- As long as DMG guidelines are followed, this can be somewhat enforced. BUT, gaming time being what it is, the party is likely to have more 1- and 2- encounter days than 8- or 10- encounter days, favoring spellcasters overall;
What does 'gaming time' have to do with long rests? There is no rule in the DMG that says people get a long rest at the end of a session.
- Non-combat encounters also tend to favor spellcasters, as there are quite a few spells that allow them to participate, while apart from rogues, non-spellcasters tend to have fewer options outside of combat;
Name those spells.
And explain how they're both more useful than say a Rogue with reliable talent and expertise in Persuasion and Insight, even before you get to the problem casting a spell in front of the King, an important NPC or any other social encounter might cause.
- While non-spellcasters can shine in combat, spellcasters can also do well in combat, and adding extra opponents tends to favor spellcasters over non-spellcasters.
But those abilities to shine out of combat generally use the same resources used to shine in combat. If you want to Charm an NPC, Teleport to the Dungeon, and Fly up a wall, you're burning resources that are needed in the combat encounters for that day.
Riding a horse, using Persuasion and climbing a rope are all just as effective and dont use resources at all.
- The options that spellcasters have during downtime also tends to overshadow the options that non-spellcasters have;
That's not my reading of the downtime rules.
- Though not universal, DMs tend to be more willing to interpret spells broadly, while limiting non-spellcasters to “realistic” ac
I absolutely agree here. But again, this is a DM problem. They'll happily nerf the naughty word out of martials (fumble rules, exhaustion on 0 HP, instant death from falls or magma or assasinations, flanking, banning feats like GWM etc) all of which exessively punish martals by depriving them of their class features (or worse yet; punishing them for using them and doing their jobs).
If a DM wants to implement stupid houserules to punish martials, and not police the AD, then of course they're gonna suck.
- Overall, the DM has to play a more active role to rein in casters. This can be tiring for a DM, or, if the DM focusses on other aspects of the game, can lead to casters overshadowing non-casters.
To an extent also true. This comes with experience of high level play (far too many DMs rage quit in the mid levels when an unexpected power or spell wrecks thier adventure, resulting in them having no experience with high level play).
But again, this is also a fault of the DM; not a fault of the game.
A DM who is running a political/military “Game of Thrones” campaign (lots of Humanoid enemies), can have the entire game wreaked by a wizard with Hypnotic Pattern and a bunch of enchantment spells.
Only if he lets it happen. If the PC wizard exists, then those spells are known and countered for. Enemy troops have a wizard of their own for example, and soldiers know to wake up comrades affected by the spell.
Otherwise the DM is (again) giving the caster a leg up by allowing them to play a wizard in what is (ostensibly) a low magic campaign.
Again; this is the fault of the DM - not a fault of the rules.
