D&D 5E The Door, Player Expectations, and why 5e can't unify the fanbase.

[TwoSix]

Are you kidding? That's the best book ever printed for 3E, and the only reason I might even consider ever playing another 3E game. It's also the number one reason I don't want to play Pathfinder. Why play a version of 3E that doesn't have the Tome of Battle?!

Amen, brother. It's core 3.5 I have the biggest problems with. I'd happily run a 3.5 game with warblade, factotum, binder, and warlock as the core 4.

 

[Manbearcat]

I come at it from the perspective outlined below (and bulwarked by someone who has DMed only in his playing "career" - 20 + years):

This originally reared its head in the first long term 2e campaign I DMed. However, I'm going to use the 3e example as the most instructive to me on the issue.

My last 3e campaign ran from level 1 to level 24. This spanned the course of 5 years. The group waxed (6 total players) and waned (2 players). However, through levels 9 thru 15 there were 3 primary players (Characters 1 and 2 below and a Diviner/Summoner that made my life as a DM utterly miserable...as much in prep as in play...but I've spoken of my disdain for unconstrained Divinations RaW in a few other posts and it is not relevant to this discussion of Fighters so I will leave this character out) and through levels 16 thru 24 this narrowed to 2 (characters 1 and 2 below...these being relevant to the discussion due to their martial roots and their subsequent branching and the impact on their relevance/potency by way of said branching). I will do my best to outline their respective Theme/Role in play, their Deployable Resources/Build Attributes and then I will examine the archetypes' respective mechanical framework, its impact on the game and end with obnoxious, Socratic rhetoric device.

* To head one concern off at the pass, both of these gamers are extraordinary tactical and strategic thinkers, devoutly committed to their favored archetypes, and understand precisely how to optimize for and accurately represent those archetypes through PC build resources. Lets get to it:


Character 1) Human Fighter/Rogue/Illusionist/Shadow Warrior Prestige Class (basically an amalgamation of a Fighter Rogue with limited shadow jump capabilities and Illusionist/Necromancy Spell progression).

Theme/Role in play

- As Batman as it gets in DnD (which was basically the archetype he was drawing upon). As he evolved he became a Swiss Army Knife, able to resolve virtually any situation and always having the right tool for the job:

1) Scout
2) Trapfinder
3) Face
4) Infiltrator
5) Controller
6) Impossible to pin down Lurker
7) Devastating Nova...er (and would have surprise and catch enemies flat-footed perpetually - see below and above roles)
8) Master of subterfuge that could dictate when fights would occur, how they would occur and if they would even occur at all

Deployable Resources/Build Attributes

- At-Will dual wielding, multi-attacking, melee crit-factory with heavy sneak attack damage.
- Vancian Shadow Caster with all of your standard fair illusion and Necromancy spells up to 7th level. The character made extreme use of all of the Image line, the Invisibility line, the Alteration line and worse yet...the Shadow Conjuration line. The Necromancy line was standard fair, and potent to be sure, but he primarily made use of his Illusion spells. He primarily had Necromancy spells for ranged control/damage/AoE.
- Mediocre HPs/Defenses. However, this weakness is rendered obsolete when you are able to dictate most fights to your terms, you are wherever you wish to be, able to escape instantly when the fire is turned up, and you are able to render an enemy's action economy inert through illusory subterfuge and conjuration lockdown, and are more or less undetectable.
- Limited Use Shadow Jaunt.


Character 2) Elven Fighter/Ranger/Monk/Mage/Bladesinger - cheese factory

- As one would expect, this was your standard Elven Fighter/Mage archetype with a few levels of Ranger to round out the character archetype (Basically a Jedi/Shaolin Monk with a smattering of Legolas).

1) Lightly Armored Skirmisher
2) Tracker
3) Secondary Scout
4) Serviceable Artillery (Archery line of feats)
5) Devastating Melee Burst Damage/Crit-Factory

Deployable Resources/Build Attributes

- At-Will blade flurrying, multi-attacking, melee crit-factory that made heavy use of Arcane Strike/Power Attack while Spellsonging True Strike and/or one of his few attack spells (Telekinesis or Magic Missle).
- Outrageous Armor Class and Defenses (Improved Expertise, High Dex and Int and Wisdom - Bladesong plus Monk, and an absurd number of buffs).
- Wizard Vancian Caster with the ability to cast 6th level wizard spells making primary use of the Abjuration line (buffs), the Illusion line (Displacement/Blink), Transmutation (Buffs/Slow/Telekinesis), Dimension Door and Magic Missle to Spellsong now and then.
- At-Will Multi-Shotting Artillery to harass targets at range.


Ok. Now onto the examination of the archetypes respective mechanical framework, its impact on the game and the obnoxious rhetoric. These characters began their arcane tracks at roughly the same level (7 and 8 respectively) applied to a strictly Martial platform.

- One of these character's spell lines (willfully done to create archetype) focused primarily on becoming an undetectable, enemy-action-denier (through conjurations and illusory subterfuge), infiltration master (proxy for Divination), guerrilla tactician who dictated the terms of almost all engagements (or if there even were to be any engagements). He was primarily an unstoppable Paper and fantastic Scissors (both of these being primarily due to his spell line but Scissors was also due to the synergy with his martial background) but he could be plenty Rock when required (primarily due to his spell line).

- One of these character's spell lines and class features (willfully done to create archetype) were constructed to make him a more potent melee combatant. These spell lines made him absurdly more powerful as said melee combatant than if he would have just retained his martial path at level 8 and continued on in Fighter or Ranger or Monk. He was Rock and Scissors through and through (intentionally so) but had absolutely no ability in the Paper arena. But what a Rock and Scissors he was.

Guess which of these two characters primarily moved the fiction (in a mechanical sense)? Guess which one of these two characters was the out of combat problem solver (via mechanics)? Guess which one of these two characters gave me sleepless nights trying to extrapolate how my plot points would be circumvented and my climactic combats would be rendered anti-climactic and dull? Which one of these two characters maps to the pinnacle of the mundane fighter and which one of these characters maps to...perhaps a mythical fighter?..and most importantly, how was this achieved within the PC build resources and within the game mechanics?

 

[Greg K]

Why play a version of 3E that doesn't have the Tome of Battle?!

Because I can be using Malhavoc's Book of Iron Might!

 

[pemerton]

the fighter can have a patron arcane weaponsmith -- like the way Bond has Q or Thor has the dwarves that made Mjölnir.

This sounds good.

Failing that, the fighter is sorta like Indiana Jones or Lara Croft, specifically looking for treasure troves containing (or villians wielding) legendary weapons and armor, and these "side quests" are built into the adventure cooperatively with the DM.

Or going a bit further - somewhat like the Dark Wanderer abilities that I quoted, there could be some sort of "this happened offscreen but still matters to the story" mechanic.

This is assuming that the magic item economy supports this, but in my experience, D&D genre is flooded with magic items, even while the rules protest otherwise

Agreed.

The DM (AKA, the gods, fate, destiny, etc.) is going to make sure that I get a bunch of exceptionally nifty equipment to keep up with the wizard and cleric IS a mythic power. It's kind of an odd one, that people can avoid looking at directly while pretending it just happened, but if you look at it squarely in terms of the emergent story, it's mythic.

I agree - but if one person can look at it and see "mythic", and another look at it and see "mundane + satisfactory explanation for mythic capabilities", that's probably a good thing.

 

[Underman]

I recall a portion of the discussion involving my suggestion (basically mental and physical preparation for a mighty task that few can even attempt, and once that's done the prep must be done again), and how it doesn't have to be Leap Ocean 1/day and Cleave Mountain 1/day, instead perhaps one of the other (ie, Mythic Feat 1/day) or having some kind of pool for this type of thing. Were you not involved in that? Maybe it was someone else.

No, that was me, but somehow the topic came up again as questionable. I don't remember how in detail, and I don't want to spoil the mood. It would be great if you could give me (and anyone in general) the benefit of the doubt, thanks!

I agree - but if one person can look at it and see "mythic", and another look at it and see "mundane + satisfactory explanation for mythic capabilities", that's probably a good thing.

Now that's what I'm talking about! Easier said than done perhaps, but it seems to work well enough for the magic item scenario, so the possibilities are clearly out there.

 

[Underman]

Since you've used it twice, I figured I'd chime in with the well-known explanation in the myth itself that this was an illusion created by Utgard-loki, a magical giant. He placed the illusion that it was his cat (small to a giant, not to Thor -- at least according to the versions I have read) as a part of a trick against Thor.

The reading is a bit vague on how the illusion is accomplished exactly in a rational way that would work in D&D let's say. Not to mention the old crone who is really Old Age and all the other parts of that contest. Útgarða-Loki's illusions are very dreamy in the way that a person or thing can be two things at once (or one thing and then another) and nothing like the way we rationalize illusions in D&D. The power level of wizards would be highly controversial if epic spells could mythically summon Old Age, disguise it in god-proof illusions, and have it wrestle a major god into defeat.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Why isn't there a fantasy trope that high level fighters learn to craft magic weapons and armor on their own?

I think the key is that the "farm boy who finds something special inside of himself and becomes a hero" archetype is pretty much the most common fantasy trope for fighters. Sometimes, it's just "common city guard who knows how to fight becomes a hero".

But rarely is the hero a blacksmith to begin with and most people think of blacksmiths as something you need to grow up your entire life doing and learning. You can't just decide to be one at 22 and have time to learn in between adventures. (Of course, as a side note, it's been done so many times that now people have no problem accepting that someone becomes a master swordsman after a week of training when they are 22, however)

That trope makes sense as an excuse for why high level fighters have lots of magic items. But most fantasy tropes originate in movies and books rather than from the games themselves. A lot of people want the game to follow the existing tropes in other fantasy entertainment. Aragorn, Boromir, and Legolas didn't craft their own weapons.

Failing that, the fighter can have a patron arcane weaponsmith -- like the way Bond has Q or Thor has the dwarves that made Mjölnir.

But this assumes a LOT of stuff in the game world. What if the PCs are playing escaped slaves of the Drow attempting to hide in the tunnels of the Underdark and do guerrilla warfare against their former masters. How are they suddenly going to get a patron without also ruining the tone of the campaign?

Failing that, the fighter is sorta like Indiana Jones or Lara Croft, specifically looking for treasure troves containing (or villians wielding) legendary weapons and armor, and these "side quests" are built into the adventure cooperatively with the DM.

The problem is that if your party comes with you, they are going to want to get a share of the treasure. You know how hard it is to convince the rest of your party that the magic suit of armor, the weapon, and the cool flying boot are all for the Fighter as a balance method for his class and the rest of you will just have to suck it up?

They are likely going to wonder why the DM didn't put equipment in there for the rest of them. Even if they know WHY...it still won't stop some people from role playing the fact that they think it's more fair if they split all the items up, that way everyone else can sell the items and buy what they want.

That's the problem with using equipment as a balancing factor. In character, there is no good reason why a bunch of people risking death together would be handing over the majority of their treasure to one person over the others.

Well, unless you can't sell magic items. In which case, that sword is ONLY useful to the Fighter, might as well let him use it.

Mythic fighters wouldn't need to rely on magic trinkets, but why don't mundane fighters reliant on magic items/armor take control of their own fate, instead of passively hoping for magic gear?

I think the entire point of going into dungeons and fighting monsters IS to take control of their own fate and find powerful magic items to use.

And the average dungeon gives them 6 suits of armor and 12 weapons anyways. So, there's no hoping involved.

 

[Underman]

@ Majoru Oakheart I agree with what you wrote as being problematic, but some of these are campaign-specific challenges with campaign-specific solutions.

But this assumes a LOT of stuff in the game world. What if the PCs are playing escaped slaves of the Drow attempting to hide in the tunnels of the Underdark and do guerrilla warfare against their former masters. How are they suddenly going to get a patron without also ruining the tone of the campaign?

For example, with guerrilla warfare, a fighter is basically pillaging his enemies and gets a ton of loot from slain and captured enemies. A fighter could strategically bring on or capture blacksmiths to aid in the battle. A mythic fighter might be able to visit a fey patron in his "dreams" and awake with a new (fey-gated-in) weapon or fey lore to the location of a weapon. But mostly, the loot is going to be plentiful.

In character, there is no good reason why a bunch of people risking death together would be handing over the majority of their treasure to one person over the others.

So the argument is that the players are OK with allocating equipment to the fighter for fairness, but the characters are thinking differently. I get that. Yet, if the fighter is most effective at utilizing a sword, doesn't it make in-game sense to give him the best sword? They don't need to hand over the majority of their treasure, just the stuff the fighter can use better than anyone else.

There are mechanical incentives in that a weaponmaster fighter gets more bonuses or more advantages out of swords than others. And then you really want to give this guy some good armor so that he can continue to slash and pierce the party's foes.

 

[Zustiur]

So I kind of viewed spells as something so difficult to handle that you are pretty much stuck "cramming" to get it to work in any kind of reasonable timeframe. In this conception, theoretically a wizard could study fireball for a decade or so, in all kinds of environments and dangers, and finally cast it on demand--but who has that kind of time? (If you say "elves," I'm gonna smack you! )

That would fit in with the concept of signature spells too! Eventually (cost of a feat) you can get so used to cramming a spell that you never forget again.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

@ Majoru Oakheart I agree with what you wrote as being problematic, but some of these are campaign-specific challenges with campaign-specific solutions.

What it comes down to, is that they all enforce a playstyle on the DM, however. If the DM wants to run a game where the PCs don't have any resources at all except those they take off the dead bodies of their enemies, and the idea that gods would directly involve themselves in 5 people trapped in a tunnel is against his/her sensibilities, then the game is saying "Don't run your game, run OUR game! In our game you MUST write into your storyline free magic items for the Fighter, whether you like it or not."

The same applies to someone who wants to run a game completely without magic items...or one who wants to be able to take all the items away from the PCs as a plot device but still have the PCs capable of escaping and winning combats, and so on. There are so many ideas for adventures that you just aren't allowed to use because the rules stop you from doing so.

For example, with guerrilla warfare, a fighter is basically pillaging his enemies and gets a ton of loot from slain and captured enemies.

Sure, and I would expect them to. But whether those items are magic or not is another story. If the DM doesn't want them to be, he is forced to make them magic by the rules now.

So the argument is that the players are OK with allocating equipment to the fighter for fairness, but the characters are thinking differently. I get that. Yet, if the fighter is most effective at utilizing a sword, doesn't it make in-game sense to give him the best sword? They don't need to hand over the majority of their treasure, just the stuff the fighter can use better than anyone else.

Sure, but if your party consists of a Cleric, 2 Wizards, and a Fighter and you find a treasure pile that consists of a magic sword, a magic armor, a magic shield, a magic helm that protects you from spells(this pile was generated because the rules said Fighters needed magic items to be balanced, so you gave out magic items specifically for him)....and 100 gp.

Now, the 2 Wizards and the Cleric in the party can either say "We fought our way through all of these dangerous traps for our share of 100 gp" and give the Fighter all the magic items. Or they can demand that the magic items be split equally amongst the group so that the magic items can be sold later to make it worth their while to go on the adventure.

There are mechanical incentives in that a weaponmaster fighter gets more bonuses or more advantages out of swords than others. And then you really want to give this guy some good armor so that he can continue to slash and pierce the party's foes.

Which makes sense. As long as you can't sell the items and buy something that gives mechanical benefits to anyone else in the party. Because then, there are mechanical incentives to take those items away from the Fighter.

Especially if the balance of the game is based on Fighters having magic items. I mean, why give the magic items to the one person in your party who is extremely weak without them when you could give them to the Wizard, who is designed to be much stronger without items and make him even stronger?