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

[tetrasodium]

My biggest complaint about so many of these discussions is the tendency for the folk claiming casters are too good compared against martials to ignore how spells known/prepped works and assume that any niche spell no matter how niche is available & ready in any edge case situation no matter how contrived.

As to the OP's point about EK/AT, I'd be more than happy if those were the crunchy/high damage casters with the actual casters free to clam their own niche. For that to happen though actual casters like wizard & such would need spells & class mechanics that allow them to be casters who reliably proved themselves to be just as meaningful of a contributor to the average session as the martials do whenever a combat comes up.

On that point, fully mundane martials like champions and battlemasters and samurai are some of the only classes that are entirely reliant on DM fiat to be able to overcome resistance in monsters with what is their core class combat feature.

resistant to nonmagical bludgeoning piercing slashing & generally low AC's stacked up against energy resist, energy immune, magic resist, legendary resist & frequently noteworthy saves is nonsense when wotc goes out of their way to nullify resistant to nonmagic bludgeoning piercing & slashing. Magic items were originally created to balance out LFQW's effects, but 5e dialed back everything that could contribute to LFQW & left the magic items to invert it badly in many ways.

Spoiler: do these samurai abilities not count for anything?

• BONUS PROFICIENCY
  When you choose this archetype at 3rd level, you gain proficiency in one of the following skills of your choice: History, Insight, Performance, or Persuasion. Alternatively, you learn one language of your choice.
• ELEGANT COURTIER
  Starting at 7th level, your discipline and attention to detail allow you to excel in social situations. Whenever you make a Charisma (Persuasion) check, you gain a bonus to the check equal to your Wisdom modifier. Your self-control also causes you to gain proficiency in Wisdom saving throws. If you already have this proficiency, you instead gain proficiency in Intelligence or Charisma saving throws (your choice).
• Ability Score Improvement
  When you reach 4th level, and again at 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1. As normal, you can’t increase an ability score above 20 using this feature.

 

[Asisreo]

However if the adventuring day is short (as many are) this isn't much of an issue because the wizard doesn't come close to running out of resources

This actually makes it more of an issue. If there is only 1 fight in an adventuring day and it takes 5-6 rounds to complete, the wizard has only 6 rounds to cast spells which mean they have only 6 chances to "get it right." Remember, a wizard cannot cast all their spells all at once. They take it turn-by-turn and if they're casting high-level spells, the amount of spells they can cast with an accurate guess dwindle in number and power.

Casting the 9th-level Wish for Forcecage only to have the creature pass a teleport save means that the Wizard can't attempt to True Polymorph in the encounter anymore.

And these series of guesses must continue, because actions are limited and truly strong spell slots aren't exactly the easiest to come by.

 

[ph0rk]

I think it's fair to assume that if the dm is using a social challenge, social skills will work at that table.

It isn't. Persuasion, Deception, and Intimidation are not interpreted equally at every table. It is similar to how a lot of tables will let Acrobatics stand in for Athletics, or let Perception to entirely replace Investigation, and forget that Insight even exists.

But I think level 17 is a more valuable one to analyze anyways,

Ok; 136 vs 208 hp at level 17.

A fighter and a wizard have the same point buy constraints, and it is just as costly for both to pump constitution above 14.

This actually makes it more of an issue. If there is only 1 fight in an adventuring day and it takes 5-6 rounds to complete,

No, because those rounds can all be maximum level spells.

If you think a wizard at level 17 with the freedom to comfortably cast a level 9, 8, 7, 6, and then 1 or two 5th level spells is somehow advantaging a level 17 fighter, I don't think we are arguing from the same premise.

Ability Score Improvement
When you reach 4th level, and again at 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1. As normal, you can’t increase an ability score above 20 using this feature.

Two ASIs are a candle in the wind compared to full caster progression.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think the reason this topic always is difficult and consensus is hardly ever agreed is because

a) we all want different preferences
b) we all play different ways.

B is very significant, because someone who may feel casters way overshadow martials is because maybe they are ignoring mitigating factors like spell components, or maybe they have few encounters between rests. Or maybe someone is only looking at comparing the powers of one class or another and ignoring the other things that impact balance (like armor, or hit points).

I want to be clear that I'm not advocating one preference of play as better than another. Just that it makes these types of discussions very hard to find common ground. There's just too many variables. How do you balance it out when one group plays one way, and another group plays another?

Should the person who wants martials to be on the same level as casters for powers and versatility be forced to play an eldritch knight? Should the person who doesn't want martials to have superhuman powers be forced to play a champion only? Is a martial power that has the same effectiveness as a spellcaster power simply a spell, but by another name, and if so, what's the aversion to just calling them spells?*

About the only truism I can see is that on paper, the classes are pretty balanced, but that all goes out the window based on how people play at their table, and gets worse the more they deviate from the core assumptions of the game design.

*This is something I struggle to understand. the argument "I don't want spells. I want martial powers (that for all intents and purposes, do the same thing as spells but with different flavor.)"

 

[Undrave]

The fighter is quite likely to be worse at this than a paladin, bard, warlock, or rogue, and that's if one is even at a table where intimidation ever works. Maybe the table allows for Strength (Intimidation) or Dexterity (Intimidation) checks, but that seems even more rare than a table where Charisma (Intimidation) actually works.

Chances are they would be most useful standing around looking mean (performing the help action) while someone with both proficiency and a decent cha makes the check.

That's some Ralph Wiggum level helping, right there.

Intimidate is like the WORST skill in the game. Using it is always a huge risk of making things worst.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Before I go on, I want to isolate some things:

Feats, Multiclassing, and other Optional Rules.

Many people regard feats as helping martials, but I want you to bare with me for a second. Let's ignore them.



Okay, my response:
High-level fighters have more than double the HP as Wizards given a typical build.

If the fighter has a +5 to Con and a Wizard has a +1, the fighter has 224 HP while the Wizard only has 102. Giving the Wizard a +5 in Con pushes them to 182 which is still significantly less than a Fighter.

As for damage, the fighter attacks AC while the Wizard attacks ST, usually. AC remains somewhat low at most points but ST's at higher levels are usually very high, well within the double digits. There are also Magic Resistance and Legendary Resistance.

This isn't to say Wizards completely flop during combat, but they must be extremely judicious about how they wish to distribute their damage and effects. So much so that I would even say that a Wizard player with an insufficient understanding of combat/spells would be a liability more than an asset.

The possibility of Wizards outdoing Fighters in combat is clearly there, but outside of focus-fire single-enemy NOVA situations, Wizards have to work much harder that Fighters to get remotely the same mileage.

So, in a way, Martials can be seen as the safe option in combat, and the closer your class is to a wizard, the more carefully you have to pay attention to even be relevant.

Yes, Fighters have more HP than wizards. However, at high levels, they have very few tools to make themselves inaccessible to attackers, and almost no way to counter effects. A caster can apply their damage from range from within the protection of greater invisibility...or while flying , etc. And they get to do so using the kit of parts provided in the PHB. They also get counterspell, dispel magic, banishment, summon xyz, etc.

Fighters do not get to do any of this. They get to soak that damage. Period.

As it relates to DM fiat, I'd also point out the habit among several of the DMs on this board of disallowing martials to benefit from the very resources you've mentioned here. The classic is falling from a great height. There have been long threads arguing that if you fall far enough, you die no matter if you have the hp to survive the RAW damage.

I'd also point out that a large chunk of the unbalance relates to the relative impact of what you can accomplish with spells vs. physical attacks. There's a whole list of conditions you can apply at the end of the book. Without spellcasting, most martials get access to two of them, prone, and unconscious. Meanwhile, even in the damage, category, a commonly used baseline is Warlock Agonizing blast(spellcaster at will damage they can apply from range), which several martials struggle to match. Basically it just feels bad, especially for melee martials, to have to spend the effort to get close enough, and incur the risk of being close enough, do your damage, and then look at the spellcasters doing comparable damage from 120 feet away.

 

[Shadowedeyes]

Everyone has their own take on the problem(or lack thereof). But for myself, I don't necessarily need martial abilities to do the same thing as spells. It would be nice if martial characters got some unique and flavorful abilities that felt as meaningful as some spells do that couldn't be easily duplicated by magic.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Intimidate is like the WORST skill in the game. Using it is always a huge risk of making things worst.

Animal handling says, "Hold my beer um, reins."


(I would say performance, but if you're using that, you're probably playing with Bards already, in which case all hope is already lost ....)

 

[ph0rk]

Fighters do not get to do any of this.

An EK can do some of that, but only a handful of times per day, and only from level 19 (for G.Invis) or 13 (fly) onward.

Animal handling says, "Hold my beer um, reins."


(I would say performance, but if you're using that, you're probably playing with Bards already, in which case all hope is already lost ....)

Don't forget all those bladesingers who get force-proficient in performance against their will.

 

[dave2008]

It would be cool if the spells could be "re-skinned" as special abilities.

I've often wondered at preparing a curated spell list that could reasonably be under the umbrella of heroic abilities.

Some people would call that 4e.