D&D 5E Martials v Casters...I still don't *get* it.

[TheSword]

By this logic a commoner is also just as capable as a spellcaster, since you're only metric appears to be "can they replicate some version of overlapping impact of a spell with enough time and effort." With enough time and effort, real nonmagical people have put men on the moon..all it takes is a few short centuries of aggregated scientific progress.

What it really boils down to is there are 78 pages (just in the phb alone) of specific narrative shortcuts, designed and incorporated in the existing action resolution mechanics requiring zero additional DM bandwidth for a player to select and use.

Also, thank you for again clarifying that you believe it is the martial player's lack of creativity and nonspecific DM intransigence that is the root cause for this feeling of imbalance here.. not that for one set of PCs, the designers have specified options for what a player may do and how they should expect for that action to be adjudicated and for the other set, the designers have said "yeah, you can grapple..and you can shove...and..et cetera I guess..your DM can figure it out".

Because here's the thing, by your metric for the bar that the designers needed to clear to provide adequate mechanical support, the entire spell section is unnecessary, you could just have the caster's players roll a contested check, have them describe a spell, and let the DM make it work.

Not going to engage with ridiculousness. If you are equating pulling a curtain down on someone’s head and flying to the moon, you’re not looking to understand but ridicule.

Spells have always been very specifically described. When you are altering the laws of physics it helps to be very precise. That’s why spells only do precisely what they say they do. It’s also the reason why there the 76 pages that you get so hung up. You don’t have to read them you know.

There are about a dozen actions a fighter can take in combat. The designers sensibly didn’t try to do what pathfinder did and game out every single possible action because they have GMs. Then they expressly encouraged GMs to use skill contests to adjudicate these.

 

[TheSword]

On "Creativity", Here's the issue.

D&D has a concept of a caster level.
D&D doesn't have a concept of a martial level.

In 5e, characters should be rolling their Martial Level or referring to a Martial level chart when doing creative physical or mental martial actions.

Why? Why try and codify the unlimited rather than use common sense?

 

[Mecheon]

Why? Why try and codify these things rather than use common sense?

One person's common sense is another's "Sneak attack is too powerful and rogues should be nerfed at all possible oppertunities"

Martials have to play "DM May I?", caster's don't

 

[Minigiant]

Why? Why try and codify the unlimited rather than use common sense?

1. Common sense isn't common.
2. Most D&D fans aren't trained warriors.
3. Nobody can agree at which level or what DC most martial actions would be easy or hard at.

What level are the real life middleweight, light heavyweight, or heavyweight MMA champions?

 

[Asisreo]

One person's common sense is another's "Sneak attack is too powerful and rogues should be nerfed at all possible oppertunities"

Martials have to play "DM May I?", caster's don't

The sneak attack example is exactly the same for spells though. They're both class features and the both just do what they say.

If the DM is nerfing class features haphazardly, then the interparty imbalance is completely their fault.

 

[Minigiant]

The sneak attack example is exactly the same for spells though. They're both class features and the both just do what they say.

If the DM is nerfing class features haphazardly, then the interparty imbalance is completely their fault.

The issues is the martial characters are often missing a class feature that tells you how martially skilled they are.

In 5e, there is no Martial roll. There is an attack roll however the rules tell you not to do it on no attack actions like shoving.

 

[Asisreo]

Nobody can agree at which level or what DC most martial actions would be easy or hard at.

Well, we can use the baselines for context clues:

If I want to push a tree down, well I believe thats possible. Is it harder than breaking out of iron manacles while bound by them?

It sounds maybe a bit harder, so we'll say its DC 22.

 

[Minigiant]

Well, we can use the baselines for context clues:

If I want to push a tree down, well I believe thats possible. Is it harder than breaking out of iron manacles while bound by them?

It sounds maybe a bit harder, so we'll say its DC 22.

Depends. How old and big is the tree?

Usually people being "creative" are doing thing outside of or far from the baselines.

 

[Asisreo]

Depends. How old and big is the tree?

And this is why the DM is so valuable, because they have the context.

It would be the same thing if the Wizard player tried to step in and use Telekinesis. Specifically, how heavy is the tree? If I'm set on having this tree remain still, the Martial gets a DC to high to hit or is told its impossible. The caster gets told it weighs 1 imperial ton and is too heavy to use.

Thus, both are denied.

 

[tetrasodium]

Guess which other classes can get "creative" describe an action and make an ability check if the DM is agreeable? That would be all of them, every class can do this. If you cannot understand the issue with that line of argument let me spell it out for you in a way that a 5 year old can understand: Spells + Described actions is greater then just Described actions.

Why is it so hard to get through some peoples skulls that saying fighters don't need any utility mechanics because they can describe and roll is a bad argument purely on the point that if that argument was correct no class would need such mechanics because THEY CAN ALL DO THAT.

I wonder if these people were picked on in their school years and this is some sort of vicarious payback against the jocks that deal in physical violence?

"Spells + Described actions " however falls far short of making up the combat disparity given the limitations on damage and non damage combat abilities. If that wasn't the case there wouldn't be a need for so many of the white rooms arguing against it to be contrived situations that exclude every method but a spell from handling it