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

[Crimson Longinus]

People don't play 6-8 encounter days though. Its a bunch of combat grinding that just doesn't play out organically without variant rest rules. The entire balance premise is flawed because most games aren't hack and slash dungeon crawls with inorganic hour long naps in enemy territory.

You're traveling through the wilderness - casters win without variant rest rules. You really think there's going to be 6-8 random encounters in a day? You have 2 months of downtime between adventures. Casters get narrative control through spells. Martials get... skill checks that the casters can also do.

So use the variant rest rules. Problem bloody solved! The variant rules are there for the reason, it's not the designer's fault if you refuse to use the tools provided.

 

[Don Durito]

They can at least potentially contribute to all except the last one as they seem like situations that would involve some skill checks. The last one seems to be clear 'requires a spell' territory though. But for example the sage fighter I suggested earlier would be handy for several of these as they would have knowledge of history of the situation and could effectively research related information.

Scaling is a pretty big issue at high level though, which affects the Fighter's skills.

At 1st level the baseline for a good stat is 16, and higher levels it's 20. That means by that level a 14 with proficiency isn't really cutting it anymore. (One of the hidden maths issues of 5e is that if you're expected to increase one ability score by around 4, that's the same mechanically as dropping the rest by the same amount - this is one reason why saves scale so poorly).

Of course the Fighter has enough feats that they could have (and probably should have) picked up Skilled Expert by that point. So they should be at least good at one skill that isn't Athletics. (and the new skill based techniques help there to).

 

[Maxperson]

People don't play 6-8 encounter days though. Its a bunch of combat grinding that just doesn't play out organically without variant rest rules. The entire balance premise is flawed because most games aren't hack and slash dungeon crawls with inorganic hour long naps in enemy territory.

Yeah. But if they don't play it how it was balanced to be, then they are creating the problem themselves. If you change things to allow spellcasters to dominate, you can't complain that spellcasters are dominating.

My group has gone back and forth between 1 week between long rests, so that the 6-8 encounters can be spaced out, removing the hack n' slash feel, and just getting long rests when the DM says you can have one, which seems to work out even better for that.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Scaling is a pretty big issue at high level though, which affects the Fighter's skills.

At 1st level the baseline for a good stat is 16, and higher levels it's 20. That means by that level a 14 with proficiency isn't really cutting it anymore. (One of the hidden maths issues of 5e is that if you're expected to increase one ability score by around 4, that's the same mechanically as dropping the rest by the same amount - this is one reason why saves scale so poorly).

Of course the Fighter has enough feats that they could have (and probably should have) picked up Skilled Expert by that point. So they should be at least good at one skill that isn't Athletics. (and the new skill based techniques help there to).

Yeah, they could and should get expertise. But the ability score scaling is an issue. I tried to fix it in my game by houseruling it so that it is more viable to have and maintain several good scores.

 

[Don Durito]

Yeah. But if they don't play it how it was balanced to be, then they are creating the problem themselves. If you change things to allow spellcasters to dominate, you can't complain that spellcasters are dominating.

My group has gone back and forth between 1 week between long rests, so that the 6-8 encounters can be spaced out, removing the hack n' slash feel, and just getting long rests when the DM says you can have one, which seems to work out even better for that.

The long rest thing is a perennial issue.

I'm sort of torn on this issue. On the one hand yes, you should adjust the rest schedule if you're not following it; on the other hand the variants given are poorly done and thought through, and there are tensions within the game that push back against changing up the rest schedule as well.

If it takes me 4 sessions to have 3-18 encounters of the appropriate difficutly levels (it's not really 6-8 that's the median) and I only play every two weeks that's 8 real world weeks between long rests. That's not much fun for the player who just levelled up and can only cast their best spell once in an 8 week period. (There's also the issue that long rest variants can take the power of deciding when to rest out of the players hands, which is disempowering and removes one aspect of strategic decision making).

The design issues here are not just about the variants. The game expects too many encounters full stop for the variety of play styles it needs to support.

 

[Neonchameleon]

A Spellcaster with a Cantrip can do similar damage to a fighter on a round to round basis.

If and only if the Spellcaster has Eldritch Blast and Agonizing Blast

 

[FrogReaver]

Then nothing is interesting. If illusions, charms, and other tricks arent interesting enough for you, you should try being a friggin fighter who gets to hit stuff and... hit stuff slightly more.

Saying cantrips aren't interesting isn't saying magic isn't interesting. Minor effects aren't interesting in themselves. It's about like calling a torch or a healing potion or caltrops or a spyglass 'interesting'.

You might can do a few interesting things with minor illusion, but then I can do some interesting things with pretty much any mundane object in the game.

Yet here you sit, telling those who want a decent martial class that we're being unreasonable for not accepting the garbage scraps the caster players are willing to toss our way. "Fine, you can have an extra half your proficiency bonus to jumping, but anything more and my precious v-tude will need the fainting couch!"

5e exists as it exists. All I'm saying is that we should approach it from that perspective instead of trying to change what it is via new classes. I'm really not opposed to new classes and I think there's plenty of concepts we can create classes around that are unique compared to what is already in 5e. There is plenty of room for more classes that would evoke a martial/leader feel, but it has to be something more than simply Martial Leader (which is really the whole theme the 4e Warlord was based on).

I'm not even against the notion that martials could have gotten more or casters could have gotten less (though, that's a conceptual gap that will never be completely bridgeable in D&D). If you want to see a class System I like, look at the Stars without Number system. You get to pick between 3 classes or can pick 2 and have a hybrid class. It covers all the ground you would need. Psionics (aka magic) in it is very specific and toned down - meaning it can add a few tricks but is no where near as versatile or powerful as 5e magic.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sure would be nice if the system provided a fair and adjudicated way to run non-combat encounters so that the back end of the 6-8 encounters aren't a sloggy deathmarch seemingly meant to appeal to fans of resource management minigames.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure would be nice if the system provided a fair and adjudicated way to run non-combat encounters so that the back end of the 6-8 encounters aren't a sloggy deathmarch seemingly meant to appeal to fans of resource management minigames.

Create a non-combat challenge and have players overcome it - with potential consequences for various levels of failure?

I'm not sure why there needs to be explicit rules for that?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The long rest thing is a perennial issue.

I'm sort of torn on this issue. On the one hand yes, you should adjust the rest schedule if you're not following it; on the other hand the variants given are poorly done and thought through, and there are tensions within the game that push back against changing up the rest schedule as well.

If it takes me 4 sessions to have 3-18 encounters of the appropriate difficutly levels (it's not really 6-8 that's the median) and I only play every two weeks that's 8 real world weeks between long rests. That's not much fun for the player who just levelled up and can only cast their best spell once in an 8 week period. (There's also the issue that long rest variants can take the power of deciding when to rest out of the players hands, which is disempowering and removes one aspect of strategic decision making).

The design issues here are not just about the variants. The game expects too many encounters full stop for the variety of play styles it needs to support.

Yeah, I definitely agree that scaling it to six to eight was a huge mistake to begin with. But it is what it is, and I think the GMs should try to pace the rests so that it gets at least somewhat close to the suggested ratio and alternate rest variants are a good tool for that. You can compensate a bit by having harder fights, but that can of course easily get very swingy. But getting some short rests between those long rests is probably the most important thing or the short rest classes are screwed.