D&D 5E Wy to level playing field for martials with alternate ability score generation.

[Tonguez]

Everytime a fighter tries to attack a skill check (attack roll) is required, but the same rules do not apply to casting a spell.
I think a lot could be done by requiring a skill roll for every use of a spell, and actually limiting what a spell can do (ie not replace a skill use or make weapons obsolete).
plus give fighters moreto do than just hitting stuff for more damage

 

[Vaalingrade]

I don't see having more numbers solving the issue of having fewer ways to engage in the game.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I'd rather prefer if spellcaster got to generate a 7th ability score (Power? Magic?) linked only to their magical abilities and no skills. This would mean that they would need to split their ASI thinner if they want to boost their spellpower AND their skills.

No longer are all sorcerers more socially inclined just because their spellcasting ability happens to also affect 3-4 skills.

 

[James Gasik]

Everytime a fighter tries to attack a skill check (attack roll) is required, but the same rules do not apply to casting a spell.
I think a lot could be done by requiring a skill roll for every use of a spell, and actually limiting what a spell can do (ie not replace a skill use or make weapons obsolete).
plus give fighters moreto do than just hitting stuff for more damage

4e actually did this, by making casters roll against a defense stat of the target, as opposed to firing off spells and letting the enemy save, and most effects only lasted a turn (saving throws were made each turn for effects that could last longer than 1 turn). This meant the caster could roll a 1 and fail to affect a target, as opposed to 5e, where if the save DC is too high for a target to make, even a natural 20 cannot save you.

 

[ECMO3]

Not to be a bother, but I see this topic coming up repeatedly and I have to ask: Does the perceived disparity between martial and caster classes actually impact play? Has anyone been playing a fighter and get miffed when their teammate wizard drops a big ole fireball and cleans house of all the goblins? I have never experienced this as a DM or a player and I tend to stick with martial classes.

Not in my experience. I am writing to the population of this board.

 

[ECMO3]

I see this as having the opposite result. There are three pure martial classes. No one is complaining the barbarian is underpowered. Of the remaining two, both of them get extra feats as part of their class progression. There is diminishing returns with feats - once you have some, your later choices don't bring as much.

So increasing ability scores would mean everyone gets to picking up feats instead of ASIs faster, which means that the extra feats granted by fighter and rogue are less useful.

As this nerfs martial class features, I say this weakens martial classes more than helps them.

I have played with the higher scores house rule, not to nerf martials but because that particular group wanted to have "herioic" stats and I did not find this to be the case. As a matter of fact it makes more feats useful because players have high abilities across the board.

The thing this does it puts all feats on the table at any level. For example if you play a fighter it is very likely after racial bonuses you will have a 16+ in both strength and dexterity at 1st level (and as likely as not a 20 in one of them). Such a character can get BOTH sharpshooter and GWM and they both pay out. Similarly if a character starts with a 16 Dex and a 20 strength he can take ASIs in Dex to get both of these to 20 at the same point a regular point-buy fighter would be hitting 20 strength. You can take medium armor master and your tank can sneak awesome in half plate because he is rocking a high dexterity. You can move back and forth between light missile guy and front line tank guy and give up nothing in either role.

So for example you have a level 4 front line tank fighter with a 20 strength GWM. At 6th he can take sharpshooter. Keep a bow on his back as a backup weapon for long range engagements or to start a fight until enemies get close and maybe have a few darts to throw if he downs someone in melee but is too far to get to the next guy that turn. IF you come across a flying dragon he rains EFFECTIVE missile fire on it with his bow and 16 dexterity until it lands. Having played such a fighter, I ended end up using backup weapons a lot, because even though my greatsword was my best weapon it was often better to do something with another weapon. So I would end a fight with weapons dropped all over the battlefield. I would start hacking a guy with my greatsword, drop him then pull out my bow and take down the caster on the other side of the room. Then drop that and pull out my warhammer to help the cleric clean up the last bad guy.

 

[ECMO3]

I don't see having more numbers solving the issue of having fewer ways to engage in the game.

You have more ways to engage because you heroic level stats in both dex and strength, regardless of if you are doing a stealthy ranged build or a tanky melee build.

You also have better social and investigation skills.

 

[GreyLord]

I see this as having the opposite result. There are three pure martial classes. No one is complaining the barbarian is underpowered. Of the remaining two, both of them get extra feats as part of their class progression. There is diminishing returns with feats - once you have some, your later choices don't bring as much.

So increasing ability scores would mean everyone gets to picking up feats instead of ASIs faster, which means that the extra feats granted by fighter and rogue are less useful.

As this nerfs martial class features, I say this weakens martial classes more than helps them.

I don't see it as ADDING ASI, but unlimiting them.

Thus, a Fighter no longer is limited to a 20 STR, they can have a STR that goes up to the max of 30 (or a DEX). A fighter that can do +10 damage from their STR is a lot better than one that can only do +5.

Sure, it helps a Spellcaster's DC's as well, but that's not as lacking (not as big a return I think) as the damage a Fighter does from the STR/DEX each round).

 

[ECMO3]

I don't see it as ADDING ASI, but unlimiting them.

Thus, a Fighter no longer is limited to a 20 STR, they can have a STR that goes up to the max of 30 (or a DEX). A fighter that can do +10 damage from their STR is a lot better than one that can only do +5.

Sure, it helps a Spellcaster's DC's as well, but that's not as lacking (not as big a return I think) as the damage a Fighter does from the STR/DEX each round).

I would not be a fan of this.

 

[Vaalingrade]

You have more ways to engage because you heroic level stats in both dex and strength, regardless of if you are doing a stealthy ranged build or a tanky melee build.

You also have better social and investigation skills.

That's not really more ways to engage. It's failing less at the meager ways I already have to engage.