D&D (2024) Martial vs Caster: Removing the "Magical Dependencies" of high level.

[Gammadoodler]

I am just saying, the "fragile" squishy 1e "magic-user" is less true today in 5e, when most casters are also melee.

5e hasnt completely escaped it − the Wizard does still kinda suck in combat encounters during the lowest tier. But generally that design paradigm is obsoleting.

Sure, and I accept that. What I am saying is that the debilitating spells you are talking about have ranges that are greater than melee (with limited exception), ranges which most if not all caster players will attempt to avail themselves of.

A melee martial does not have that option.

So you may say that the casters are trading damage for conditions, which is only partially true. I say, yes, but they are inflicting conditions from 30, 60, 90, 120 feet away from threats.

If you're going to be in melee, taking heat from the enemy, you should have to trade off less than the guy standing a full turn of movement away from the action.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Now, I do want to say. Yes, there is a great argument to be made that martials need more utility outside of combat, but in practice... this isn't an easy thing to do for the fighter.

The Rogue gets expertise in skills, reliable tallent and has excellent mobility.
The Barbarian is now allowed to take skill checks with strength (only while raging which is a desperately needed combat mechanic) and has a different form of reliable talent that only works with strength.

So... what do you give fighters? Even at low levels, what do you do to push them beyond normal skills. You don't want to make them MAD by adding mental skills to their physical checks. You can't do expertise. You can't really do reliable talent. You can't copy the barbarian move. They kind of end up stuck in a rut because everyone else got every other possible idea.

I went with giving them an extra die prof times per day, but that kind of mechanic is difficult to figure out how to scale into high level stuff like mind control effects. And that may just be because the skill system itself is very mundane and hasn't been written to give some of those abilities that mid to high level magic can give.

 

[Chaosmancer]

A tradeoff. The more powerful the condition, the less damage possible.

That goes for balancing spells too. Each slot needs to have a clear amount of design space that each spell within it must conform too. Right now, because of the "legacy" spells from earlier editions, some spells are too overpowered for their current slot, and some spells are underpowered for their slot. The entire 5e spell list needs vetting, and various individual spells need reslotting or rewriting.

I can agree in theory, but I mostly just gated certain conditions behind level. Because warrior damage from a single attack basically does not ever increase, so decreasing it more and more doesn't make sense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sure, and I accept that. What I am saying is that the debilitating spells you are talking about have ranges that are greater than melee (with limited exception), ranges which most if not all caster players will attempt to avail themselves of.

A melee martial does not have that option.

So you may say that the casters are trading damage for conditions, which is only partially true. I say, yes, but they are inflicting conditions from 30, 60, 90, 120 feet away from threats.

If you're going to be in melee, taking heat from the enemy, you should have to trade off less than the guy standing a full turn of movement away from the action.

Completely agree.

 

[Yaarel]

Sure, and I accept that. What I am saying is that the debilitating spells you are talking about have ranges that are greater than melee (with limited exception), ranges which most if not all caster players will attempt to avail themselves of.

A melee martial does not have that option.

So you may say that the casters are trading damage for conditions, which is only partially true. I say, yes, but they are inflicting conditions from 30, 60, 90, 120 feet away from threats.

If you're going to be in melee, taking heat from the enemy, you should have to trade off less than the guy standing a full turn of movement away from the action.

The 5e longbow is arguably the most powerful "ranged spell" in the game, with a vast range of reach, especially in the hands of a warrior that can add various boosts and then multiply its damage via extra attacks. This is a case of linear caster and quadratic warrior.

At low tiers, the longbow is the best "cantrip" in the game, except for maybe the Warlock Eldritch Blast because of its damage type.

 

[Gammadoodler]

The 5e longbow is arguably the most powerful "ranged spell" in the game, with a vast range of reach, especially in the hands of a warrior that can add various boosts and then multiply its damage via extra attacks. This is a case of linear caster and quadratic warrior.

The longbow is the best "cantrip" in the game, except for maybe the Warlock Eldritch Blast because of its damage type.

What is your point?

Like I think I used the word "melee" a lot. And I guess a longbow could be used as an improvised melee weapon in a pinch, but otherwise it would seem to be irrelevant to the conversation.

 

[Yaarel]

What is your point?

Like I think I used the word "melee" a lot. And I guess a longbow could be used as an improvised melee weapon in a pinch, but otherwise it would seem to be irrelevant to the conversation.

Your post complained about a caster casting from range − but a Fighter with a longbow has the most powerful ranged effect.

And eliminating a target from the combat encounter makes "dead" the most powerful "condition" to inflict.

 

[Minigiant]

sigh

And this ignores the power of casters to say that a warrior is "extremely powerful" at low tier combat.

There is no level 1 fighter in the world that kill four goblins in a 1v4 fight, without taking damage and risking life and limb.

At 7 hp a pop, for a total of 28, a level 1 wizard casting sleep which averages 22.5 health of enemies only has to roll above average. And they may well, under the right circumstances, pull out that victory without taking a single attack. It is difficult, but doable.

By level 3, the fighter is no longer risking as much (they have more hp) but they still often can't take out four enemies in a single turn. The Wizard now has to only roll average on sleep, which is 31.5.

But isn't that the issue.

Arcane spells from Mages are designed to be encounter enders. Since 1e.
Divine spells from Priests were designed to be encounter savers and niche encounter enders (destory the undead, banish the fiends.)
Martial attacks from Warriors are designed to be cumulative effects that help end encounters.

This is why the game breaks at high levels.
Because if the Encounters are not greater than the Encounter Enders, the Warriors can't get the cumulative attacks out.
This forces the designs to adjust the attacks needed for the get to the cumulative sum.
If they go damage, the warriors do all the damage if they can hit and it slogs if they can't.
If they go control without still remaining simple, slog.

It comes down to on thing, the D&D designers wanting martials to be both simple and complex, magical and nonmagical under the same class.

Just make new classes.
The Fighter cannot successfully encompass 50 archetypes.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Your post complained about a caster casting from range − but a Fighter with a longbow has the most powerful ranged effect.

A fighter with a longbow make for a strange melee build.

I'd expect the same level of tradeoff between safety and potence for a ranged fighter vs a melee fighter as I would for casters vs. a melee fighter.

Edit: not to mention that there are spells like Mirage Arcane, which have a range of "sight" and affect a square mile of terrain with an effect that lasts for days. A fighter with a longbow isn't going to come close to this even with sharpshooter for the greater effective range (and we all know how standard melee builds include sharpshooter)

 

[Gammadoodler]

But isn't that the issue.

Arcane spells from Mages are designed to be encounter enders. Since 1e.
Divine spells from Priests were designed to be encounter savers and niche encounter enders (destory the undead, banish the fiends.)
Martial attacks from Warriors are designed to be cumulative effects that help end encounters.

This is why the game breaks at high levels.
Because if the Encounters are not greater than the Encounter Enders, the Warriors can't get the cumulative attacks out.
This forces the designs to adjust the attacks needed for the get to the cumulative sum.
If they go damage, the warriors do all the damage if they can hit and it slogs if they can't.
If they go control without still remaining simple, slog.

It comes down to on thing, the D&D designers wanting martials to be both simple and complex, magical and nonmagical under the same class.

Just make new classes.
The Fighter cannot successfully encompass 50 archetypes.

For the record. Magical vs nonmagical has nothing to do with mechanical interactions in-game.