D&D 5E Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

[HammerMan]

So I've gone through this deal at work where one of my team's passwords got borked and I've been working for days trying to get IT to fix it. I keep explaining that her computer password needs to be reset and they keep asking questions about the passwords for her tools and trying to palm us off to the team that handles those.

best analogy yet... I feel you.

don't forget your new password has to be so complex you can't remember it and will do little to no good if a hacker really wants it...

 

[Oofta]

i want multi tiered abilities that control narrative like spells. I want things that in and out of combat have abilities to choose from and if I make 3 different members of the same class I can choose different abilities (the way I can make 3 diffrent wizards, choose 6 +2 per level spells and not duplicate at all if I want...)
Also the rune knight is still magical. I want a strong leader of men with little to no magic. I want my narritive abilities to be non magical.

Thanks for explaining but I think you want something other than what most people want from the game. To be a leader of men you have to have a reason to be a leader, you typically have to have an entire subsystem of kingdom management and warfare that we haven't seen in a long time. Without that subsystem, which would have far reaching impact, there's no reason to have any mechanical system in place because the DM is going to have to build all of the reasons to have it anyway.

If you want a leadership style (I'm assuming not a "leader" role like 4E) you need someone to lead. If you have people to lead you have to have a reason in game to lead them. Current editions of D&D don't provide any support for that, I don't see that ever happening.

 

[Remathilis]

Every suggestion is shot down with ~but my verisimilitude~ or ignored.

Moving the Battlemaster chassis back to the core fighter with a reasonable number of superiority die rather than the 'eh, you can be a decent warrior once or twice a combat' levels they have with subclasses that build on that as you specifically have shown is a start.

But that discussion doesn't last long before being drowned out by 'NERF CASTERS' and 'ITS GOOD ENOUGH, SHUT UP'.

Wow. It's like my battlemaster/champion hybrid core fighter idea I posted in the last two threads got deleted. Twice.

 

[HammerMan]

For those who feel that the fighter is basically fine as is, how would you rate the three pillars in terms of importance in your game?

I would say at my table it's roughly 40% combat, 30% exploration, and 30% social. Exploration and social can have a profound impact on the course of our campaigns, but we enjoy a lot of combat as well.

not your target here (I want a better fighter) but I would say 45% combat 20% social and 35% exploration is most of my games I run... but the 2 DMs I play under(right now) are different

Becky runs weekly and she is closer to 50% social 35% combat 15% exploration... over last 7 levels (3rd-current 10th) we have explored only 2 sites, but we have been embroiled in the death of a king (died long pregame) and his elven wife has been queen regent while his and her half elf children and grand children have become adults (they have a single baby great great grand daughter) and the problem of who sucseeds her as she is sick (most likely poisoned) while the 2 city states that used to be part of the kingdom both have larger more battle ready armies and at least 1 might invade... and there lord mayor is a descendent of the dead king's brother...

Matt runs 1/ month (although due to holidays we missed December) and he is more 50% exploration 45% combat 5% sociol... we are explores on an unknown continent so...

 

[HammerMan]

Thanks for explaining but I think you want something other than what most people want from the game. To be a leader of men you have to have a reason to be a leader, you typically have to have an entire subsystem of kingdom management and warfare that we haven't seen in a long time. Without that subsystem, which would have far reaching impact, there's no reason to have any mechanical system in place because the DM is going to have to build all of the reasons to have it anyway.

you should check out birthright... it has good systems for all of that. However for now I am fine with only being the leader of the small force inspireing a few people... I don't need an army (although I do miss birthright)

If you want a leadership style (I'm assuming not a "leader" role like 4E) you need someone to lead. If you have people to lead you have to have a reason in game to lead them. Current editions of D&D don't provide any support for that, I don't see that ever happening.

and I am argueing to change that.

 

[Umbran]

I mean the post literally had the missing warrior types in it as that was the subject of my comment. But to repeat:

• Superpowered warriors
• Monstrous warriors
• Scientific warriors
• Warriors of mystical weapon martial arts

Aren't Barbarians the monstrous warriors?

And I am not exactly sure why a pseudo-medieval fantasy game needs a "scientific" warrior. The only "scientific" class in the game is the Artificer, and they're pretty blatantly using magic, not science.

 

[HammerMan]

Wow. It's like my battlemaster/champion hybrid core fighter idea I posted in the last two threads got deleted. Twice.

it's a good idea. I even joked with a friend for a while about gestalt fighter/rogue and giving the fighter the battle master dice and maneuvers even though they would still get another subclass. I doubt at level 13+ anyone would notice them compared to any full casters... but the damage of 3 attacks 1 getting sneak attack plus action surge was too much for me to take it seriously

 

[HammerMan]

Aren't Barbarians the monstrous warriors?

And I am not exactly sure why a pseudo-medieval fantasy game needs a "scientific" warrior. The only "scientific" class in the game is the Artificer, and they're pretty blatantly using magic, not science.

I think articefer is great at filling that gap... the batman gadget or the ironman armor but in a mystic midevilish world

 

[Remathilis]

The issue is I think WOTC was selling people on a Ravenloft Cupcake and the growth of 5e is based on people expecting Ravenloft cupcakes, Avatar Cupcakes, Demon Slayer Cupcakes, Batman the Knight Cupcake..

then provides a Vanilla cupcake with Icing.

VRGtR was positively reviewed. But what was the biggest common criticism: It wasn't dark enough.

And to me that's the core cause of the martial issue in 5e: It doesn't get martial enough. It's all vanilla with flavors on top. So martials can't get deep in the martial flavor and aredependent on the DM or 3PP to inject flavor and hope it gets allowed.

The thing is, WotC never promised anything more than vanilla and lightly flavored icing. Ravenloft can't compete with a dedicated horror rpg like CoC or WoD, and it really shouldn't. D&D is vanilla and complaining that you got a vanilla cupcake when you bought isn't WotC's problem. They labeled it a vanilla cupcake with lightly flavored icing and you wanted them to bake you red velvet with cream cheese icing.

That said, any new class in the PHB should be designed for that kitchen sink setting best exemplified by Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. It needs to work in the vanilla. A pistoleer would be a cool warrior type, but unless you want guns in all vanilla D&D settings, it's probably not a core option. (Now making it for a supplement like how artificer is would work fine). I think a couple of your ideas could flesh out into classes, but they gotta be able to work in the largest amount of settings if they are going to get traction. Put another way, it can't clash with the vanilla.

 

[HammerMan]

The thing is, WotC never promised anything more than vanilla and lightly flavored icing. Ravenloft can't compete with a dedicated horror rpg like CoC or WoD, and it really shouldn't. D&D is vanilla and complaining that you got a vanilla cupcake when you bought isn't WotC's problem. They labeled it a vanilla cupcake with lightly flavored icing and you wanted them to bake you red velvet with cream cheese icing.

TBH I wish we got MORE lightly flavored frosting... even if the main push was FR (my least favorite D&D setting) the 2.5 ravenloft books are a great example of how we could see more (.5 becuse of revamped base in the box).

1 adventure, 1 supliment... imagine doing that for Darksun, Birthright, Spell Jammer, and more (those are my 3 favorites after ravenloft) even if we say adventure 1 (like curse of strahd) came out 2023, adventure 2 (like curse of strahd) and supliment 1 (like vanrichten but linked to adventure 1) both in 2024, then adventure 3 and supliment 2 in 2025 ect ect... then suggest in the back of each to go to the DMs guild and buy previus edition books to add more flavor if you want to continue to run those settings.

That said, any new class in the PHB should be designed for that kitchen sink setting best exemplified by Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. It needs to work in the vanilla. A pistoleer would be a cool warrior type, but unless you want guns in all vanilla D&D settings, it's probably not a core option. (Now making it for a supplement like how artificer is would work fine). I think a couple of your ideas could flesh out into classes, but they gotta be able to work in the largest amount of settings if they are going to get traction. Put another way, it can't clash with the vanilla.

I actually think artificer (and a 4ewarlord or 3.5 warblade) added to the 50th anniversary book would round out the classes nicely... and not be adding anything we don't already have/want... a new warrior and an alchemist seem like easy softballs over the plate. Even if the new warrior would be shut down by loud voices... I can't imagine anyone saying artificer doesn't fit in it's newest form right next to warlock, wizard, sorserer ect.

As for you