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

[Emberashh]

If when I DM I need to look and build in 5-10 anti magic things that is not the same as half or more the monsters in the book being immune or resistant to non magical damage

Sure points at the monsters being the problem doesn't it?

Kinda funny how so many times this can come up where we get into the weeds of whats causing problems and so many times its something other than the Martials themselves.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Sure points at the monsters being the problem doesn't it?

Kinda funny how so many times this can come up where we get into the weeds of whats causing problems and so many times its something other than the Martials themselves.

except the "throw antimagic" wasn't just a monster thing. It has to be used in exploration and social too or else the casters take over there too, and there is NO equivalent

 

[Emberashh]

except the "throw antimagic" wasn't just a monster thing. It has to be used in exploration and social too or else the casters take over there too, and there is NO equivalent

Exploration and social are underbaked to nonexistent as it is, even for Casters.

 

[Gammadoodler]

You brought it up, dude.

You wanna act like it’s a useful data point when the character was deeply underpowered. It’s not an example that tells us anything about the fighter, which is the claim that you made.

But when everything went right for him, and he had Hex up, even with a bad subclass and a gun that stole some of his attacks for reloading IIRC, he did the most single turn damage in the whole campaign. IIRC Fjord the damage focused spellcaster didn’t even top him in that regard, in the next campaign.

But the subclass and the guns are bad, so most fights didn’t go nearly that well for him.

Maybe look for examples that aren’t using underpowered subclasses and equipment.

I think it's helpful to look at actual play stats to kick the tires on some assumptions, but not that useful to base any conclusions on, especially with respect to damage capabilities.

For example, you look at Keyleth's damage, and you think

"oh, she's got waaay less damage than Grog or Vax or Percy. Clearly that means Wild Shape Druids are not as damaging as these other classes."

And maybe that's true, but one issue all by itself is uptime. Looking at campaign 1.
Can Grog, or Vax, or Percy provide reliable healing beyond potions? No
Can they cleanse debuffs on the party? No Can they manipulate terrain? No

Fundamentally none of the martial characters have competing priorities for their actions in combat. They better do the most damage, since damage is the only thing they can do. (And consider that for large chunks of Campaign 1, Keyleth and Scanlan were splitting up the healing duties.)

Compare this with Campaign 2. A martial comes out on top (and a monk..Yay), but the party wizard has only like what 12% less damage and IIRC did not have any solo duels to pad their stats relative to the rest of the party where our monk had like maybe 3 or 4. And that wizard was also handling teleport around the world duties, and fly duties etc.

 

[Remathilis]

how about giving options where the fighter can choose at level up to have something akin to a 5th level spell 1/day instead of indomitable 1/day?

Ok how about this?

Martial Adaptation. Starting at 9th level, your experience with fighting in strange conditions have lead you develop special tactics. Once per day, you may use one of the following options. Once you use an option, you can't use any others until you finish a long rest.
You gain additional uses at x y and z levels.

• Aquatic adaptation: you gain a swim speed equal to your walking speed and can hold your breath for up to 10 minutes at a time.
• Arboreal adaptation: you gain a climb speed equal to your walking speed for 10 minutes.
• Indomitable: as normal
• Magical Adaptation: choose one spell of up to third level from the transmutation school. You may cast it on yourself 1/day. You may choose int, wis or Cha as your casting stat. You may choose a different spell each day.
• Suppress resistance: weapon attacks made by you ignore damage resistance for 1 minute.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Exploration and social are underbaked to nonexistent as it is, even for Casters.

um, those are 2/3 of the game? I often spend more time on them then combat

 

[Emberashh]

um, those are 2/3 of the game? I often spend more time on them then combat

That doesn't make them mechanically substantive.

 

[Clint_L]

Dude... it wasn't my example. Sorry, but, scroll back up. It was other people bringing up Critical Role as a great example of how fighters are the damage kings. I was pointing out that it actually wasn't true and that the fighters are actually sucking hind tit, BEHIND a beastmaster ranger. I mean, okay, he's not exactly optimized, but, then again, the competition is a Beastmaster ranger...

You keep harping on dealing the most damage in a single round. So, he gets to be the damage king once out of, what, a couple of thousand rounds of combat? Yay? I guess?

Actually, I brought up critrolestats, and I did it in response to a specific claim that Wizards are the damage kings, and that if we looked at the actual numbers from games it would prove it.

They are not great for discussing fighters specifically, because Percy is a weird home brew variant who spends a lot of actions doing stuff like “disarming shot,” Grog is much more barbarian than fighter, and Orym is only level 7-8. Though that said both Percy and Orym are very competitive.

Also, the one high level wizard is very much specialized towards blasting (fire specialist), but is in the same damage range as a monk (the clear damage dealt leader in campaign 2 would be another barbarian had the player not missed a significant chunk of games).

So, at least looking at that source, the claim that wizards are the best damage dealing class in the game is not supported.

Edit: it turns out, I was responding to you! (from page 30):

Again, as I said earlier. Track it. Actually do the math. Track your next 20 rounds of combat. Area attacks deal total damage, not single, so, it's not fair to compare a single target - you have to talk about total damage. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that your casters are number 1. Every time.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Actually, I brought up critrolestats, and I did it in response to a specific claim that Wizards are the damage kings, and that if we looked at the actual numbers from games it would prove it.

They are not great for discussing fighters specifically, because Percy is a weird home brew variant who spends a lot of actions doing stuff like “disarming shot,” Grog is much more barbarian than fighter, and Orym is only level 7-8. Though that said both Percy and Orym are very competitive.

Also, the one high level wizard is very much specialized towards blasting (fire specialist), but is in the same damage range as a monk (the clear damage dealt leader in campaign 2 would be another barbarian had the player not missed a significant chunk of games).

So, at least looking at that source, the claim that wizards are the best damage dealing class in the game is not supported.

How deeply did you look into critrole stats?
For example:

Did you know that Caleb has the most kills in the party (and it isn't close)?

Did you know that 1100 points of Beau's damage came when Caleb did zero damage?

And that Beau has 13 more episodes where she did damage than when Caleb did?

In fact, when you take the average of the damage done per episode on episodes with more than zero damage, Caleb comes out ahead of everyone except Yasha (and who knows how the missing episodes would have impacted that average, it could go up or down)

As I mentioned earlier, campaign stats are tricky, but there is evidence here that wizards can be excellent damage dealers even compared to dedicated martial classes.

 

[Stalker0]

At some point, you have to say "this is the movie I want to watch" or "this is the game I want to play", and accept the reality it is portraying for you.

And I think this is the fundamental disconnect in a lot of these discussions. At a fundamental level, some people want high levels to be: I am stronger and cooler in the same narrative as low levels. Others want it to be: I want the narrative to literally change, the game is now different than low levels.


The problem we have now is that two different types of classes are playing in two different interpretations of the same world. In the world of casters, the narratives of high level dnd is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from low levels. When teleporting and scrying and divinations are powerful and commonplace, the game is simply different than what it used to be.

Then there are martials that are stronger than they once were, but fundamentally are doing the same kinds of things they used to do.

But that is a big disconnect, either you have an evolving narrative designed around the powers of casters....in which martials feel left behind. Or you create the same narratives you have used for low level games.... in which casters can break that narrative with the use of a spell.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either casters have to be reined in to bring the narrative back to a more "mundane" level, or fighters have to be able to step into this new narrative and gain abilities that are suitable. We can flavor that transition however we want, but one of these transitions has to happen to create a cohesive experience at high levels for both fighters and wizards.