D&D 5E [+] Ways to fix the caster / non-caster gap


Riding the shield? Stabbing with the arrow, then firing it? Impaling two enemies with one shot? Climbing and shooting a moving foe? Being an elf who is sufferable?

Almost everything there is doable:

1. Riding a shield: This is most likely declare an action although many DMs would rule you don't need an action, just like if it were a sled or carriage you were on.

2.a. Stabbing with an arrow: improvised weapon attack
2.b. Then firing it: ranged weapon attack

3. Impaling 2 enemies with one shot: Arcane Archer Piercing Arrow (I admit I had to think about this one for a while)

4. Climbing on a moving foe and attacking it: Optional rule from DMG page 271. In terms of fiction, the scene from LOTR is what I think of when I read this section of rules. Also note RAW, not only can you climb on and attack the creature, you have advantage on those attacks. I have done this a lot in game with a variety of characters. I've done it so much one of the DMs I play with nerfed this and houseruled it so it no longer gives the advantage.

5. Being an Elf who is sufferable: Ok you have me there! :)
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
although i do admit, the idea of wizards beating people up with their magic staffs is amusing.

edit: what are peoples thoughts on shigallah and magic stone cantrips and the magic weapon spell(if it worked like the cantrips)? spell investments that mean they don't need a high STR or DEX if they want/need to use a weapon,
Last edited:


Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I still think new classes is the easiest option.

The fighter stays somewhat like it is and mostly relies on magic items. Perhaps as suggested earlier in this thread getting more atonement slots so they can have more magic items than anyone else.

The Barbarian does mostly like what it does now and get stronger and tougher and eventually become something closer to a comic book bruiser. Hulk. Thing Bane. Then then sub classes determine what utility aspects you get. World tree turns into Swamp Thing. Zealot turns you to Samson.

Then you get a swordsage class which goes full wuxia.

You get a gadgeteer class which is a warrior who gets infusions but no magic spellslots.

A psychic warrior that goes full Jedi. Your character straight up becomes Obi-Wan. D&D siccs Siths on party. And the BBEG is Darth Maul or Darth Vader instead some lich.

focus down on the image and archetype.
I wish we could easily find out if the general TTRPG community wants to play the Hulk. I suspect that most players want to play fantasy characters rather than comic characters, but I could be wrong.

One of the only class concepts that is just not supported (outside of like, a few spells maybe?) is the Warden. It was only a class in 4e but the concept is older and broader. That’s your sometimes swamp thing, and your were-wolf/bear/whatever, right there.

Hopefully the mystic swordsaint is what we see for the monk in the next UA, but I’m not hopeful after them pushing in the opposite direction on the last one.

Tony Vargas

I wish we could easily find out if the general TTRPG community wants to play the Hulk. I suspect that most players want to play fantasy characters rather than comic characters, but I could be wrong.
Where does the Barbarian rank on the class popularity leaderboard?

but I could be wrong.
I suppose you could think of comic book superheroes as the heroic fantasy that was acceptable for the time & place they originated?
Last edited:

I'm not sold on the idea that "Fighter" and "Wizard" are playstyles. You can play either class in a wide variety of ways.
But if you try to play either as the other you're gonna die.
They're archetypes. Narratives. Paths that you choose as a player before you even know what that path can lead to in the game (and, not coincidentally, "Fighter" is a much more incoherent narrative in D&D than "Wizard" is...there's a reason one used to be Magic User but changed, and one is still Fighter.)
Fighter used to be pretty coherent. And Fighter used to be Fighting Man.
So, don't define the narratives as something players can choose independently. Define the narratives that you are willing to tell with the adventure you're running. In something like the Shattered Obelisk, maybe there are psychically powered aberration hunters. In a dragon-themed campaign, brave dragon-slayers. Don't define your story without the rest of the group!
One thing I've borrowed from WFRP 3e and Blades in the Dark for my 4e retroclone is the idea of a "Party Sheet" where the party agrees what they are about and get some bonuses for it. So a pirate crew is using a different sheet from a band on the run which is again different to a group trying to secure their home village and possibly become the local lords.

Where does the Barbarian rank on the class popularity leaderboard?
By D&D Beyond it's middle of the pack. It's Fighter in first, Rogue in second, Warlock displaced Wizard to be consistently in third by about a 1% margin (the earliest data showed wizard third), then almost everything else in the PHB within about 1% of each other, then Druid consistently but slightly trailing the pack by 1%. And the artificer's stalled on the starting grid.

Fighter is both popular by number of players and shows a high level of dissatisfaction in the surveys. People want to play one but it needs work.

An Advertisement