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

[Oofta]

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. Despite what has been done to appease them in 5e, they aren't satisfied. 4e was perhaps the fruition of their philosophy. They want pure martials without any resort to magic to do things that the rest of us think can't be done without magic. We don't want spell like powers being performed by martials but everyone just winks and says it's possible without magic.

I agree with a lot of this. I want an option to have truly mundane PCs. Even if that means that in whiteroom spreadsheet analysis they are (GASP!!!!) 0.5 DPR less per round based on a specific set of assumptions

At this point, I don't really see how both groups can be happy with the same game. 5e has already pushed me out and it is unsatisfying to the other side. WotC is trying, somewhat successfully as 5e has been successful, to play both sides of the fence. The trend has been away from me and towards them but again it's never enough it seems until the differences between fighters and wizards is purely what things are named.

There has always been this dichotomy. It used to be worse - before 4E came along casters completely dominated the game at higher levels. In 4E (until essentials) they just gave everyone similar structure of AEDU powers and there was IMHO very little room to run a "mundane" PC.

With 5E the gap in power is less than it was, but there is no perfect solution. PCs that manipulate magic are always going to be different. Whether they're more powerful depends on too many factors, and to be honest I don't care. Casters don't completely dominate games I've been in or run (even up to 20th level).

There is no "martials vs casters" when I've played. It's a group with different strengths and weaknesses trying to overcome obstacles with whatever tools they have. The fighter may not be flashy, but they're the energizer bunny that frequently take the brunt of the attacks. Casters have the dazzle but without support they tend to be shooting stars that burn out quickly. Both support each other, they're a team competing against the monsters not each other.

 

[Asisreo]

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...

Was there a reason he thought a simple torch would be more effective than a sword/dagger. I'd understand if he was fighting a troll/twig blight/etc. But if he was fighting a creature with no innate vulnerability to fire, wouldn't it make sense that a stick with a relatively cool flame wouldn't do as much as a dagger expertly sliced into vulnerable areas?

Regardless, its still enough to kill a commoner guaranteed, but its not enough to kill a ghoul who isn't specifically weak to flames.

 

[Gammadoodler]

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.

"Most spells can be mimicked through other means with enough time and effort"

"There are about a dozen actions a fighter can take in combat."

"When you are altering the laws of physics it helps to be very precise."

why??

You’ve clearly established that spells are not so different from what martials can do, and that nonspecific DM adjudication is adequate to address anything a martial might attempt. If spells are so similar, why do they need special treatment?

 

[Emerikol]

There is no "martials vs casters" when I've played. It's a group with different strengths and weaknesses trying to overcome obstacles with whatever tools they have. The fighter may not be flashy, but they're the energizer bunny that frequently take the brunt of the attacks. Casters have the dazzle but without support they tend to be shooting stars that burn out quickly. Both support each other, they're a team competing against the monsters not each other.

What is funny to me is that it is my fighter players that hated 4e the most. It wasn't the wizards trying to keep the fighters down. For my flavor of game, it is the people who play those classes that are martials that object.

 

[Minigiant]

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.

The question is who wanted daily martial abilities?

I feel like only the 4e designers wanted that. Many 4e fans would trade them for encounter powers.

 

[Campbell]

The question is who wanted daily martial abilities?

I feel like only the 4e designers wanted that. Many 4e fans would trade them for encounter powers.

I think a lot of us would trade them for sufficiently awesome at will stuff. Speaking personally I find 2d20 Conan stuff sufficiently awesome as well as Pathfinder Second Edition stuff. I just want martial characters that are interesting to play and feel like they are capable of really contending with the sort of adversaries the game pits them up against. Daily or encounter resource rationing is not required.

 

[ph0rk]

I feel like only the 4e designers wanted that. Many 4e fans would trade them for encounter powers.

I think encounter powers (and at will stuff) are more interesting for a martial combatant, sure. However: this will, indirectly, lead back to the short/long rest ratio. Which, in a way, echos 40 year old debates about Prepared Slots/Vancian casting and Spell Points (PSPs).

The occasional long recharge technique isn't too bad (stab through self to hit grappling enemy, that sort of thing), but that doesn't need to be a daily power to be rarely used - it can just do damage.

 

[DnD Warlord]

Was there a reason he thought a simple torch would be more effective than a sword/dagger. I'd understand if he was fighting a troll/twig blight/etc. But if he was fighting a creature with no innate vulnerability to fire, wouldn't it make sense that a stick with a relatively cool flame wouldn't do as much as a dagger expertly sliced into vulnerable areas?

Regardless, its still enough to kill a commoner guaranteed, but its not enough to kill a ghoul who isn't specifically weak to flames.

Well he doesn’t know what is and is not vunrable to fire (new to game) and thought dead body in rotted dry cloths would burn easy.

edit: the WOD larper freaked when they learned about paralyzing claws... and the new players where all super shocked

even the 5e vet that I am forgot elves where immune until I read the Roll20 chat on the claw attack

 

[DnD Warlord]

I think encounter powers (and at will stuff) are more interesting for a martial combatant, sure. However: this will, indirectly, lead back to the short/long rest ratio. Which, in a way, echos 40 year old debates about Prepared Slots/Vancian casting and Spell Points (PSPs).

The occasional long recharge technique isn't too bad (stab through self to hit grappling enemy, that sort of thing), but that doesn't need to be a daily power to be rarely used - it can just do damage.

I am big on the warlock chaise just refilled and reworked

get 2 short rest “martial exploits” but know a small handful known from a large list that is level locked (maybe not like spells but like prerequisite 5th level on some and 11th level on some and 15 or 17th level some really big ones) a few at will abilities and choices (like invocation) that give you static bonuses or new at wills or new encounter or maybe even a supernatural power or two

at level 11+ daily big world changing supernatural absolutes and a 3rd use of the short rest abilities.

Ex. Cleave and tide of iron from 4e as at wills a super leap or a monkey climb invocation and something like 3.5 mountain hammer as one of those short rest abilities.

 

[ph0rk]

Well, in a way the Hexblade already sort of does this (short rest slots for smite or for being hard to hit as a technique), but you've got a bunch of re-flavoring to do so eldritch smite and crown of stars feel martial. Well, and utterly replacing the specter - what an awful level 6 feature.