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

[TheSword]

But I never "got" the "simple fighter" and likely never will. The simple warrior is the Bruiser Barbarian or Brute Rogue in my head.

It’s worth checking out the list of fighters from fiction by Tier linked earlier in the other thread. A small fraction of them fitted that description. Most fitted the classic fighter or possibly the eldritch knight, ranger or Paladin.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Honestly, that is what most DMs have done for the 40+ years I've played D&D. Flying mounts, winged boots, magic carpets have all been used for a long time. I don't think I've ever known a DM who hasn't done such things once you get to the appropriate "power" level to need it.

The premise has always been casters use magic, non-casters use magic items.

But you have the group who want non-casters can just do cool stuff "because" they can and the group who doesn't want non-casters to have to depend on magic items and other groups as well...

The issue, as I see it, is that the caster options are primarily player facing. Every level casters get to choose spells.

The non-caster options are DM facing. Have a stingy DM? Tough. A DM who prefers to roll magic items randomly (this is often the case when I'm a player) and the dice don't fall in your favor? Too bad.

The game will always rely on the DM. However, certain classes rely too much on the DM, while others are far less reliant.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Honestly, that is what most DMs have done for the 40+ years I've played D&D. Flying mounts, winged boots, magic carpets have all been used for a long time. I don't think I've ever known a DM who hasn't done such things once you get to the appropriate "power" level to need it.

The premise has always been casters use magic, non-casters use magic items.

But you have the group who want non-casters can just do cool stuff "because" they can and the group who doesn't want non-casters to have to depend on magic items and other groups as well...

Putting into rule form is a great way for players/DM's who don't have 30+ years of experience fixing up D&D's slapdash rules and play.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Then you made the design choice to emphasize melee over ranged. If that comes to bite you in the butt once in a while, so be it.

Lets be honest. They were stupid enough to want to play a warrior type over one of the real classes.

The game already rewards ranged over melee, and dex over strength.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Then you made the design choice to emphasize melee over ranged. If that comes to bite you in the butt once in a while, so be it.

It's how the game is built. If you choose to balance both, your fighter won't even be the best at combat. Some choice.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

It’s worth checking out the list of fighters from fiction by Tier linked earlier in the other thread. A small fraction of them fitted that description. Most fitted the classic fighter or possibly the eldritch knight, ranger or Paladin.

Those guys didn't go on adventures with D&D casters. I'm sure the BMX Bandit is great in his solo show.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Glad you've resigned yourself to bad design being a feature, not a bug.

Now hold on! Tell me how you really feel.

While I have no problem with a beefed-up fighter (witness my admiration of Level Up) or even a mythic warrior class, I don't want casters nerfed any further. I feel that to do so would tarnish the essence of D&D to the point where I wouldn't enjoy it. It is not bad design to me.

 

[TheSword]

It's how the game is built. If you choose to balance both, your fighter won't even be the best at combat. Some choice.

Not true. There are several ranged weapons that key off strength. There are also perfectly good ways of playing a melee fighter that key off Dex.

 

[DND_Reborn]

It’s worth checking out the list of fighters from fiction by Tier linked earlier in the other thread. A small fraction of them fitted that description.

LOL man, I didn't know 80% or more of the people on those lists in that thread...

The issue, as I see it, is that the caster options are primarily player facing. Every level casters get to choose spells.

The non-caster options are DM facing. Have a stingy DM? Tough. A DM who prefers to roll magic items randomly (this is often the case when I'm a player) and the dice don't fall in your favor? Too bad.

The game will always rely on the DM. However, certain classes rely too much on the DM, while others are far less reliant.

(bold added)

Which is why a return to only gaining spells you find and having make checks to master them would fix that part of the issue, returning the authority to the DM where (IMO) it belongs. To me it is one of the failings of d20 D&D in general, casters still get their spells, but there is no longer other checks and balanced to keep them in line.

Putting into rule form is a great way for players/DM's who don't have 30+ years of experience fixing up D&D's slapdash rules and play.

Sure, I think that would have been a much better use for some pages in the DMG than some of the stuff we have in it.

Lets be honest. They were stupid enough to want to play a warrior type over one of the real classes.

Many casters would have the same issues...

The game already rewards ranged over melee, and dex over strength.

Yep, another issue with d20 design. But, honestly, ranged favors melee IRL anyway.

It's how the game is built. If you choose to balance both, your fighter won't even be the best at combat. Some choice.

One I choose all the time. I don't need to be optimized or the best at ranged or melee when I can be pretty damn good at both.

 

[Micah Sweet]

At will when?

Can wizards fly and levitate at will? When did that happen?