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

[pemerton]

youre wrong and for reasons Ive already explained.

The rules I quoted make it clear that each attack roll to hit with an arrow shot from a bow is a discrete event in the fiction. Each even consumes a piece of ammunition! (Basic PDF, p 45)

So it follows that a fighter can never shoot an ogre through the head on his/her first shot. Why not?

it's impossible to ignore the fact that fighters get multiple attacks rather than larger attacks. earlier @Flamestrike narrated out how it could play out with the last attack in the chain killing the ogre after knocking the ogre's weapon aside & demoralizing it or something but that was declared not good enough a couple posts later because the fiighter's two three four or maybe even five attacks can't individually do 59hp damage or better. Exactly what level do you think fighter with fighter's extra attack should be dealing 59 hp or more each individual swing? Should they be sacrificing their extra attack?

You're still talking about mechanics. I'm talking about fiction: Why can a fighter never shoot an ogre through the head on his/her first shot?

The answer can't be because that would be unbalanced - game balance is a thing that matters in the real world, but it's not a part of the fiction.


EDIT: Mostly ninja'd by @Neonchameleon. And this post from Mort is also right on target!

Yet another thing 4e got right - mooks. I realize some people hated them - but they could really add dimension to combats.

In 4e, it is possible for a fighter to shoot an ogre through the head with the first shot. That's represented mechanically by the ogre being a minion.

We can then get into interesting questions about who gets to make that decision - and if it's the GM, and the GM decides the ogre is not a minion, what is the relevance to the gameplay dynamic of the GM deciding this ogre is too lucky/prominent to be one-shotted? But those questions about the dynamics of the gameplay don't change the underlying possibilities of the fiction.

 

[ECMO3]

No Wizard or Cleric is going to be less complex than the Champion. None. The existence of spells and spell slots automatically makes them more complex. The Warlock is the magic equivalent. It's pew pew and a few spells. It's more complex than the Champion, but not by a lot and it's the least complex caster.

That is not true. He is not automatically more complex.

The champion has built-in limited use abilities to keep track of such as action surge, 2nd wind and indomitable. Add other things like racial spells, battle master maneuvers from his fighting style or luck dice and spells from feats and it is quite possible to build a very complex champion. Also if you build a champion like that it can be all over the map with different abilities going into different feats and spells and short rest vs long rest mechanics making it more difficult to track than a simply built wizard.

At 12th level dwarf illusionist that has taken 3 ASIs has 16 spell slots to keep track of and they are all based on intelligence, he has to keep track of arcane recovery and illusury self as once a day uses too.

A 12th level drow champion CAN have 2 spells based on charisma, 2 more on intelligence and 2 more on wisdom while also having 3 luck dice and 2 battle master maneuver dice to use on 3 different battlemaster maneuvers. Then like every other fighter he has to keep track of action surge, indomitable and 2nd wind uses .... and that is off the top of my head, it may not be the most complex build possible.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The Rogue is not a caster, the premise of this thread is that we are comparing the Fighter to casters.

And the post I was replying to, which I actually quoted suggested "Why not use those to get skills and expertises to turn yourself into a skillmonkey rivalling the rogue?" Which is why I pointed out how impractical this is.

As an example, a half elf Arcane Archer will have more skills than a base Rogue at level 3 (unless the Rogue gets one from a feat, race or subclass).

This is dubious and depends on whether you count thieves' tools and/or languages as a skill. The thing about bringing Arcane Archer into the mix is that there are precisely two subclasses I'm aware of that don't at third level either (a) give you more skills, normally two, or (b) make you better with the skills you already have - and of those two one is the Arcane Trickster. (The other's the Swashbuckler).

And the skills you get as a fighter don't actually match those you get as a rogue thanks to the rogue having two Expertises - and sneaky rogues getting Cunning Action. Even with your suggested all-in to match a baseline rogue for breadth you're still well behind on depth.

 

[Manbearcat]

That sounds roughly as sensible than 4e's int making you better at dodging blows. So that's no from me.

Information processing speed and information processing effectiveness has everything to do with dodging blows. Counterpunchers aren't great because of head movement and explosive athleticism. The "slipping" part of "slipping and ripping" is probably 80 % capability within your cognitive loop (so Int in D&D terms), information processing and training the body to respond to that processing, and 20 % physical capability.

Same thing goes with hitting a baseball (except its well more than 80 %).

Same thing goes with playing QB (and correctly reading the defense in the probably the .5 second post-snap interval you have to work with) in the NFL.

Same thing goes with reading and reacting to the body language of the man your defending and the set they're running when playing defense in basketball or Hockey.


Int being the primary stat for Initiative and Reflex is absolutely as sensical as it gets. The idea that Dexterity is the predominant feature of processing and correctly reacting in a tiny interval of time (and therefore getting the body to react) is the nonsensical thing.

The problem is that D&D's stats just don't make any actual sense. Int is the stat for bookishness so it...can't be the stat for having a world class cognitive loop (which all apex athletes...particularly fighters...possess)? Its a complete nonsensical artifact of a gamey, non-granular (you hate both of those things) attribute system that defies any and all connection with how the brain and body work in concert to do a physical thing.

 

[Maxperson]

That is not true. He is not automatically more complex.

The champion has built-in limited use abilities to keep track of such as action surge, 2nd wind and indomitable. Add other things like racial spells, battle master maneuvers from his fighting style or luck dice and spells from feats and it is quite possible to build a very complex champion. Also if you build a champion like that it can be all over the map with different abilities going into different feats and spells and short rest vs long rest mechanics making it more difficult to track than a simply built wizard.

With all of that(and fighting styles don't grant BM maneuvers) he has not even a 10th of the complexity of a Wizard or Cleric. A 10th level Wizard is going to have 15 spell slots plus 5 cantrips selected from a minimum of 10 spells(probably more like 14), and those 14 selected from his spellbook which will have a minimum 24 spells in it. The combinations of spells and slots is going to be staggering compared to the very, very tame small number of options a Champion has. A Cleric is far worse since his "spellbook" comprises all Cleric spells.

At 12th level dwarf illusionist that has taken 3 ASIs has 16 spell slots to keep track of and they are all based on intelligence, he has to keep track of arcane recovery and illusury self as once a day uses too.

16 spell slots X the minimum of 10 prepared spells = a huge number of options. Does he upcast things or not. Which of his prepares spells does he use, when. And he faces more options when deciding what to prepare for the day. That dwarfs the very limited number of choices a Champion faces.

A 12th level drow champion CAN have 2 spells based on charisma, 2 more on intelligence and 2 more on wisdom while also having 3 luck dice and 2 battle master maneuver dice to use on 3 different battlemaster maneuvers. Then like every other fighter he has to keep track of action surge, indomitable and 2nd wind uses .... and that is off the top of my head, it may not be the most complex build possible.

The fighting styles don't give BM maneuvers, unless that's in another book other than the PHB, which can't be assumed. And even with all of that, you still don't even come remotely close to the 10th level Wizard, let alone a 12th level one.

 

[pemerton]

But it doesn't feel like that, at least not to me. I am really not fighting the same monster, I am fighting some nerfed carboard facsimile. 'We know you couldn't kill a real ogre, so here's this ogre shaped balloon you can kill and pretend to be a big damn hero.' I feel it is failure of the system if it requires such a kludge instead of things scaling so that the characters can actually easily kill the same creature super easy at higher levels.

The way I see it, if the monster doesn't have the same amount of narrative oomph, it doesn't need as many rules.

On this I fully agree with Undrave.

It's the same logic as systems that allow using simple or extended resolution - HeroWars/Quest is the best developed, but there are others that use the same idea like Burning Wheel and Prince Valiant and even 4e out-of-combat (skill check vs skill challenges of varying degrees of complexity): when the narrative weight of the situation is greater, the resolution process is more intensive.

Expecting the resolution system to deliver this sort of pacing desideratum just by scaling effect numbers up and down seems very, very optimistic to me.

And the notion that I'm not really fighting the same monster seems to be treating the mechanics as if they're a component of the fiction, rather than as a means for establishing fiction.

Furthermore, whilst I don't expect particularly high level simulationism from D&D, the same creature having different rules depending on who it fights is a bridge too far for me. Imagine if that same ogre would face a combined group of high and low level characters; what rules it would have then?

4e D&D is crystal clear that it doesn't have action resolution rules for integrating the efforts of characters of significantly different levels. So there's no answer to your question.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So it follows that a fighter can never shoot an ogre through the head on his/her first shot. Why not?

You're still talking about mechanics. I'm talking about fiction: Why can a fighter never shoot an ogre through the head on his/her first shot?

The answer can't be because that would be unbalanced - game balance is a thing that matters in the real world, but it's not a part of the fiction.

Well technically, they can. in 5e Ogres have 7d10+21 HP. You can actually roll it so the minimum is 28 (perhaps that represents an unlucky ogre!) A fighter with a modifier of +4, a mundane longbow and the sharpshooter feat can deal 30 points of damage with one shot that crits. (Champions get that easier, as they're improved crit range, and of course you could have +5 modifier and heavy crossbow to bring the damage to 35.) So even completely according the rules, it is a thing that can happen, albeit it is super unlikely.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Information processing speed and information processing effectiveness has everything to do with dodging blows.

Sure. That's why Sir Roger Penrose is roughly as good at dodging blows than Muhammad Ali in his prime.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sure. That's why Sir Roger Penrose is roughly as good at dodging blows than Muhammad Ali in his prime.

I raise you the RDJ Sherlock Holmes movie.

 

[ECMO3]

With all of that(and fighting styles don't grant BM maneuvers) he has not even a 10th of the complexity of a Wizard or Cleric.

You are wrong the superior technique fighting style grants a battle master maneuver and martial adept feat available to any character grants two more.

Such a character is substantially more complex with crap to keep track of all over his character sheet. one-for-one It is also easier to manage slots than daily castings. The wizard does not have to keep track of if he cast darkness or invisibility, just that he cast a 2nd level spell and used a 2nd level slot.

Aside from his abilities and choices, every single time he makes an attack roll or ability check he needs to figure out if he or the target is in "direct sunlight".

A 10th level Wizard is going to have 15 spell slots plus 5 cantrips selected from a minimum of 10 spells(probably more like 14), and those 14 selected from his spellbook which will have a minimum 24 spells in it. The combinations of spells and slots is going to be staggering compared to the very, very tame small number of options a Champion has. A Cleric is far worse since his "spellbook" comprises all Cleric spells.

I find it pretty easy to manage spell slots, not so easy to manage abilities that vary with short rest vs long rest.

16 spell slots X the minimum of 10 prepared spells = a huge number of options. Does he upcast things or not. Which of his prepares spells does he use, when. And he faces more options when deciding what to prepare for the day. That dwarfs the very limited number of choices a Champion faces.

Options do not mean complexity.

The 12th-level champion if he uses the attack action every single turn has to decide how to split his 3 attacks between the 5 different weapons he started with (assuming he did not buy any new ones after 1st level), grappling, shoving or making an unarmed attack. Then he can decide what riders to put on that attack and whether to take action surge and do it again.

That is just if he makes an attack instead of casting a cantrip or spell himself or doing something else.

The champion has a ton of "options", not as many spells but a lot of options.

The fighting styles don't give BM maneuvers, unless that's in another book other than the PHB, which can't be assumed. And even with all of that, you still don't even come remotely close to the 10th level Wizard, let alone a 12th level one.

The Superior technique fighting style gives one battlemaster maneuver and it is published official WOTC RAW. Martial adept also gives two and I think it is in the PHB.