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

[Crimson Longinus]

So what should I Fighter be able to do out of combat?

Allow me to introduce Elliot Spencer from the TnT show Leverage.

Elliot is, in the show's parlance, The Hitter, the group's muscle whose job it is to beat on problems the rest of the team can't hack, steal, or talk their way past.

It would be really easy for the writers to make him a dumb, useless brute only good in a fight like a D&D Fighter. But these are some of the best pulp writers in the game, so he's not.

Elliot has been a hitter all over the world and in dozens of conflicts of varying size and type.

He can identify weapons by their sound or the shape they hold under clothing.
He speaks almost as many languages as the team Grifter for the same reason.
He's been in so many fights that he has a great sense of when someone has hostile intent from body language and mannerisms.
He's been muscle for so many bad guys that he knows security layouts and standard patrol routes.
He also knows the base operations of those types of organizations.
He cooks.
He sings.
He's good at covert communication.

In five seasons, he lost three fights. And no one tried to balance his badassery by making him incompetent at the other ways he contributes to the team.

Also, he never just stands there like a lump and punches ceaselessly, but baby steps.

Right. So some skills and perhaps feats. Considering that a starting fighter gets something like four to six skills (depending on species) without expending feats, that seems pretty doable. Decent wisdom might be a good pick to boost perception and insight. Though he probably isn't a first level character.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Relatively. If the max spell level anyone can ever get is five instead of nine it's pretty different.

You still cast spells more often than you poop. How is that low magic?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

You still cast spells more often than you poop. How is that low magic?

I gather you do not understand what 'relative' means?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

This again seems to indicate the level of dissatisfaction with the game than will realistically never be addressed. So perhaps stop being mad about it and go find a game better suited your tastes?

Or maybe they can add a single class to meet the needs of people who are tired of weaksauce fighter types? We have umpteen types of mages, bloating the game with hundreds of pages of spells, but a mythic martial hero is just a bridge too far?

Maybe its you guys who just back down and stop shooting down our desired archetype at every opportunity, given that you don't want to play it? It's like a vegan dictating how the steak should be served.

 

[Don Durito]

Class variant: Smite Evil. - Cross out Action Surge on your character sheet. Instead write "Smite Evil".

There. Done. If you want to play a Paladin, you play a Fighter; take the Acolyte Background, Take Magic Initiate Cleric.

We can get rid of the Paladin class now there is no need for it. It's conceptual space has been filled. And since you can already do it, no one should be asking for a new class.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Class variant: Smite Evil. - Cross out Action Surge on your character sheet. Instead write "Smite Evil".

There. Done. If you want to play a Paladin, you play a Fighter; take the Acolyte Background, Take Magic Initiate Cleric.

We can get rid of the Paladin class now there is no need for it. It's conceptual space has been filled. And since you can already do it, no one should be asking for a new class.

Sounds fine to me. Though I probably would make it a subclass; a divine version of eldritch knight.

 

[Sithlord]

Oh for gods sake! Just admit you dislike the idea on principle.

It's D&D, fun and game balance trumps realism by a factor of 100 to 1. What about Bards - when they go to bardic college to they have special warrior training sessions? (In case they need to deal with jealous partners maybe?)

But try this. Scholars require privilege to get their education. That privilege in an arisocratic society generally assumes some degree of warrior training. It's expected. The fact that ultimately they resisted that training doesn't mean they never got any.

Or, if being able to fight is part of the design of the class, then of all the scholars in the world, the ones you can play are the one's that can fight. Just, as, of all the priests in the world, the ones you can play are the ones that have some degree of combat training.

Done! We can now continue our day, having resolved this deeply vexing question, and knowing all is right with the world.

Nope. I would like more no armor and 1d6 hp classes. I like what they did with a scholar class in a Conan rpg and a few others. But you are right that was pretty negative and unconstructive of me. Go with what works for you. Apologies

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

But D&D's popularity is sort of a problem in a sense that a lot of people appear to see RPGs=D&D and then expect D&D to be able to do everything, and it really can't. It's not my favourite game and I wouldn't use it for many things.

However, D&D has a unique problem in that it's legacy fanbase actively reinforces bad design choices and punishes attempts to improve them.

Stopping spells with magic swords and armor is a pretty bog standard fantasy tropes. That's some level 5 appropriate stuff IMO (expend reaction, gain advantage on save). Far more so than casters flinging spells in a single round, which is a trope of D&D, and... like nothing else. Hell, even D&D novels don't have the heroes casting spells much, probably because the writers realize how lame it is. .

Yep. D&D is not a well designed RPG for anything other than modeling D&D. And D&D is very weird from a literary/archtype point of view. It's such a hodge podge of legacy randomness.

Take magic. Other than a few superheros and mary sues, magic from non D&D sources is much more likely to have:

1) severe breadth limits. You are a Fire Mage but can't teleport, scry, use other elements, etc. You are a Diviner that can also put curses on people but you can't do combat magic. Etc.
2) severe cost to self by using your magic.
3) Both

I don't really have much hope that D&D changes on the magic front. 3e was the point of no return apparently (with a tiny 4e speed bump).

That said, it could still add the mythic hero concept and the game would be a broader tent. Maybe even have its cake and eat it too if it just waited until level 8 or 10 to start adding this stuff.

IMO the TTRPG field would have been better off with some other system than D&D evolving into the dominate RPG system. But it doesn't matter too much, since there seem to be cool and innovative TTRPGS coming out all the time. We have so much more to draw from and play than in 1980 which is fun, but IMO also a little sad that many people will only experience an RPG through D&D.

 

[Sithlord]

Yep. D&D is not a well designed RPG for anything other than modeling D&D. And D&D is very weird from a literary/archtype point of view. It's such a hodge podge of legacy randomness.

Take magic. Other than a few superheros and mary sues, magic from non D&D sources is much more likely to have:

1) severe breadth limits. You are a Fire Mage but can't teleport, scry, use other elements, etc. You are a Diviner that can also put curses on people but you can't do combat magic. Etc.
2) severe cost to self by using your magic.
3) Both

I don't really have much hope that D&D changes on the magic front. 3e was the point of no return apparently (with a tiny 4e speed bump).

That said, it could still add the mythic hero concept and the game would be a broader tent. Maybe even have its cake and eat it too if it just waited until level 8 or 10 to start adding this stuff.

IMO the TTRPG field would have been better off with some other system than D&D evolving into the dominate RPG system. But it doesn't matter too much, since there seem to be cool and innovative TTRPGS coming out all the time. We have so much more to draw from and play than in 1980 which is fun, but IMO also a little sad that many people will only experience an RPG through D&D.

I really wish people would revel in what D&D is and not come into it wanting to play Harry Potter or Dresden. It has its own cosmology and magic system that are quite unique. It’s not a Jack Vance ripoff. It is Jack Vance influenced beautifully. But it really is it’s own thing. And I would definitely recommend Vance to anyone for reading.

 

[FrogReaver]

I really wish people would revel in what D&D is and not come into it wanting to play Harry Potter or Dresden. It has its own cosmology and magic system that are quite unique. It’s not a Jack Vance ripoff. It is Jack Vance influenced beautifully. But it really is it’s own thing. And I would definitely recommend Vance to anyone for reading.

Sure. But D&D is kind of supposed to handle generic fantasy. That’s part of the problem IMO.