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

[HammerMan]

Many times I have heard game designers say that players are great at spotting problems but not necessarily good at fixing them. That doesn’t erase the problem. Consensus should not be the enemy of a solution.

I;m real good at saying "this didn't work" or "We had this problem at the table" but I can't make a good fix. I (with some friends) have found some work arounds and patches... but mostly we just avoid the problem area and complain we want to use the problem area...

it's like cooking. I am the cook in the family (pretty good if I do say so) but my grandmother or my aunt can tell me "too much salt" or "not enough paste" or "put more onions next time" and I can feel confident they know what they are talking about... my niece and nephew who grew up eating all our food and hearing that are teens and can do similar. My fiancé how ever is NOT a cook... at all she loves most of my cooking... and she can tell me something is off or not as good as normal, but she never can tell me what I need to fix I need to figure that out on my own...

with game mechanics I am like my fiancé with food... "This isn't right" and "this is off" I can do... but I don't know if it needs more salt or more onions

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

the problem lies with X% want mythic martial class/classes and Y% say it will not be D&D anymore if you have mythic martial class/classes

Some people are sadly doing this despite the history of D&D including these mythic martials as examples.

And yes, it's a problem with these discussions because that is a non starter.

Yuuup. The person who ordered chicken wants an equal say in how someone else's steak is cooked. This doesn't get called out enough as the selfish BS that it is.

And apparently doesn't want steak on the menu at all because despite the insistance that they prefer chicken, are somehow threatened by someone sitting next to them enjoying their steak...

 

[HammerMan]

Trouble is that in these threads "mythic martial" as its apparently being called today seems to be "everything the fighter can do in combat just as well or better plus everything any other class can do within that class's niche".

the problem is you look at us saying "options for this or that" and are complaing about ADDING THIS ADN THAT to what is now...

A combat speced wizard is not the best at combat... that most likely falls to the combat speced hexblade or cleric... with honorable mention to druid and wild shape.
A combat speced wizard CAN in some number of encounters per day out do a fighter... and still have crazy out of combat trick or two...and in those rounds/encounters that the fighter is doing better, the wizard is still contribuitng and holding some weight.

I have yet to see a proposal for this 'master class' that can duplicate 6th-9th level spells without giving anything up

When anyone points out how broken that would be then contrived whiteroom scenarios like quantum wizards against fighters who spend 20 levels with as nonmagic dagger forced to upgrade to a plus one sickle.

bull
nobody does that,

I get told that I 'underused' the fighter by making a str/con build with a shield and longsword the lucky feat and 1 stat bump ahead of a
str/con build cleric with a shield and longsword with the lucky feat (but 1 stat bump less)...

I got told "Give him great weapon fighting a two handed sword and great weapon master... so I said okay, but I also traded out the long swor dand shield on the cleric for a 2 handed one and took great weapon master... I was told I just added too much to the cleric...

The amount of blindness to what different classes can & can't do within the limitations of their strengths & weaknesses tends to be tossed aside just as blithely too.

a party of 4 casters (see below) can out perform a party of 4 non casters in every way shape and form...

College of sword Bard, Cleric of war, Divination Wizard, Armorer Artificer... 3 full casters and a half caster

Bear totem barbarian, Battle Master fighter, Champion fighter, Thief Rogue

these two parties going agaist the same challanges with the same level of optimization isn't even close...

Just the other day there was a thread about how fighters should be tool masters because no other class fits that... Twenty two posts of dah rah each later someone pointed out the artificer who actually has that as a core part of their identity.

yes and artificers STILL get up to 6th level spells... ONTOP of being better with tools then the fighter and on par with the rouge (although later in level)

 

[HammerMan]

Yuuup. The person who ordered chicken wants an equal say in how someone else's steak is cooked. This doesn't get called out enough as the selfish BS that it is.

And apparently doesn't want steak on the menu at all because despite the insistance that they prefer chicken, are somehow threatened by someone sitting next to them enjoying their steak...

yup... how dare my favorite chicken restaurant offer good steak... they should get Crummey stake if they order steak... after all this is my chicken place.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Vast majority thinks there's a problem.

It's the plurality that's important!

D&D's primary problem, not just the fighter, but the game as a whole is its incredible, Blob-like inertia to change even when a massive number of participants want it. It's why the bias playtest in 5e put us in the position where this thread exists in the first place. Remember: we DID have a fighter a lot of people complaining here would have been happy with. And it got turned into a low-powered subclass version of itself.

Well to be fair, ENWorld is hardly representative of all D&D players. In a more general poll, I think it's likely a majority would be fine with the fighter as is.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why does everyone have to agree? If a decent amount of people -- 20%, 25%? -- want a Mythic Martial IMO the game is better for having that as an option to use or not.

1. There is a segment that is fine with things as they are.

2. There is a segment that wants to buff the current Fighter a little but still remain in the exagerated real world physics

3. There is a segment that wants Mythic Martials that go from mundance to action hero to mythic hero over the 20 levels

And others. We will never "convince" the other to have the same preferences.

That said, why are 1s and 2s so vocal about piping in on what 3. should look like and whether it should exist? As long 3 doesn't go beyond the current versatility, power, and narrative control of a Wizard then let them have at it. Let people that are excited about this hypothetical class design it.

No one from 3. is saying 1. and 2. shouldn't exist but there are a lot of 1. and 2s trying to police 3 with weird parameters that seem to boil down to "I might be more comfortable with this class that I don't want and will never play if you approach it like this or limit it like this..."

Ask WotC why they have to agree. It's their guideline. Or just find a third party product that does what you want and leave stodgy old officialdom behind.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Well to be fair, ENWorld is hardly representative of all D&D players. In a more general poll, I think it's likely a majority would be fine with the fighter as is.

Maybe. Maybe not.

While I don't think that ENWorld is generally representative of non-ENWorlders, in this case that might be beneficial. I suspect that ENWorlders likely spend a good deal more time in consideration and analysis of the game than the average player, which means that we may actually be a better indicator for issues like this.

 

[HammerMan]

Well to be fair, ENWorld is hardly representative of all D&D players. In a more general poll, I think it's likely a majority would be fine with the fighter as is.

good guess... it is no better then my guess that the opposite is true (especially with Strixhaven and Witchlight being so combat lite) I think if you could telepathically contact everyone who is playing 5e and took a poll MORE would want the fighter fixed then don't.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why do you think you deserve an answer? Wizards don't owe me an explanation for why magic is apparently so easy to learn, reliable, and safe. Leaving it vague lets players use their imagination.

The fighter can suplex an elephant because it's stupid that spells are the only way supernatural powers manifest in a magic heavy world. Magic is tech in D&D. EVERYONE uses science/tech in our world, not just computer programmers, scientists and engineers. Fighters in a magical world would have incorporated magic into their training in different ways. They would be doing mantras of strength, using top tier dragon protein powder in their protein shakes, and learn to reflect rays with their armor and dispel magical defenses with their weapons.

Sure, and if they say in the class description that fighters perform superhuman feats through establishing a connection with the supernatural essence of the world, then great! Otherwise, reality is earth-like unless you indicate that it's not. You can't just assume.

 

[HammerMan]

Ask WotC why they have to agree. It's their guideline. Or just find a third party product that does what you want and leave stodgy old officialdom behind.

oh the younger brother to 'fix it yourself' just buy something and hope it is good...

the same way I do not have the time energy or ability to homebrew, I do not have the time energy or money to buy 10 other homebrew ideas and find if 1 works (and maybe none do)... now the Enworld book level up sounds good, but mostly on here.

I don't find level up talked about on the facebook groups or tic tock or youtube the way I do here, so even though I know that it is MORE tested and MORE likely to be good then a random 3rd party... I still haven't done it yet (although I have been really thinking about it)