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

[HammerMan]

An enemy that cannot be killed by a fighter with a normal sword perhaps should not killed by a spellcaster with a normal spell, either.

Good one.

If a normal sword can then a fireball or disintegrate can but if a normal sword can’t then a normal disintegrate shouldn’t.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Sure if we assume Galen is an NPC that sits in the background of the games lore.

Not so much if they're a PC who trivializes a character that was telegraphed as a giant CGI fight to climax on.

And yes, that does mean that Casters often being able to do precisely that is bad and shouldn't be the case.

This is why it really isn't a good idea to just jack up Martials trying to chase what Casters do, because what Casters do for the game isn't good and we shouldn't be doubling down on it.

i mean, are we saying they one-shot them with the pencil or was it a whole drawn-out 1+STR damage per hit cherry tapping battle, like the ones people used to go around saying they slayed the dragon only using their d4 dagger.

 

[HammerMan]

Sure if we assume Galen is an NPC that sits in the background of the games lore.

Not so much if they're a PC

I disagree. It makes the PC feel like that powerful NPC especially when people act shocked “wait you killed the invulnerable with a rock?!”

who trivializes a character that was telegraphed as a giant CGI fight to climax on.

It didn’t trivialize it. The fight was just as epic wether it was with a +3 sword or a pencil

This is why it really isn't a good idea to just jack up Martials trying to chase what Casters do, because what Casters do for the game isn't good and we shouldn't be doubling down on it.

I will at least say you are consistent

 

[Incenjucar]

Something like "We must each bathe in the river of death. If we survive its waters, then and only then can our strength and magic defeat the Gorglespore." is fine. "We must each bathe in the river of death, OR use cantrips." not so much.

 

[Stalker0]

No.

I'm saying its a lot of work or takes a ton of DM experience.
More work than most publishers are willing to do.

This are a bunch of busted magic stuff in the PHB and MM and the DMG doesn't help you remove the magic from the other 2 books.

It should be done.. It's just not a cakewalk and WOTC wont do.... ever

I respect that…but then why are you in this thread? I mean that is the topic we are broaching, if you think that’s a waste of time i respect that, but then what then is what is the point of participating?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

so lets say I make an adventure, and there are 5 spells that in theory could circumvent or even end the adventure? MY choice is to rewrite it, or accept that it could happen (I mean I could also just know my players don't have speak with dead contact other plane and raise dead).
With a fighter it is "Hit hard and take hard hit" at level 1 and level 20 and every level in between.

Your other choice is to remove those 5 spells from the game so the adventure and others like it can be played as written.

That's what they did to GURPS: Magic in order to create the spell system for Dungeon Fantasy RPG.

 

[Stalker0]

Something like "We must each bathe in the river of death. If we survive its waters, then and only then can our strength and magic defeat the Gorglespore." is fine. "We must each bathe in the river of death, OR use cantrips." not so much.

I think this a fine concept for some high level legendaries. Put in the statblock that it requires X quest to beat them, and the book could even offer a few alternatives. The DM of course can always change or override that.

But it adds the fundamental concept that some high level bad guys can’t just be beaten with a sword to death or bashed with magic until dead. It shakes up the notion of high level combat, which should be different than lower level combat, at least in terms of the “boss monsters”

 

[W'rkncacnter]

If there were one thing I wish that was as automatic as Free Archetype in PF2 (this is basically the equivalent of playing with Feats in 5E), it would be ABP. It should have been standard because God it is so cool.

iirc it was going to be, but their playtesters wanted the treadmill so they left it as a variant in the GMG instead.

 

[Minigiant]

I respect that…but then why are you in this thread? I mean that is the topic we are broaching, if you think that’s a waste of time i respect that, but then what then is what is the point of participating?

I don't think it's a waste of time.

However many D&D fans trivialize game design and get themselves disappointed when they see something "so easy" not happen.

Removing magic dependency from 5e is not easy or simple.

 

[Clint_L]

So looking at those stats, it is pretty clear that martial classes are not struggling for damage done. This tracks my personal experience, but I think having an objectively verifiable source is more meaningful, and these include almost 300 games played.

I think it is very memorable when a caster gets off, say, a fortuitous fireball that hits a lot of opponents, but the on demand damage, round after round, delivered by martial classes is the backbone of the damage dealt by most conventionally structured parties, just as their ability to tank damage is also vital. When kids are starting a new party and ask what classes they should make sure to include, a fighter/barbarian/paladin/moon druid is always the top of my list, followed by someone who can cast healing word, ideally a cleric. A wizard/sorcerer is great to have, but not indispensable.

That said, I don't disagree that plain jane martial classes can be boring to play. Sub-class plays a far more important role in how a fighter plays than it does for a cleric or wizard. If you are playing an Echo Knight or a Battle Master you are going to have a lot more to do than a Champion. Feats are also extremely important, but I figure that if someone has chosen to play a Champion with all combat feats, they will certainly be effective at delivering and taking damage but not much else, and if that kind of very narrow play is what they enjoy, then bless.

Edit: In fact, my son, who was 15 when he made the character, played a Goliath fighter (champion) with sentinel (I think) and toughness, dueling style, wielding a warhammer and shield, and had a gas. He was very, very effective. At fighting.