D&D 5E (2014) Should martial characters be mundane or supernatural?

[Voadam]

Some people envision Tolkien, Some people envision anime. I prefer something closer to the former and don't want to play a game based on the latter.

And some picture the Tolkien books and some picture the movies.

 

[Oofta]

I mean, in Tolkien, virtually all the protagonist/supporting cast were "martial" and the wizard didn't do that much magic on screen, and resorted to wielding a sword much of the time in combat. There were not many magic items, but they were pretty powerful or significant. There was no Cleric and basically no magical healing - Aragorn used a possibly magical herb to heal someone, IIRC - and a real dearth of treasure-hunting. Moria was the only 'Dungeon,' Smaug the only Dragon.

How well does D&D really do that? Especially with, like, the party in the hobbit being all fighters & one thief, and the whole fellowship concentrated in Fighter & Rogue, with Aragorn and Gandalf the outlying Ranger & Wizard?

D&D doesn't do JRRT, or Anime or anything else - D&D just does D&D.

D&D 5E is far closer to Tolkien than anime. On the other hand 4E was closer to anime for me, which is one of the reasons I no longer want to play it.

But this is all just about preferences, just because D&D is a fantastical setting it doesn't mean I want every character option to be obviously supernatural.

 

[Xamnam]

eh, i do think the fighter specifically should break bounded accuracy personally, or at least give it a good few sizable cracks, but i do agree with the rest of what you're saying.

Huh. I've never considered this before, but I'm actually kind of amenable to this as a solution here.

 

[Voadam]

I mean, in Tolkien, virtually all the protagonist/supporting cast were "martial" and the wizard didn't do that much magic on screen, and resorted to wielding a sword much of the time in combat. There were not many magic items, but they were pretty powerful or significant. There was no Cleric and basically no magical healing - Aragorn used a possibly magical herb to heal someone, IIRC - and a real dearth of treasure-hunting. Moria was the only 'Dungeon,' Smaug the only Dragon.

How well does D&D really do that? Especially with, like, the party in the hobbit being all fighters & one thief, and the whole fellowship concentrated in Fighter & Rogue, with Aragorn and Gandalf the outlying Ranger & Wizard?

D&D doesn't do JRRT, or Anime or anything else - D&D just does D&D.

Its not whether D&D as a whole really does Tolkien or Castlevania, but whether the concepts of the martial classes are or can be Tolkien or anime.

 

[Minigiant]

The fighter's problem isn't that they aren't hitting or doing enough damage. We don't need to toss bounded accuracy into the bin. It's that they don't do much else. They don't fly, teleport or have instant movement. They can't dominate or beguile someone, instantly learn knowledge, or secure a rest free of interruption. You can dial the numbers up to 9000 and the wizard still has the ability to shut him down by flying away.

The fact that the martials don't meet their full potential in attack and damage means they lack the leeway to branch out.

Or in layman's terms, a fighter with 12 STR should have the accuracy and damage of a cleric with 22 STR (Giants gauntlets) because the fighter really knows how to fight.

Kinda how OS fighters could have meh combat scores but still be terrors on the battlefield.

 

[Oofta]

And some picture the Tolkien books and some picture the movies.

View attachment 306460

We were just discussing that with my sister who will be joining a family game. She doesn't really care about the game per se, it's an excuse to get together with family.

So we asked her if she wanted to play Legolas or Gimli. Because the former does a bunch of DC 20+ acrobatics checks the latter just runs around hacking things with their ax. She's leaning towards the latter.

 

[Voadam]

The fact that the martials don't meet their full potential in attack and damage means they lack the leeway to branch out.

How would giving martials "full potential in attack and damage" give them leeway to branch out?

 

[Tony Vargas]

D&D 5E is far closer to Tolkien than anime. On the other hand 4E was closer to anime for me,

I mean, I ran the Moria portion of the fellowship in 1e, 3.5, and 4e, and, 4e actually handled it the best. You can have an all-martial but for one reluctant-to-cast wizard in 4e without having to completely re-jigger everything, just, like, Aragorn becomes a Warlord.

5e is very far from Tolkien, because it's so much higher-magic, 5e, in particular, weights to classes heavily towards spellcasting, 5e without spells going off in every encounter isn't 5e.
Anime, OTOH, has sub-genres that cleave closely to video game conventions (which were inspired by D&D early on), and outright rip off D&D (like, oh, Slayers & Record of Lodoss War, to date myself). D&D does Isekai strangely well, too, especially in the 'immersive' mode some prefer.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Its not whether D&D as a whole really does Tolkien or Castlevania, but whether the concepts of the martial classes are or can be Tolkien or anime.

As implemented currently, my answer would be "neither." Hard fail in both cases.

And some picture the Tolkien books and some picture the movies.

View attachment 306460

Yeah, I imagine that trying to run a game as exposition heavy as LotR would be an uphill battle.... definitely in the bailiwick of some DMs though, just gotta love lore & wourldbuilding.

How would giving martials "full potential in attack and damage" give them leeway to branch out?

I suppose the idea is to open up some design space or leeway to do something other than lean into full attacks every round?
The 5e fighter chassis, for instance, is dominated by Extra Attack to keep it's damage potential high enough to statistically compete with caster damage potential over ~30+ round 'day,' something that arguably also requires heavy investment in STR or DEX and Feats ('optional' in 5e.2014), and, preferably, a reasonably potent magic weapon ('not assumed' in 5e).
If the fighter design were more open and flexible, able to do sufficient damage in combat, while also having options open to do high damage or other contributions in-combat, and participate more meaningfully out of combat it'd be a better balanced design. Heck, if it could do that, it'd be better than every prior fighter design, even the elegant, but Tier 5, 3.5 Fighter or the solid defender, AEDU resource-parity, 4e Fighter.

 

[CreamCloud0]

How would giving martials "full potential in attack and damage" give them leeway to branch out?

without having to invest their ASI in their main attacking stat but remaining competetive due to inherent class bonuses lets them invest those ASI into less mandatory areas, you could actually make a fighter who's good in INT or CHA and not dragging behind in combat because their STR is a 14.