Gimli or Legolas (all three of them Fighters if I had to put them in D&D nomenclature).

Legolas is an interesting character here. The source of his otherworldly martial ability wasn't supernatural. Further, if Gandalf is only level 6ish, I certainly wouldn't classify him anywhere near Epic tier (level 17 +). However, in the fiction, in all ways his abilities make the 5e Champion look like an absolute chump. You cannot get Legolas out of the task resolution system and bounded accuracy of 5e. Legolas could lay low dozens and dozens of orcs (with bow or blade) and float around the battlefield like a wraith. He could bring all of that big damn hero, crazy athleticism (with pretty much 100 % efficacy) outside of combat for noncombat conflict resolution. The Champion couldn't dream of that kind of stuff. Even at double his level.

With respect to the other means to have the Boromirs and Samwise Gamgees in a group of superior warriors, it doesn't just have be done via the level system (though that is the way it should be done for an agenda that is seeking process-sim). It can be done beautifully with metagame mechanics. To name a few, Fate and MHRP can do it via their infrastructure, BtVS can do it by giving the Scoobies plot points, 4e can do it via princess built Warlords or Companion Characters.

Now in 5e they have a multi pronged fix to the problem.
The power of casters has been severly reigned in due to fewer high level slots, reduced save DCs and most importantly the concentration rules.

I've yet to GM more than the early playtests (and I expect I won't ever be GMing it unless some of the modules turns it into a better one-off dungeon crawl than 1e or RC). However, the system seems so familiar to me and I've run so very many AD&D 2e and 3.x games (this system basically looks like AD&D 3e and I'm certain it plays like it), that extrapolation seems trivial.

I'm reluctant to buy-in to 5e's multi-pronged approach to balance at mid 2nd tier through Epic. The vast majority of Conctration checks will be in the vicinity of 10. This is trivially worked around via the Warcaster feat, the Resilient Feat, Transmuter's Stone, potions or stuff to give you resistance or having Shield and Mage Armor. A level 10 High Elf Wizard with any combination thereof (or even just 14 Con and Warcaster will be passing typical Concentration checks at a rate approaching mechanical irrelevance).

The reduction of DCs is accompanied by the 3.x save paradigm. This, of course, means that creatures you are fighting are going to have outrageously poor saves in 2 of the 3 big saves. In terms of spell proliferation being reined in, I'm not sure I see it. Take the below Basic Set, Evocation specced, High Elf Wizard at level 10 (halfway through tier 2). Again, this is missing some big guns from the PHB. Just this guy below is ridiculously powerful.

Blasty McBlasterson - Level 10, High Elf Evocation Wizard.

1) 20 Int yields 5 + 10 = 15 spells per Long Rest.

2) Known spells just from leveling (no spellbook poaching or found spells)

5 cantrips
8 first level spells
4 second level spells
4 third level spells
4 fourth level spells
4 fifth level spells

3) Able to cast spells as rituals

4) 5 spell levels recovered with AR

5) ES should mean there will be more evocation spells in spellbook

6) SS = 1 + spell lvl allies automatically pass their save so no friendly fire

7) PC = enemies still take 1/2 damage on successful save.

8) EE = + 5 damage to cantrips so you have more flexibility to save the majority of your 15 spell slots (of which you can get 5 more spell levels back from AR) for utility. Just the below Cantrip load-out is awesome (and makes Gandalf weep)

Acid Splash for AoE (1/2 damage on save, no friendly fire, + 5 damage)
Firebolt for single target (1/2 damage on save, enormous range, + 5 damage)
Minor Illusion for tricksey
Mage Hand and Prestidigitation for Fantasia

9) With those buffed Cantrips and AR I've got enormous versatility to pick a load-out heavy on any of the ridiculously awesome spells (encounter enders or nerfers to the point of obseletion + recon/divination master + Face + infiltration + massive defense by way of mobility/escape contingencies).

Arcane Eye
Passwall
Wall of Stone
Greater Invisibility
Major Image
Fly
Suggestion
Levitate
Web
Hold Person
Invisibility
Sleep
Disguise Self
Charm Person
Mage Armor
Shield
Protection from Energy
Dominate Person
Wall of FIre

10) I'm not seeing a lack of flexibility. I'm seeing flexible and filled with combat beat-down/control.
 

As we work through the tiers of play, here are the discrete packets of non-negotiable fiat power that the Wizard will have available for noncombat conflicts of which the resolution legitimately affects and drives the course of play.

<snip>

As we all know, the Wizard's payload will progressively become more and more potent.

<snip>

His proliferation of means and his specified, non-negotiable tools will utterly outmode the mundane conflicts that the Fighter has any ability to engage with. Further, the Fighter will only ever have the means to engage with those outmoded-by-way-of-Wizard conflicts as his gameplay never, ever changes. What's more, the proportion of nonviolent conflicts:violent conflicts (the stuff the Fighter is supposed to be the master of) will skew toward the former as the Wizard attains more robust means to circumvent combat entirely (if not solely propelling, then anchoring the effort to do so).
You cannot get Legolas out of the task resolution system and bounded accuracy of 5e. Legolas could lay low dozens and dozens of orcs (with bow or blade) and float around the battlefield like a wraith. He could bring all of that big damn hero, crazy athleticism (with pretty much 100 % efficacy) outside of combat for noncombat conflict resolution. The Champion couldn't dream of that kind of stuff. Even at double his level.

With respect to the other means to have the Boromirs and Samwise Gamgees in a group of superior warriors, it doesn't just have be done via the level system (though that is the way it should be done for an agenda that is seeking process-sim). It can be done beautifully with metagame mechanics. To name a few, Fate and MHRP can do it via their infrastructure, BtVS can do it by giving the Scoobies plot points, 4e can do it via princess built Warlords or Companion Characters.
I agree with this. It's the lack of the ability to circumvent the base, d20+bonus mechanics and hit-point attrition that strikes me about the fighter. So little condition-infliction. No auto-jump or climb. Etc.

Furthermore there are no mundane classes, only (5) mundane subclasses.
The problem isn't with classes or subclasses being mundane. It's with the lack of resources - eg X skill rolls per day are a nat 20, or get advantage, or whatever. Which means the players of those PCs lack the fiat powers that spell-casters have.

Not really. For most of that to happen you would have to: Let Wizards rest whenever they want to without consequence, misunderstand spells, ignore drawbacks to spells (Especially in older editions) and ignore spell components. People never seem to mention any of those limitations, so I can only surmise that we're talking about games where the Wizard is resting every other encounter, doesn't need components, there's never any drawbacks, and spells are played wrong.
Spell components are a very minor part of 5e.

And the wizard doesn't have to be able to do everything that was mentioned. It's enough that s/he can do some of it.
 

Remove ads

Top