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

[Zubatcarteira]

I think the most impact I've seen a Fighter do in a turn was a level 13 Echo Knight doing 9 attacks with GWM in one go to kill an ancient void dragon thing. Saved us a lot of trouble.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Nothing in the game does need that altering of reality? If your DM is designing adventures that require a wish spell then get a new DM. It’s just bad writing.

Absolutely right. Wish is literally never necessary. “Reality warping” is just a lever for caster to get the same job done but in a weird way.

Not sure why your reasonable posts are being mocked with laugh emojis.

 

[Remathilis]

The OSR is THE DEFINITION having DM/GM with decades of experiences to manage the game.

It's literally Old School


It's not about competition.
It's about choosing the best option to can afford for the plyers.
It's about spotlight balance for the DM.

Let's have the fighter charm the orc with his +1 to Persuasion over the rogue with +7 or the wizard with Charm Person and tons of slots to spare.
Random Encounter. Rolled a flying fiend.

Like I said in many other thread,5e was designed to rely of DM who alrady knew how to DM in order for the DM to change the rules in order to move the spotlight.

This whole thread is about how game is on magic spells and magic items to make actions and events initiated by martial character an intelligent choice by the whole party.

I think there are two very different things that get conflated: the idea that a fighter should have more things to do when not in combat and that those abilities should rival a wizard's magic.

Switching classes, I don't think people complain about the rogue for lack of things to do outside of combat. They have great skills, expertise and reliable talent, useful survival skills like uncanny dodge and evasion. Your subclass adds much needed specialization to certain skills. Yet people also complain the rogue falls behind magic's reliability. Schrodinger's wizard can be as good a rogue with Invisibility, knock and spider climb and still have enough magic to end encounters. (Of course, this always assumes perfect spell use, but whatever).

What I think would be a good idea I don't see as much is the notion of skill tricks/talents. 5e has some feats that enhance a skill or requires proficiency in a skill to take, but I'm not wondering if a new mechanic akin to weapon mastery but for skills would help. Skilled in stealth? You can go invisible. Skilled in persuasion? You can charm a person. Skilled in athletics? You gain a climb or swim speed.

 

[TheSword]

Telling the GM to just fix it is not a great solution. Especially when that solution may feel hostile towards a particular player (for nothing more than picking a class and trying to play it properly) and it demands that the characters themselves would act dumb (because they've seen what spells can do, so why not just repeat that past success at every turn).

Ok so I think it’s less a case of DM fix it and more DM don’t break it.

Don’t write adventures that expect a party to have a specific spell to succeed.
Don’t plan encounters that happen on featureless plains with no terrain to interact with.
Don’t clump all your foes in the open then give the party surprise.
Make sure there is a reasonable spread of magic items

These are DM 101 suggestions.

 

[Minigiant]

Ok so I think it’s less a case of DM fix it and more DM don’t break it.

Don’t write adventures that expect a party to have a specific spell to succeed.
Don’t plan encounters that happen on featureless plains with no terrain to interact with.
Don’t clump all your foes in the open then give the party surprise.
Make sure there is a reasonable spread of magic items

These are DM 101 suggestions.

That's my point.
Where does a new DM learn this?
Not the DMG.

5e was designed with the assumption that the DM knows already this already.

But 5e was anostaglia edition deigned to bring back old 1e-3e DMs not teach and help new DMs.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

the playtest got rid of the great weapon power attack -5 to hit for +10 damage.
If you get a +3 longsword and have a 20 Str you DO deal 1d8+8 per hit

Now the example I saw the other Peter give was d12 or d10

But let’s go best case 2d6 is the best weapon in the game that is 2d6 plus stat mod plus magic

Every fighter subclass pretty much has ways to add more damage.

You are expecting a lot out of one action. In either case you are likely using multiple actions and are still not affecting the encounter as much as the single casting.

I’ve never seen the whole party fail such a save.

I should of posed my question earlier better, lets say the Wizard is your ally is there anything you can do as a 5th level Fighter that can affect any combat encounter like your Wizard ally casting Hypnotic Pattern?

tanking and killing. Hypnotic Pattern is great when it works exceptionally well, okay when it works at average level. it locks out any AoE damage, makes any “secondary target” abilities harder to use, and is tbh disruptive because it dictates party tactics.

It’s a great argument for nerfing the effect of control spells or making them even less reliable, but especially useful as an argument about fighters.

 

[Emberashh]

That's my point.
Where does a new DM learn this?
Not the DMG.

5e was designed with the assumption that the DM knows already this already.

But 5e was anostaglia edition deigned to bring back old 1e-3e DMs not teach and help new DMs.

I don't believe anyone disputes that 5e isn't good at teaching new DMs.

That, however, isn't a system problem.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Which spell are they using to do it?

Blinding Smite

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think this is exactly the kind of thing that bothers me. You described a character on a featureless Demi-plane and attacked by 9 zombies a round. It’s essentially the white room theory. No buildings or choke points to hold, no tactics to employ. No mobility to consider. It the equivalent of playing a game of W40k on a featureless field. And it only happens in homebrewed games.

Have you considered that maybe the DM set that particularly unique situation up purely to make the cleric feel good? That it was a sop for their ego?

Yes, well done. If a cleric is in a featureless plane with infinite zombies all around and they have prepared anti-undead spells then yes they can deal a tremendous amount of damage. You win. Now I’ll go back to playing D&D sessions that aren’t custom geared to allow one class to dominate.

The DM put us ALL in situations like that. My sorcerer ended up in a philosophical argument with their rogue counterpart. Then once we got bored of that, I one-shotted an equal level rogue with a Whirlwind spell. The Barbarian was put in a one on one fight, which was entirely boring because they had sentinel and polearm master, and their opponent used a greataxe.

Sure yes, decry the actual play experience because you don't like the example, but riddle me this. Let us say there WAS choke points, buildings, tactics, mobility and everything else.... don't you think the clerics would have done BETTER? Do you think that they would have been incapable of producing greater results if given more tools? Or is your argument that the fighter needs the world to shape itself to give them a chance, but if it does, then they can equal the sheer might of a spellcaster?

Also, I love how Blade Barrier is now an "anti-undead" spell. Blade Barrier is an "anti-enemy" spell, it is equally effective against anything with hp.

 

[Minigiant]

A warrior archetype that a lot of myths speak of but does not get bought up a lot, the Warrior Philosopher archetype.

That's the Artist Knight or Technician in my list.