D&D 5E Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll

[Mind of tempest]

I'm going to push back here big time. Fighters are just as SAD as rogues. Both Classes max their primary stat (either STR or DEX for the Fighter and DEX for the Rogue). Both Classes add some Con. Both Classes then have plenty of stat points left for a mental score. The only real difference through level 10 is expertise in 4 skills.

unless you do not want to play a dex fighter and why should we be penalised by that?

 

[Maxperson]

Aragorn is more rogue (if we are considering core 4 classes instead of adding in things like ranger) than fighter (he's just higher level and has better "racial stats" than most of his fellows). Gimli is more a true "fighter"

A Rogue who uses a bastard sword, heavy mail, and goes toe-to-toe with things like Trolls. Wait, that doesn't sound like a Rogue at all. It sounds like a Fighting class.

If we're going core 4 classes only, then Aragorn is a Fighter with tracking and nature skills, like herb lore. And of course his racial abilities being Dunedain.

 

[FrogReaver]

if you care works but need frequent fixes to get it to go more than six miles I would call it worse than bungled and presently that is the fighter.

I've played tons of fighters. No major issues with any of them. I typically give mine a mental stat, wisdom or charisma most often and get proficiency via background in 1-2 of those stats related skills.

That said, I would find it an improvement if they got a little extra out of combat but seriously - expertise for levels 1-8 is a +2 to +3 bonus - and fighters do tend to be a little bit better than rogues in combat - so the boost doesn't need to match the rogue, but a little something extra would be nice, even if not necessarily required.

 

[Maxperson]

so was thaco once and that is dead as dishwater.

if you care works but need frequent fixes to get it to go more than six miles I would call it worse than bungled and presently that is the fighter.

That's a pretty major False Equivalence. THAC0 is nowhere near as core to the game as the 6 ability scores. It only appeared in 1 edition, where the 6 stats have been in every edition plus Basic.

 

[FrogReaver]

unless you do not want to play a dex fighter and why should we be penalised by that?

You don't have to. Play a Strength Fighter get a moderate con and a 16 wisdom or charisma. Take perception/insight or deception/persuasion via background. You aren't the expert at skills, but those skill checks with such stats and proficiency work out fine through heroic tier.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's a pretty major False Equivalence. THAC0 is nowhere near as core to the game as the 6 ability scores. It only appeared in 1 edition, where the 6 stats have been in every edition plus Basic.

THAC0 also had what was essentially a mathematically identical replacement that was more intuitive for most people.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't think we can actually call the fighter being 4 expertise skills away from a heroic tier rogue in out of combat ability a 'flaw'. Look I'm all for calling out flaws but that's not one - or let me put it this way - if you insist that's a flaw then I insist it's such a minor one that it doesn't even deserve to be brought up.

The flaw is every class but the fighter and barbarain has class features to make or bypass (via spells) higher and higher skill checks.

When the DM throws a hard or very hard check at the fighter, they have little to nothing to help them until Tier 3when they've maxxed out their combat effectiveness.

And now we get to the actual 'war' you are waging. It's now revealed that it's actually around ability scores. I agree the 6 D&D Ability Scores aren't the best mechanic ever, but it is part of what makes D&D be D&D.

One might say your fundamental problem is with D&D as D&D. And that's fine, but fundamentally changing the game to the degree you prescribe isn't going to make D&D be D&D anymore. IMO.

I love the six ability scores. I just think 5e implemented them poorly for the sake of simplicity. Strength could have another skill or 2 and thrown weapons could be better. Intelligence could have an innate bonus somewhere. And Dex could be taken down a peg.

Sure. But just because something could be a bit better doesn't mean it was bunlged.

The Ranger was bungled. There is no spin to that.
The fighter just includes too many ideas and it took 5 years to even imitate the biggest ones. That's a bungle in my book.

Let's say we gave the fighter a single skill expertise at level 2 and again at 9. Is that enough for you or too much?

Add 2 skills to its skill list and you have something I figured out in 2018.

 

[Mind of tempest]

That's a pretty major False Equivalence. THAC0 is nowhere near as core to the game as the 6 ability scores. It only appeared in 1 edition, where the 6 stats have been in every edition plus Basic.

well, it was once that way till it stopped being that way, I hear there were complaints when they finally cut it, plus why not take the six stats back to the drawing board to get a better system as to why does wisdom have anything to do with perception, senses have to do with perception.

You don't have to. Play a Strength Fighter get a moderate con and a 16 wisdom or charisma. Take perception/insight or deception/persuasion via background. You aren't the expert at skills, but those skill checks with such stats and proficiency work out fine through heroic tier.

you will be outcompeted by other characters and what is the point of trying when the bard will just crush it like a mountain on a walnut? plus your system seems to assume roled stats, which not everyone gets good results(chance gave me lower than ten in every stat) from or the luxury of using.

 

[FrogReaver]

The flaw is every class but the fighter and barbarain has class features to make or bypass (via spells) higher and higher skill checks.

When the DM throws a hard or very hard check at the fighter, they have little to nothing to help them until Tier 3when they've maxxed out their combat effectiveness.

25 DC check. Let's actually look at where some of the other classes stand in heroic on very hard checks.

Unless you have proficiency and some stat or expertise in a skill everyone at level 5 always fails very hard checks.

A fighter at level 5 could easily have +5 or +6 to any chosen non-str or non-dex skill. He gets a 5% to 10% chance to pass very hard checks for those skills.

A wizard at level 5 typically needs all 3 dex, con and int. He can get a +5 or +6 to dex skills. He probably will have a +7 to some int skills. Leaving him a 5-10% chance for very hard dex checks and a 15% chance for selected int skills.

A rogue at level 5 typically will have dex and con and then much like the fighter can pick any other stat. In dex skills with expertise he can have a +10, putting him at 25% on very hard checks. In a stat he put 14-16 into he can get +9 with expertise, placing him at 15% to 20% success. Expertise in any skill without much stat bonus comes out to 0% to 10% chance of success.

No class is particularly good at very hard checks (and why is that the benchmark you chose, I have no idea). I don't think that a very hard check has ever come up in my games.

I love the six ability scores. I just think 5e implemented them poorly for the sake of simplicity. Strength could have another skill or 2 and thrown weapons could be better. Intelligence could have an innate bonus somewhere. And Dex could be taken down a peg.

That would actually make it harder for fighters to get proficiency in mental skills while still getting the athletic skills. It's like the opposite of an improvement IMO.

The Ranger was bungled. There is no spin to that.

On that we agree. But even, through level 10 the Ranger is still fine.

The fighter just includes too many ideas and it took 5 years to even imitate the biggest ones. That's a bungle in my book.


Add 2 skills to its skill list and you have something I figured out in 2018.

I have no problem with that proposed improvement. But again, it's such a minor thing that something like that surely doesn't make it a bungle.

 

[FrogReaver]

well, it was once that way till it stopped being that way, I hear there were complaints when they finally cut it, plus why not take the six stats back to the drawing board to get a better system as to why does wisdom have anything to do with perception, senses have to do with perception.

What we have now is essentially the same thing as THAC0.

Wisdom makes the most sense out of the 6 stats to associate with perception. PHB: "Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition."

you will be outcompeted by other characters and what is the point of trying when the bard will just crush it like a mountain on a walnut? plus your system seems to assume roled stats, which not everyone gets good results(chance gave me lower than ten in every stat) from or the luxury of using.

Everything I stated can be done via standard array. Serious question: do you even play 5e?

As to other characters outcompeting your fighter at a particular skill you want to be good at, so what? Even if they are, through levels 10 they are rarely doing so by more than +1 or +2 higher. I mean the only characters that manage much more than that are characters that get expertise and place the expertise in their main stat skill.