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

[Minigiant]

I think all three of the reasons explain why it is much better to allow DM and their players to set the tone for their table rather than a one size fits all rule setting.

The issue is there is little guidance for genre based adjudication.

It would be a book I wrote if I had time.

 

[Umbran]

This age old debate is pretty divisive. To the degree the people wanting to turn warriors into casters get what they want, they will force people like me out of their games.

What is divisive is framing this as "Them and Us", and casting yourself as a victim forced out of games. That's like saying you are "forced out" of a movie because you don't like one of the actors. Yes, the makers made choices, and you don't like the results, but there's no deliberate force being actively applied here to remove you from the tent. It isn't like, "Hey, let's cast Gilbert Gottfried! That'll really cheese off this Emerikol guy, and he'll have to leave the theater!"

Instead, we should see this as simply a result of how the world changes over time. If your wants and desires do not similarly change, that's okay, but you can't expect you and the game to go together forever.

Folks are not entitled to a D&D that meets their specific desires. So, no wrong is being done unto a person if what is produced isn't their cup of tea.

 

[Mort]

Sure. But wizards don’t need to get their hands dirty and can do it easier, so the ability to pull a curtain down on someone’s head isn’t that practical. Particularly if it involves standing next to the target.

As usual the argument relies on white room theory crafting not practical sense.

So martials get these awesome combat options but casters don't need to bother with them because "why should they get their hands dirty?" well OK.

Players aren't idiots. If they see the DM allowing good results on opposed checks they'll likely adapt. So the Wizard player will firebolt the curtain next to the baddie, dropping it on him and entangling to give the fighter optimal hitting chance (to pound the baddie into goo). And the Wizard didn't even get his hands dirty.

But this is the issue :

1. The opposed check mechanic (for fun results) is Ill defined and requires a DM both willing and able to implement it well. That's not a small hurdle ;

2. Assuming you have such a DM, casters can take full advantage of the mechanic too AND they have magic on top.

 

[DnD Warlord]

I will give you a new play his name is spelled M E for me.

I do not want to dm proof the game more teach fools how to do it properly as learning is hard when you do not get to game often.
and you still can't tell me why what I want is wrong, why should we have a more dynamic and interesting fighter?

I will see you and raise you my writing group

since for a year we have not seen each other (actually Over a year now) one of the guys who used to play d&d in late 70s and early 80s suggested we start a Roll20 game once a month... 3 of the 8 of us are already playing 5e... DM +1 more used to play pre 3e... of the three other players 1 has 0 rp expereince and 1 only larped WOD in 90s and 1 only played call of Cthulhu and she only did so once or twice a year at a writing con...

so we had (CoC player) playing a (now 2nd level hafling rouge) say “hey I have a torch in my off hand, I should light the ghoul on fire”. Half the players where excited that was going to be great... me and another who know 5e well shared a look...

the DM made him make a str attack (way less then the dex attack that dagger he had would have done) and he did hit... he then was told it would do 1d6 fire and the ghoul would take another d6 of fire every round(we all made a joke about keeping him warm the rest of his life).
The problem came when everyone realized what is 5e players already knew... 1d6 now and 1d6 next round and 1d6 is less over all then 1d4+4+1d6. As such a lot of people felt that made it a “punishment “ to try to do something that should have been awesome...

later that same night we fought a suit of animated armor. The teifling fighter said “wait it’s armor with no body in it can’t I just unlatch it and take it apart?” And sent the whole game into a 15 minute hold while the DM tried to come up with an answer...

Back in game 1 (at level 1) the Druid used speak with animals to pretty much solve the entire adventure...

this lead to in 2 levels of play over 3 1/2 sessions for multi new players to ask similar questions... why don’t fighters and rogues have special abilities that just work like a Druid or sorcerer. One longtime 5e player said at level 10+ the rouge will have expertise and reliable talent and the DM admired he didn’t think we would play much in double digit levels...

 

[Emerikol]

What is divisive is framing this as "Them and Us", and casting yourself as a victim forced out of games.

My primary point is that on this issue there isn't that much room for compromise. What one side wants the other hates. So it's divisive. That was the point. And when you change a game that is one way into a game that is the other way, you are "forcing" out those who consider the changes unacceptable. I don't see this as all that controversial a statement.

 

[Mort]

I will see you and raise you my writing group

since for a year we have not seen each other (actually Over a year now) one of the guys who used to play d&d in late 70s and early 80s suggested we start a Roll20 game once a month... 3 of the 8 of us are already playing 5e... DM +1 more used to play pre 3e... of the three other players 1 has 0 rp expereince and 1 only larped WOD in 90s and 1 only played call of Cthulhu and she only did so once or twice a year at a writing con...

so we had (CoC player) playing a (now 2nd level hafling rouge) say “hey I have a torch in my off hand, I should light the ghoul on fire”. Half the players where excited that was going to be great... me and another who know 5e well shared a look...

the DM made him make a str attack (way less then the dex attack that dagger he had would have done) and he did hit... he then was told it would do 1d6 fire and the ghoul would take another d6 of fire every round(we all made a joke about keeping him warm the rest of his life).
The problem came when everyone realized what is 5e players already knew... 1d6 now and 1d6 next round and 1d6 is less over all then 1d4+4+1d6. As such a lot of people felt that made it a “punishment “ to try to do something that should have been awesome...

later that same night we fought a suit of animated armor. The teifling fighter said “wait it’s armor with no body in it can’t I just unlatch it and take it apart?” And sent the whole game into a 15 minute hold while the DM tried to come up with an answer...

Back in game 1 (at level 1) the Druid used speak with animals to pretty much solve the entire adventure...

this lead to in 2 levels of play over 3 1/2 sessions for multi new players to ask similar questions... why don’t fighters and rogues have special abilities that just work like a Druid or sorcerer. One longtime 5e player said at level 10+ the rouge will have expertise and reliable talent and the DM admired he didn’t think we would play much in double digit levels...

Thanks for sharing an actual play experience! It's a nice counter to those calling this position white room nonsense.

As for reliable talent, assuming a group gets that far AND has a rogue with enough levels? It still runs into the problem of needing a permissive and flexible DM to be fully effective.

And on top of that there's a decently vocal crowd (judging from a thread a bit back) that feel reliable talent is just too good and needs to be nerfed (while completely ignoring that by that level casters are rocking 6th level, world changing, spells).

 

[Emerikol]

It's not about turning warriors into casters by default.

It's about giving martial characters options for certain groups or creating a separate class that does for those players.

Yes but these options often look like spells to me. They have limits on usage without any explanation in fiction. 5e's second wind for example and 4e's daily and encounter martial maneuvers. So when you use up some resource that without a magical explanation doesn't exist, it doesn't sit well with some portion of the playerbase.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes but these options often look like spells to me. They have limits on usage without any explanation in fiction. 5e's second wind for example and 4e's daily and encounter martial maneuvers. So when you use up some resource that without a magical explanation doesn't exist, it doesn't sit well with some portion of the playerbase.

Stamina.

It's Stamina.

D&D is one of the few major mainstream fantasy games without a stamina mechanic.

 

[Emerikol]

Stamina.

It's Stamina.

D&D is one of the few major mainstream fantasy games without a stamina mechanic.

That might, maybe, work for encounter "powers" though mapping powers to stamina still seems like a big fail to me in many cases. It doesn't work for daily powers though.

 

[Mort]

Yes but these options often look like spells to me. They have limits on usage without any explanation in fiction. 5e's second wind for example and 4e's daily and encounter martial maneuvers. So when you use up some resource that without a magical explanation doesn't exist, it doesn't sit well with some portion of the playerbase.

Whereas to me, second wind is a great non-Caster mechanic. It easily simulates taking a second to refocus and gain back some of your energy. And can't be done again (for in game benefit) without taking a longer moment to rest up (a short rest). Fits perfectly into the fiction for me.

But sure, I see how that's not a satisfactory answer to some people.