Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter/Martial Problem (In Depth Ponderings)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9174176" data-attributes="member: 7030563"><p>I don't believe there is a right and wrong side of balance. There is a strong and weak, but what is right is what you as the player want to play.</p><p></p><p>Being weak is not the same as being a trap, nor is it the same as being wrong. I am playing a Monk right now, I was not trapped into doing that and I am not wrong for doing that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a flawed approach because certain classes are more reliant on subclass than others. Wizards and Paladins for example are not heavily reliant on subclass. Clerics and fighters are more reliant on subclass and subclass is a</p><p></p><p>If you consider the best subclasses of each class (probably Rune Knight or Eldritch Knight on a Fighter), the amount of imbalance goes down tremendously becuase that is a big buff for classes like Fighters and Clerics, but a smaller Buff for other classes. Further using an optimal class for some classes like Cleric (Twilight) or Monk (Mercy) completely changes the dynamics of the class Balance. A Twilight Cleric more powerful than any Wizard with equal abilities at most levels if you do it this way. So to achieve "balance" you would need to actually nerf the cleric or buff the Wizard, since the optimal Cleric is so good.</p><p></p><p>Further the amount of imbalance between fighters and Wizards is generally small compared to the amount of imbalance between races when playing such classes and the best races typically do more for Fighters than they do for Wizards.</p><p></p><p>So when we are doing this balancing act are we assuming optimal races too? This is important because the best races are a bigger boost for martials than they generally are for casters. So to achieve this perfect balance are we to assume the optimal race for each specific class (and subclass). So there is one single point where there is balance?</p><p></p><p>What levels should we strive for balance at? Wizards are not as powerful as Monks at 1st and 2nd level, so do we need to nerf Monks a bit because of that?</p><p></p><p>Finally different ability scores dramatically change balance and not only different ability scores between PCs, but the same distribution on different classes changes the balance dynamic as well. A Wizard with no ability above 14 loses a lot more than a Druid with no score above 14. A Paladin with a single 14 who picks an optimal subclass is generally going to be weaker than a fighter with a single 14 who picks an optimal subclass.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You can't do that as long as choice is at play. My fighter that chooses to invest points in Charisma instead of Constitution (and this is common on fighters I personally play) is going to be weaker.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The imbalance between Fighters and Monks at most levels is larger than the imbalance between Fighters and Wizards at most levels. Where this is not true are levels 1-2 where the Monk is actually the most powerful of these three classes and at level 17+ after Wish comes online. At every other level a Fighter is closer to a Wizard than it is to Monk.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not at all levels and especially not if you assume optimal subclass choices.</p><p></p><p>There is no appreciable gap between an optimized human fighter with standard array at levels 3-8 and an optimized human Wizard with Standard Array at those same levels.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>No it isn't, it is the Monk or Barbarian at most levels above level 3 and the difference is pretty great.</p><p></p><p>This argument that fighters are restricted to being mundane holds no water at all in modern RAW 5E considering all the supernatural options available to fighters.</p><p></p><p>The fighter has very strong subclass choices it can use to set overall effectiveness, including access to spells and many other supernatural abilities through those subclasses.</p><p></p><p>Fighters can turn giant size and summon flaming shackles or teleport across the battlefield, or have poisonous thorns spring from their arrows, or shoot fire from their fingertips ..... It is fine if players choose not to have their PC fighters do those kinds of things, but it is also a conscious choice to play on the weak (but not wrong) side of imbalance.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But those aren't constraints in 5E. There is no requirement at all for 5E fighters to not be supernatural! Aside from the subclasses and races, in 5E not even the feats are constrained like this.</p><p></p><p>If I want I can build a single-class fighter that can cast 14 leveled spells a day at 8th level. That is without even thinking about it very hard!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9174176, member: 7030563"] I don't believe there is a right and wrong side of balance. There is a strong and weak, but what is right is what you as the player want to play. Being weak is not the same as being a trap, nor is it the same as being wrong. I am playing a Monk right now, I was not trapped into doing that and I am not wrong for doing that. This is a flawed approach because certain classes are more reliant on subclass than others. Wizards and Paladins for example are not heavily reliant on subclass. Clerics and fighters are more reliant on subclass and subclass is a If you consider the best subclasses of each class (probably Rune Knight or Eldritch Knight on a Fighter), the amount of imbalance goes down tremendously becuase that is a big buff for classes like Fighters and Clerics, but a smaller Buff for other classes. Further using an optimal class for some classes like Cleric (Twilight) or Monk (Mercy) completely changes the dynamics of the class Balance. A Twilight Cleric more powerful than any Wizard with equal abilities at most levels if you do it this way. So to achieve "balance" you would need to actually nerf the cleric or buff the Wizard, since the optimal Cleric is so good. Further the amount of imbalance between fighters and Wizards is generally small compared to the amount of imbalance between races when playing such classes and the best races typically do more for Fighters than they do for Wizards. So when we are doing this balancing act are we assuming optimal races too? This is important because the best races are a bigger boost for martials than they generally are for casters. So to achieve this perfect balance are we to assume the optimal race for each specific class (and subclass). So there is one single point where there is balance? What levels should we strive for balance at? Wizards are not as powerful as Monks at 1st and 2nd level, so do we need to nerf Monks a bit because of that? Finally different ability scores dramatically change balance and not only different ability scores between PCs, but the same distribution on different classes changes the balance dynamic as well. A Wizard with no ability above 14 loses a lot more than a Druid with no score above 14. A Paladin with a single 14 who picks an optimal subclass is generally going to be weaker than a fighter with a single 14 who picks an optimal subclass. You can't do that as long as choice is at play. My fighter that chooses to invest points in Charisma instead of Constitution (and this is common on fighters I personally play) is going to be weaker. The imbalance between Fighters and Monks at most levels is larger than the imbalance between Fighters and Wizards at most levels. Where this is not true are levels 1-2 where the Monk is actually the most powerful of these three classes and at level 17+ after Wish comes online. At every other level a Fighter is closer to a Wizard than it is to Monk. Not at all levels and especially not if you assume optimal subclass choices. There is no appreciable gap between an optimized human fighter with standard array at levels 3-8 and an optimized human Wizard with Standard Array at those same levels. No it isn't, it is the Monk or Barbarian at most levels above level 3 and the difference is pretty great. This argument that fighters are restricted to being mundane holds no water at all in modern RAW 5E considering all the supernatural options available to fighters. The fighter has very strong subclass choices it can use to set overall effectiveness, including access to spells and many other supernatural abilities through those subclasses. Fighters can turn giant size and summon flaming shackles or teleport across the battlefield, or have poisonous thorns spring from their arrows, or shoot fire from their fingertips ..... It is fine if players choose not to have their PC fighters do those kinds of things, but it is also a conscious choice to play on the weak (but not wrong) side of imbalance. But those aren't constraints in 5E. There is no requirement at all for 5E fighters to not be supernatural! Aside from the subclasses and races, in 5E not even the feats are constrained like this. If I want I can build a single-class fighter that can cast 14 leveled spells a day at 8th level. That is without even thinking about it very hard! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter/Martial Problem (In Depth Ponderings)
Top