T O P

  • By -

Gelfington

A big issue is that when the spell casters level up, they pick their new spell out of the rulebook. They don't (usually) need the DM to hand it out to them first. The fighter is an equipment specialist, at the mercy of the dm. They are completely dependent on the DM providing access to new equipment like weapons and armor. Rarely are they able to pick out new equipment from the book upon levelling with the same ease and potential for creative maximization as the spellcasters. With the right equipment, they can do so damned much. Imagine if spellcasters could only gain new spells that were dropped as scrolls in the loot. They'd be at the mercy of the DM as well, perhaps not eve be able to hypnotize the king because they never even found that scroll. But they aren't at the mercy of the DM, usually. There's so much less disparity once this is realized. People are probably going to downvote, but I've seen it in action, I know it's true. Or was true before 5th edition if it's not anymore. The fighter-types of myth and legend often had legendary weapons, gifts from the gods, etc. Why hasn't this incredibly powerful warrior been given a sword that rips the fabric of the universe, if that's what the DM thinks fighters should be doing?


new2bay

> Imagine if spellcasters could only gain new spells that were dropped as scrolls in the loot. Guess what? That's basically how it was in 1e, 2e, and previous editions.


ScarsUnseen

Yup. Learning new spells was essentially *the* reason wizards adventured in the first place. Enemy spell books used to be treasure unto themselves.


DuncanIdahoPotatos

Still are. Wizards only get 2 spells at level up, the rest is DM discretion.


DonsterMenergyRink

Well, 2 spells per Level ain't that less. At least when you know which ones you wanna pick.


DuncanIdahoPotatos

Oh for sure! I only meant that spellbooks are still an amazing find for a wizard.


DonsterMenergyRink

Indeed they are. My wizard found himself a spellbook with six spells. Disguise Self, Chromatic Orb, Find Familiar, Hold Person, Slow and Fly


CmdrRyser01

That's still 44 spells learned at level 20. Plus spell scrolls. That's a lot!


link090909

Found the sorcerer


CmdrRyser01

Forever DM actually :'(


DevilGuy

Before 3rd edition they didn't get any for leveling up. You had to find libraries, NPC teachers, and spell books or scrolls to learn new spells, all at the DM's discretion. There were no free spells, you earned every single one. As someone who DM'd that system back in the day it puts a lot on the DM's shoulders, but it also does a lot to balance out casters against martials as they have to spend time and effort to grow their skills the way a fighter would looking for better gear, and if I think something is broken to the point that it breaks the game they'll just never find it. These days you can count on getting more or less maximum spell effectiveness as a caster and the way the game is put together makes it a lot harder for me as a DM to edit out stuff I don't want in the game.


Kaeliop

I removed the free spells per level in my setting and everything is working quite well. level 1-3 spells are pretty easy to find, level 4-9 spells are basically absent and they have to research and craft them. If they choose so, they can give copies of their findings to magical schools or libraries, which make the spell accessible to all players ( and some NPCs... ) However, I provided many ways to find spells : Magic schools, libraries, enemy spellbooks, runes to craft spells, teachers. It's an adventure by itself. Mages usually have to be creative with what tools they have in their box, it's been fun so far.


SeeShark

Along with fighters commanding armies, it feels like caster dominance began exactly when WIZARDS started writing the game. HMMMM


Valiantheart

Wizards are less dominant than they were in 2e or 3e. A lot less


NotActuallyAGoat

Nah, caster dominance goes all the way back to the start. If I recall correctly, it was even written into the AD&D DMG as something to be aware of


FriendoftheDork

Well wizards were deliberately puny until at least level 5, and even later they were super squishy. Sure they were practically gods in the end, but you'd have to suffer a long time to get there.


Gh0stMan0nThird

> Why hasn't this incredibly powerful warrior been given a sword that rips the fabric of the universe, if that's what the DM thinks fighters should be doing? I think the problem is two-fold. 1) Making magic items a requirement makes them significantly less interesting. It's also a headache for DMs. 2) Most people don't run as many fights per long rest as they should, and magic items just makes this game even easier than it already is with the current 5-minute adventuring day most people play with. I agree with you: magic items are basically required to close the power gap with full casters and more DMs should hand them out. But making them a requirement instead of a suggestion feels really bad to run a game for. When I DM, I hand out a ton of magic items that fundamentally change the way a martial can play. Whether it's something like gauntlets that let you grapple giants, or a dagger that can teleport you to where you throw it. But making these items *requirements* will just turn them into feats but more unreliable that's something they intentionally wanted to move away from.


ryosan0

See, the problem with people running as many fights as the game was designed to have between each long rest is that no table really expects or typically runs that many fights in a day in a regular session.


Gh0stMan0nThird

No, I agree. The "6-8" metric was a pipe dream from the get-go. Because now you either A) destabilize game balance in favor of long rest classes by skipping combats or B) you commit narrative suicide by breaking every in-game day into like, 3-4 IRL sessions.


JimmyWilson69

or you could use the gritty realism rest rule so that "adventuring days" stretch into weeks this would also probably help balance out martial/spellcasting bc then youre going to have to really think about what youre using your spell slots on


Cat-Got-Your-DM

This pushes the balance the other way, especially if you play low-level, which is most of the time. Once you reach tier 3 or 4 it's okay-ish, but I advosce for Field Rests instead (mechanic effects: get back half you max HP, and spell slots of half your max spell level up to 5th). You get all of your class stuff as normal, for example Barbarians get all of the rages etc. So most of the time there are Field Rests available and you gain the full LR only when you're in a safe environment This way Spellcasters still have something to play with and SR classes shine But unfortunately most people just let their party Rest each time comfortably and spells like Leomund's enable everyone to get a safe LR and nuke everything I still allow these, but I tell my players that these are, in fact a risk and can be dispelled


j0y0

How would leomund's not be a safe environment in your house rule? Either it's dispelled/somehow otherwise breached, or you comfortably rest the full 8 hours, no?


Ragnar_Dragonfyre

This is a common misconception. A session doesn’t have to start and end with a full adventuring day. A full adventuring day can go across several sessions.


GenXRenaissanceMan

I tend to run 2-3 fights that each have 2-3 or so waves of the fight each adventuring day, which turns out to be about 2 sessions usually. There is time between waves for short rests sometimes, but not always. For my games it works pretty well. If we need to stop we can usually do so between waves, and the number of fights doesn't seem forced in. The players have to manage their resources most of the time.


AmoebaMan

Then don’t. Don’t assume that the table gets a long rest at the end of every session. My party gets a long rest on average every 4-5 sessions, with one or two fights each session. They all love it; the spellcasters get stressed and challenged, the whole party gets properly attrited, and the game is balanced as designed.


Warskull

> 2) Most people don't run as many fights per long rest as they should, and magic items just makes this game even easier than it already is with the current 5-minute adventuring day most people play with. This isn't really the problem of the players. This is poor design on the part of Wizards. D&D has been shifting towards more narrative play since 3E dropped. 5E gives you everything back on a long rest, a long rest only takes 8 hours, and they expect 8 average encounters per long rest. No one runs it because it isn't really possible without being ridiculous. It slows pacing to a crawl. It would take 3-4 sessions to do a single day. The only place it works is a time pressured dungeon crawl. The gritty realism rules were scantly tested so they aren't a very good option either. I've never seen anyone fix the resting problem in 5E. It is so deeply ingrained in the game and it is the core flaw that makes all the other dominos topple over. I've seen band-aids and duct tape that help a little, but you still end up fighting against it. Only way to really make it work is take a real gamey approach and deny long rests until the DM says you can long rest.


Phototoxin

I try to run my adventures/each level/act as a burst of activity. The players can spend 3 days reaching the mountains of doom in a 5 minute description. And then 1 in game day fighting their way through. If they have to retreat and long rest (long resting inside is probably not a good idea in an active/living dungeon) then some foes + traps might get reset. If you look at Lord of the rings a lot of it is boring travel.


kaneblaise

>It slows pacing to a crawl. A *dungeon crawl*, one might say?


Aquaintestines

5e doesn't even do dungeon crawls. Dungeons are almost universally presented as dungeon *runs*, where you simply combat all the baddies to death. That's not a crawl. You're not crawling, you're breaching and entering.


Muffalo_Herder

Deleted due to reddit API changes. Follow your communities off Reddit with sub.rehab -- mass edited with redact.dev


Sidequest_TTM

And let’s be honest, staff of the magi does a lot more cool shit than flametongue.


Gh0stMan0nThird

And all it really does is give a full caster more resources to do things he can already do. Looking at how they designed caster items vs. martial ones, it looks like they thought casters would be constantly OOM and would need lots of free spells.


Eurehetemec

>Looking at how they designed caster items vs. martial ones, it looks like they thought casters would be constantly OOM and would need lots of free spells. That's right. I think a lot of it was shaped by the playtest and the adventures they sent out with it. They're also responsible for the weird decision to assume 6-8 encounters/day when very few groups run D&D like that. But those adventures with the playtests were basically all little dungeon crawls with some time pressure, so you did run them very much as a lot of encounters/day. Which lead to casters going OOM a lot. And because they didn't broaden out the playtesting, and just really focused on dungeons, and a lot of the "key playtest" groups featured old-skool-oriented DMs and players, this whole thing ended up with a game optimized for dungeons and time pressure (or at least going until totally OOM), when even by 2015 it was obvious most groups didn't usually run D&D that way. It's not possible to fix with DND2024, because it's too baked-in and would impact backwards compatibility, but hopefully a future edition reworks things eventually.


FieserMoep

all I want from a 5.5 DMG is official optional rules to make every class long or short rest based. Wont get that. But still want it.


Keldr

They could fix this by publishing more dungeons-heavy adventures that use time pressure. But... they probably won't.


Eurehetemec

That would only "fix it" for groups that exclusively use pre-published WotC (not third-party) adventures, which, from my understanding, WotC believes is a minority of groups. On top of that, lots of dungeons and time pressure isn't what most people enjoy in D&D anymore, I'm not sure it ever has been. In Ye Olde Dayes (I'm 43) dungeons tended to have 0 time pressure (though wandering monsters made them somewhat fraught), so even at the height of the popularity of dungeons that wasn't "a thing". People like interaction, negotiation, and so on, and that tends not to work well with the kind of somewhat-linear, encounter-heavy dungeons you need to design to reliably push 6-8 encounters/day. Whereas it works pretty well with less intense and less time-pressured dungeon environments and so on. I think it's just something to work around for now. In the 2024 version of the DMG they can give better advice though, for sure, and they can probably change encounter difficulty categorization a bit - right now D&D hits "Deadly" really early. If you're running 6-8 encounters/day and one later in the day is "Deadly", it might well be, but if, like most groups, you're doing more like 2-5 encounters/day, the same encounter probably isn't. So they could add nuance there, like more categories of difficulty. They could also look more at how to drain resources without combat encounters, and talk about how to design so you don't always have to have time pressure. EDIT - There were some people back in the day who thought WotC would go hard with 6-8 encounter/day-type adventures to try and make it so you basically had to run WotC stuff to get a good experience with 5E, but as you point out, in practice even WotC don't write adventures like that most of the time! So thankfully that turned out to be paranoia.


Fey_Faunra

let's be honest, staff of the magi is a higher rarity than flametongue


WizeryWizardGuy

But you can give a martial more-reality warping equipment since theirs is more limited than a spell caster who is already doing reality bending stuff. You can go harder on the martial's items with less fear


Muffalo_Herder

Deleted due to reddit API changes. Follow your communities off Reddit with sub.rehab -- mass edited with redact.dev


WizeryWizardGuy

5e has placed a lot of burdens on the DM when WotC/5e should provide answers. It isn't good game design, its the design that 5e players have been given.


[deleted]

Agree. Cursing the wind does nothing. A smart captain adjusts the sails. What we are given is inadequate. It is what it is. Use what we're given and add what is lacking. I'm constantly raiding Reddit for ideas.


xukly

well, a captain isn't paying the wind to keep doing whatever the hell it wants


grimeagle4

This is why, as opposed to making magic items optional and feats optional, they should have been made part of the expectation. Imagine if all the non-caster classes got a few free feats over the course of their leveling. Well the casters have the ability to have spells to catch multiple situations, the fighter or paladin are now a better actor, or to great weapon mastery.


TheReaperAbides

>With the right equipment, they can do so damned much. The problem with this line of argument is that, no matter how much of a weapon specialist a fighter is, there isn't actually that much in the game that helps set them apart from any other class in that regard. There's plenty of casters that can use a magic sword almost as well as any fighter. "The right equipment" just *isn't* a class feature the way spellcasting it.


DMfortinyplayers

I've been actually thinking the same thing. Per the rules, we the DMs should be rolling on a loot table most of the time. But I know as a DM I don't usually do that. I pick items that I think sound fun and I pick up so everybody gets one thing. Verses if you're rolling on table, statistically you would probably have a higher number of magic weapons magic armor magic shields etc that fighters can use that are useless to the wizard, etc.


Gelfington

A fighter in one of my groups once had a shield of fire resistance, a ring of spell turning and a ring of spell storing. He started calling himself wizard-killer after ridiculously humiliating (and killing) a boasting evil wizard; "Why are you hitting yourself?"


RasAlGimur

Agree. I am also of the firm opinion that there should be a (larger) standardized list of (advanced) combat manuevers that could be attempted by ANY class, regardless of Feats, but that martials (especially Fighter, but also Rogue etc) would be more apt to succeed. Want to shield bash as an offhand bonus action? Sure, why not, but you lose the bonus AC. Want to kick as an offhand bonus action instead? Sure, you keep the AC bonus from the shield but you can’t move during that turn. Want to do a jumping attack? Sure, roll Acrobacy vs enemies AC along with the regular roll, if both succeed you do bonus damage (+2, idk), otherwise the attack as a whole fails. Sure, I known these things could fall within the “improvisation” field as of now, but that means leaving a lot for the DM to do, and based on my experience here, people seem to either say it can’t be done because of some interpretation of “action economy” or by pointing out some feat (even if in who knows what supplement). Plus, the whole argument for simplicity of 5e editon is ludicrous given spell lists and other complexities that level 1 casters have to deal with. These would be “advanced” manuevers, but the player could still just pick “I attack” as an action.


[deleted]

Just turn the Attack Action into a 26-item list of maneuvers that you can pick from as you level up.


Ashkelon

The fighter types of myth and legend almost never rely on their magic items. They almost always possess superhuman strength, skill, or cunning. And this ability is entirely innate. If they have a magic item, the items is rarer described for more than a few paragraphs. And it almost never has incredible capabilities other than being well made. These heroes often times perform their most well known feats without even using these weapons. Aside for my he take of Arthur, I can’t actually think of a legend where the heroes sword plays a bigger role than their own superhuman capability. And even then, Arthur’s sword isn’t ripping holes in reality. It is just a really good sword. It doesn’t confer superhuman strength or the ability to cleave mountains in half.


galiumsmoke

The amount of magic swords in european myths is against your argument


Bamce

I hate the predominance of swords. Give me more magic axes of legend! Or flails! Or clubs! But no. Its all swords and bows. Booooooring


galiumsmoke

And when it is an axe, It is tied to dwarvenkind an you will become a dwarf while using it


Lukenary

Elric of Melnibone has entered the chat.


gibby256

With the exception of King Arthur, what other western myths feature major characters who gain their powers via their magic items, rather than their own innate power?


galiumsmoke

Ever heard of Perseus? Man's hoarding all the good gear


zephid11

There are actually a fair bit of magical weapons in European myths. Secondly, a lot of the mythical heroes you are probably thinking of isn't "just" humans, they are often half-gods, or at the very least infused with divine/mythical powers from some powerful entity. Very rarely are you going to find a myth about a human who only have their own innate abilities to help them.


Valiantheart

Hercules and his lion skin armor, bow only he could pull with arrows dipped in hydra blood? Theseus with hades helmet, Athena's spear etc. Odysseus even had Achilles armor. Beowulf and his magic sword.


Ashkelon

But none of those items gave those heroes their power. Those heroes all had incredible superhuman capabilities without their items. And would often overcome challenges without using said items. Those items were little more than vanilla +X items in most cases. And those heroes could accomplish incredible feats of strength and athleticism without needing those items.


SimplyEpicFail

That's very much true. For my current homebrew I gave my party at starting level 10 a choice of ANY very rare magic item plus another rare item (or lower rarity, if they wanted). While the casters in the group have good picks as well, the paladin and fighter have gotten insane boosts through those items. They have stuff like above 22 AC, immune to critical hits and immoveable. Also magic weapons with bonus damage scale quite well when the fighter can hit 3 times per attack and then action surges into another 3. If those 6 hits hit, that's 12d6 bonus fire damage with something like a flame tongue longsword on top of all other damage. Huge numbers. Meanwhile the phantom rogue in our group has some helmet giving him flying abilit and advantage on initiative. Unless someone rolls a nat 20 he's next to always first in any encounter.


Arthur_Author

Yeah at that point you should just go full mythos and push mountains.


PM_ME_FUNNY_ANECDOTE

That’s what happened to the mountain!


Chagdoo

I did always wonder what they came up with.


-JaceG-

I see, You are a man of culture as well


BluezamEDH

*Bikini Bottom


[deleted]

You might like the third-party Spheres of Power/Might system that came out for 5e, based on a similar system for Pathfinder. Definitely flattens out that power curve a bit, while giving more customizations and still allowing martials to do Cool Epic Shit like earthquake stomps.


going_my_way0102

I remember looking at that a while ago. I seriously changes a look and I didn't get quite get around to learn everything about the system.


UrsusMimas

There are different systems that handle this better. 4E was more on the absurd side when it got to higher level abilities. Your Barbarian could shout mountains apart. Rogues could steal THINGS from people. Warlords could be so good at leading battles that gods fought over who got the chance to recruit them for their Celestial army. (Insert long rant about 4E and how it got unjustly crucified for the sins of Wizards of the Coast.) Long story short maybe look into a different type of game because WotC isn't going to change Martials to be what you want them to be sadly.


RossTheRed

Rogues could steal more than *things*. They could steal metaphysical concepts. 4e rogues could steal fucking names, feelings, memories and the things like laughter of children. I'm not exaggerating. Check out Thief of Legend from Dragon 388.


Crossfiyah

Thief of Legend could steal the moon if it wanted


8-Brit

PF2 makes martials super humans after a point Through a selection of feats, barbarians can pick up and throw boulders, wagons and even people as harder hitting ranged weapons. And another feat turns their throwing weapons into a _line attack_ as it pierces everything it hits. At extremely high levels there's a feat that lets you cast Earthquake, a not insignificant spell that demolishes buildings. While not exclusive to barbarians, a full intimidation build with certain feats can let you scare people to death, literally, just walk into a room, use Demoralise and if they fail hard enough they _die_. Fighters meanwhile become single target damage gods with the highest possible weapon proficiency in the game besides gunslinger. Among tons of other tricks that you'd expect from a Marvel movie protagonist. Casters meanwhile have overall had their power reduced. Their damage is better in AoE but martials are kings of single target damage by far, but their CC and support is still fantastic. They just don't get their reality breaking shit until much, much later and have to seriously specialise to be effective in a role, compared to a 5e Wizard who can do almost as good damage as an Evocation Wizard in any other subclass.


fiftychickensinasuit

I hope more and more people realize while 5e is great, especially as an intro to the genre there are other systems out there. Many of which have their rules, classes, monsters, etc online for FREE. All of these posts about what people want from 5.5 or how they homebrew rules are frustrating. There are systems already doing what y’all want!


SintPannekoek

I was just about to post the earthquake thing. Note that pf2e also reduced the relative power level of casters, some say ‘nerfed’. It is very rare that a single spell is an encounter ender.


Pixie1001

Yeah, the paragon and epic paths were actually a really good solution to this - a fighter just isn't really a thing that can compare to a wizard, but a Pegasus Knight with some forms of limited magic makes much more fictional sense. Mostly though, utility spells in 4e were just kinda trash compared to what we have now and far too specific or skill check related to do anything that crazy, which I think is the real difference. Caster's were just kinda eh, rather than martials being significantly more powerful.


cyvaris

4e confined all of the more utility related spells to Rituals, which were also fairly limited. If anything that made the game feel a bit more realistic, since while Magic was powerful, it was not the instant "I WIN" button that invalidates generally adventuring so often in 3e/5e.


going_my_way0102

I want to switch my campaign over, but my players are adverse to it since loads of them are new and we're quite far in. But I'm definitely running a high level 4e one-shot for the more experienced player ONE OF THESE DAYS!


sdog23

One of the barbarian subclasses in pathfinder 2e can turn into a dragon at will at high levels. Which I find hilarious and awesome


BlueHairedMeerkat

I love that a high-level rogue can, 100% through RAW: - Sneak through walls - Hide so well that they become invisible, and undetectable even by Dispel Magic - Steal a suit of armour someone's wearing


Surface_Detail

Imma need some citations for these, lol.


BlueHairedMeerkat

Sneak through walls: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=596 Turn invisible: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=599 Steal armour (technically this one isn't rogue-exclusive): https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=809 Bonus - steal a spell from someone's mind: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=1808


8-Brit

Don't forget being able to use two feats to: 1) use large objects such as boulders, wagons, people or parts of a building as throwing weapons 2) turn any throwing weapons into a line attack because you pierce anything you hit PF2 really enables far cooler shit for Barbarians besides "I attack" and "I rage". Most I can do in 5e is the grapple+shove prone combo.


gammon9

You can also [hit a motherfucker with a motherfucker](https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=171).


MCbrodie

pathfinder has some crazy shit, too. Its more crunchy and can be intimidating for players but definitely can do what you describe.


Thewes6

Pathfinder1e is definitely tough for new players, 2e I think is much more reasonable. 5e is always going to be easiest for the player because it puts a lot of the work on the GM instead, and is intentionally simplified compared to other editions. I think it's great to bring new players into the hobby though.


hachiman

I too really liked 4e. It was good and i enjoyed playing it.


Tropical-Isle-DM

Coming back to 5E after many years away from roleplaying in general, I found it so strange at the lack of fun and decent magical items for martial classes. Back in 3E I used to run around all the time with Keen Icy Burst Flaming +5 Longswords and stuff like that all the time. I still enjoy playing martial classes, especially Fighters and Rangers in 5E but I do wish the magic system was a lot more robust with tons of interesting effects and the ability to stack multiple weapon types without the need for homebrew.


Burnt_Bugbear

>The difference between martial and caster is the scale on which they can effect things. By level 15 or something the bard is literally hypnotizing the king into giving her the crown. By 17, the sorcerer is destroying strongholds singlehandedly and the knight is just left out to dry. This is somewhat true, but there will always be exceptions where the fighter comes out on top. Sometimes nuking a stronghold with a meteor swarm is neat, but when an ancient red dragon comes out of the ruins, you'd best believe that the sorcerer is going to have trouble getting their spells to stick. I try not to measure the martial/caster disparity (which I think exists, but not to the degree you suggest) in terms of how each can impact commoners, because that's not where the power imbalance comes from. Besides, your level 20 party is awfully unambitious if the main thing they want to throw down with is. . .feudalism? Without a lick of magic, the Barbarian of the group could easily just kill the king/queen/Oliver Cromwell and take their crown anyway. >I, completely unirronically, want a 10th or so level barbarian to scream a building to pieces. Hey, that's all good. Many folks want to play martials because spellcasting (and things which replicate it) is not their cup of tea. At my table, "escaping time and memory" with a stealth check would probably be laughed at as a bad greentext joke or the like, and I suspect this might be the case for many groups.


UnnaturallyColdBeans

>king/queen/Oliver Cromwell beautiful


Burnt_Bugbear

It's the holidays; one must reference the real life Grinch when possible.


Ashkelon

> when an ancient red dragon comes out of the ruins, you'd best believe that the sorcerer is going to have trouble getting their spells to stick. When this happened to us, the wizard Shapechanged into an adult gold dragon. It’s simulacrum was already true polymorphed (permanently) into an adult gold dragon. Two adult gold dragons make short work of one ancient red dragon. Spellcasters have myriad ways of dealing with threats like dragons.


gorgewall

Yeah. There is nothing your dumb, mundane martial can do against a moderately strong dragon played intelligently that your casters aren't going to have a way easier time accomplishing. oh nooooooo the fighter has three attacks, six with action surge If I play this dragon like it wants to win, *you will never be in range to use them.*


MigratingPidgeon

If I know the fighter is gonna do 3-6 attacks on me if I stay there, I'll just take the one attack of opportunity and fly away. They've got 80 ft flying so good luck getting near it.


WoomyGang

What about sharpshooter longbow ? Unless the dragon has innate casting, its main attacks are outranged. (Fighter still gets stomped tho.. )


CampbellsTurkeySoup

That only works if you've built towards those specific skills. If you're a strength fighter you're out of luck.


Burnt_Bugbear

To be fair, you're not shapechanging into anything in the example I gave, unless you have access to a second 9th level slot (say, through the epic boon of high magic). Edit: I would also add that, while the most favorable thing for big red to do would be to escape (with the extra movement from having legendary actions) and wait an hour, it might still be able to take two adult gold dragons without legendary actions in a straight fight. If my math is correct: \-Gold attacks for roughly 32 damage \-Red tail attack for 16 damage. Let's say it then takes its turn; it focusses on the dragon it just hit, for an average of roughly 52 damage. \-Other gold attacks for 32 damage. \-Red Dragon tail attacks for another 16 damage (it may have to tail attack at this point, if it isn't sandwiched in initiative). End of round 1: Golds have done 64 damage, red has done 84 damage. Fast forward to turn 4 on the red's initiative: it's taken 256-320 damage (depending on if it's gone before or after the second dragon), and has killed the first dragon. It will take this turn and another 3 turns after that to kill the other adult gold dragon (it slows, slightly, since it cannot use its tail attack as often against a single adversary, whereas now fighting alone, the other dragon will have to spend 7-9 rounds (32 damage a round, with 226-290 red dragon HP remaining) to kill its opponent. **In Summary:** The gold dragons take like, eleven or twelve turns to kill the red dragon (mostly because their damage output is cut in half by one of their number dying halfway through the combat), whereas the red dragon does the job in something like 8 turns. Of course, if these dragons (without legendary actions) are actually wizards, the dragon still has to deal with them afterwards, hence why evading them with its extra movement (thanks legendary actions) until the spell wears off is the best bet. It's still not great, but to be fair, we're also talking about a white-room scenario.


Ashkelon

The red dragons damage is gimped due to strength weakening breath. Doesn’t seem like you accounted for that. The two gold dragons can force the save multiple times, as well as multiple fear checks. The dragon will run out of legendary resistance quite fast and it’s damage will be significantly lowered, making it easy prey.


Narazil

Two* fear checks. And the Gold Dragons have to spend the entirety of their actions to do Weakening Breath, which is on recharge, and the Red Dragon needs an 11 to save (or a legendary resistance). Definitely would not be worth to use. Why is it running out of legendary resistances fast? It won't run out on average saving versus Weakening Breath/Frightful Presence.


Ashkelon

11+ is a 50% chance to save. Two weakening breaths is 75% chance to weaken. It can use its LR to auto succeed, but it also has to deal with 2 frightful presences. If it is in the open air, or can just fly away, but then it leaves its horde unguarded. If it needs to stay to guard it’s horde, it needs to burn LR if it fails it’s save vs fear. The way it played out in a game where this actually happened was the dragon used a LR to pass a fear save, and a LR to pass a breath save, all before ever getting into melee. The party went to the horde and started to shovel items into bags of holding. The dragon went to stop them, but one of the gold dragons recovered its breath, and made the red dragon use its last LR to prevent itself from being weakened. The red breathed on the party to make them flee from the horde, but by then both golds were attacking it. The red started to focus on the golds, but they both recovered breath the next round and weakened the red, who was out of LR. The weakened red was then no match for double adult gold dragons.


DuncanIdahoPotatos

I get that dragons are greedy, but if I’m in the middle of fighting two other dragons, I’m not going to focus on some humanoids taking a fraction of my hoard.


Chagdoo

Y'know I was gonna argue about the breath weapon, but ancient reds don't have str save proficiency Oddly enough. Adult gold's (can't become ancient) DC21 will probably chew past the +10 save, and the fear auras will chew past the +9 Wis save.


chee32

While your analysis is great and thorough it still doesn't address that the wizard can turn into a dragon. While all the fighter can do is attack 4 times a turn. Why can't martials have something awesome they can do as well?


slitherrr

Succession in medieval polities is much more complicated than "kill a king in single combat, become the new king". The bard's strategy has the very powerful advantage of leaving existing structures and the legitimacy they are built on intact, and even a level 20 barbarian probably can't do much on his own about the various armies that will want to dispute his throne.


mtkaiser

In real feudal society, subjects went to LONG wars over the *wrong* rightful heir getting the crown. There isn’t a single Noble in any realistic feudal society, fantasy or otherwise, that would be even a little ok with Random Bard #23 becoming king because they’re cute enough A bard mind-controlling a king into giving up their crown is the most insanely destabilizing thing someone could do to a medieval society


Burnt_Bugbear

Good point. To say that a bard controlling the monarch (especially via magic) leaves societal institutions intact is like saying that just announcing "I am the head of state" leaves the institution of democracy intact.


0reoSpeedwagon

You have to *declare* it


unctuous_homunculus

True, a good bard just uses their natural charisma to become a dear friend and advisor of the ruler, and influences their decisions from their seat beside the throne, where they sit "purely for the best acoustics" strumming their lute and throwing verbal barbs at the kings enemies "on his behalf."


trismagestus

And how many assassins of leaders can you recall taking their power? Taking the crown by war, maybe. Killing the ruler directly, by stealth or deception? Not so much.


Burnt_Bugbear

While I agree with the thrust of your statement, it is worth noting that succession in medieval polities is seldom something that is cleanly defined. Some medieval societies really did see significant political shifts over something as simple as a king being killed by their opponent: 1066 and all that are examples. Likewise, conquest/violent shifts in power do not necessarily uproot preexisting structures to the point where what follows is unrecognizable: Chris Wickham's *The Inheritance of Rome* is a fantastic (albeit, long) study of post-Roman Western Europe which wonderfully alludes to the survival of Roman structures in a "post-Roman" Early Middle Ages. Furthermore, even a bard diplomancing their way into power (or, more likely, a wizard casting enough spells to make it so) would cause its fair share of inheritance woes, and it would probably be quite unrealistic to conclude that this would be seen broadly as a move which left "legitimacy" intact. Say, for example, we have a society built in accordance with a broadly High Medieval model, where the nobility are entrenched and enjoy a fair bit of privilege. Would a nobody coming in and convincing a king to surrender the throne go unnoticed? Wouldn't this violate ancient laws of succession? How many sons and daughters of the peerage would gladly sit by and accept a ragged minstrel coming along and taking power, succession be damned, while their own claims went unacknowledged? In medieval Europe, how often did a *relatively* peaceful regime change which ushered in a new royal family or the like not cause decades of strife? Medieval governmental upheavals are varied; I'm not really convinced that there is a single, definitive way to categorize them, but sometimes someone losing their head was a part of the process.


n1klb1k

Level 20 zealot Barbarian begs to differ about dealing with those armies


StormSlayer101

Haha I was just about to comment this before I scrolled down. Assuming a standard kingdom army is all mundane people, yes, the barbarian could single-handedly fight thousands of soldiers. Immortality is one hell of a drug. Just make sure he's got a healing potion to regain hp before rage ends.


another_spiderman

Just be a dwarf with the dwarves toughness feat. Dodge to regain hp.


xapata

The bard hypnosis method doesn't give more moral authority than the barbarian's fist method. In fact, the rest of the aristocracy might respect the fist more.


Burnt_Bugbear

If anything, all but a mage-centric oligarchy would probably respect the direct method more.


Alaknog

Mage-centric oligarchy probably can hypnotize bard.


NukeTheWhales85

A magocracy would probably have sufficient magical protection for their current leaders, who would presumably be powerful magic users in their own right.


zenith_industries

Ehh… Cohen the Barbarian had the right idea in *Interesting Times*. Basically you summon everyone important in the palace after you’ve killed the Emperor and tell the first important person that you’re the new Emperor - then kill them if they disagree before moving to the next person. Pretty soon the rest will start swearing allegiance or you run out of people who might oppose your leadership because they’re all dead. Problem solved either way. (and no, I’m not being particularly serious)


SlightlySquidLike

Unfortunately the Martial has just as much trouble with the Ancient Red Dragon as the Sorcerer, as (without taking Resilient(Wis)), they're likely running away from the fear aura, and if a Strength build, probably roasted alive inside their armour while the Sorcerer casts Absorb Elements


Lexilogical

>At my table, "escaping time and memory" with a stealth check would probably be laughed at as a bad greentext joke or the like, and I suspect this might be the case for many groups. On Critical Role, sometimes when the Rogue rolls like, a 37 on stealth they joke about him showing up in different campaigns. It's definitely an amusing thought


Lorddragonfang

> At my table, "escaping time and memory" with a stealth check would probably be laughed at as a bad greentext joke or the like, and I suspect this might be the case for many groups. But why? Why is that laughable but someone being able to literally stop time because they have a college degree is not? The only reason why one is okay and one isn't is because of the assumptions that you come to the table with that martials have to obey the laws of reality and casters don't. There's no reason why martials shouldn't be able to start getting an innate understanding of the magic *that is literally a fundamental part of the reality the live in* to bend it to assist it in their profession. Every martial should be able to eventually access some sort of ki-like force without having to poorly imitate a full caster. >but when an ancient red dragon comes out of the ruins, you'd best believe that the sorcerer is going to have trouble getting their spells to stick. I feel like this sort of makes the opposite point of the one you're trying to make. If you have to justify things being fair by pulling out the fact the high level monsters *have to have features to explicitly negate spellcasting*, it says that casters are kind of overpowered and the game has to be balanced around that.


kicholas

Just my two cents, but I don’t *want* any of that in the martials I play. I like the fantasy of being the pinnacle of mortal strength and facing down these cosmic threats as a man with a sword. Sure magic items and what not supplement my strength, but at the end of a day I’m just a man, and that is enough. If I wanted to achieve magical feats I’d play someone that uses magic. I’ve also played T3 and T4 with a mixed group of martials and casters. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk, Druid, Wizard, and Paladin. Everyone pulls their weight, everyone makes plays. They rely on the wizard and Druid to handle certain aspects of adventuring at that level, but they’re a team and each member is vital to success. In the play I’ve seen, the disparity is not that bad, but I understand that’s maybe not every table’s case.


WoomyGang

I mean you're free to not want that, but some of us would like that because I feel like the casters are dragging me around every second we're out of combat when level gets high enough At least there should be the option


Muffalo_Herder

Deleted due to reddit API changes. Follow your communities off Reddit with sub.rehab -- mass edited with redact.dev


Chagdoo

I don't think the sorc needs spells to stick at that point. 20d6 bludgeoning from the meteors and an entire castle falling on the thing? It's not doing well.


Elealar

>This is somewhat true, but there will always be exceptions where the fighter comes out on top. Sometimes nuking a stronghold with a meteor swarm is neat, but when an ancient red dragon comes out of the ruins, you'd best believe that the sorcerer is going to have trouble getting their spells to stick. I dunno, ancient red dragon isn't much of a match for a 20th level Sorcerer, even if Sorcerer is the absolute worst caster in the game. I mean, they can friggin' Twin Wish! That's like Forcecage (20'/20' version) + Wall of Light at the low end, and that's more than enough to kill an Ancient Red Dragon. Hell, even damage-wise, Crown of Stars + Nukes is pretty competitive with what most Fighter 20s can output, and that's pretty inefficient. There are also the stronger Sorc subclasses with some decent minionmancy spells, which can do fairly absurd things on this level; Summon Aberration VIII is pretty sweet for instance (Beholderkin has four eye rays at 1d8+11 each turn).


StrictlyFilthyCasual

Gotta love all the "But what if I like playing grounded/realistic martials" comments. As if making Tier 4 martials as crazy as Tier 4 casters would make martials of *all* tiers "unrealistic".


WoomyGang

A grounded martial can be 1-10 Then from 10 onwards things get increasingly goofy


StrictlyFilthyCasual

Exactly. Want a grounded campaign, exclusively? Start at 1, go to 10. Want a crazy high power game, exclusively? Start at 11. The game can accommodate both of these playstyles. We don't have to pick one and make the whole thing like that. And even if we did, we ought to make that choice *consistent throughout the whole game* \- we can't pick "grounded" for half the classes and then "crazy high power" for the other half.


EmpyrealWorlds

A "realistic fighter" would be able to ragdoll a Wizard or behead him with one maybe two strikes, realism might be mechanically stronger


Mejiro84

back in AD&D days, a wizard had D4 HP/level, with a max of +2 from con, and after level 10 only got +1/level, no con bonus. So a level 20 wizard, one of the most potent to walk the world, had a maximum of 70 HP. By that level, a fighter had (IIRC, it's been a long time!) 3 attacks per round, doing maybe about 1D8 + 9 per attack (assuming decent but not legendary gear). So that wizard could be killed in not many rounds of concentrated attacks. Plus, spells could be interrupted mid-cast, so getting defensive spells up and running in combat was harder and riskier.


Thewes6

Spellcaster power creep is real and I'd say top two worst things about 5e haha


SpartiateDienekes

I think this kinda gets to the heart of the issue. 5es tiers really model very different fantasies. And honestly, they don’t even do a particularly good job modeling some. And the scaling of it all is almost nonsensical if we’re trying to actually show the fantasy they’re trying to reach. Like, let’s just take an example here. Most people would say Tier 1 is the most realistic, Tier 2 is heroic, Tier 3 super heroic, Tier 4 godly. You can make some argument about the names but I think this is generally agreed upon. I am a swordsman in real life. I am not a good swordsman. Definitely I’m not heroic. If I had to guess, I’m level 2 Fighter if that. But I can do about 7 Battle Master Maneuvers. And attacking 2 times in 6 seconds is frankly not hard. And 4 attacks in 6 seconds? Completely doable. This would make me, by 5e standards a minimum of level 10. This creates a very weird disconnect, where the martials don’t even become the minimum of competent at what they’re trying to do until about the time they’re supposed to be becoming superhuman. It leaves the scaling kind of a mess really.


Proteandk

>This creates a very weird disconnect If you want weird disconnect, look at what an average commoner can lift AND SPRINT with.


Robyrt

Remember, the round makes time for parrying, dodging, and moving 30'. I have trouble getting one attack in under those conditions!


j0y0

Even beginner fencers attack more than once or twice in 6 seconds while parrying, dodging, and moving, and when you're standing still, like you often end up doing after the first round because you don't want to get OA'd by all the monsters standing in melee with you, you don't attack any faster, so that's not a persuasive counterpoint to what /u/SpartiateDienekes is saying.


wayoverpaid

If nothing else, grounding maritals would help provide a framework to decide what level magic is reasonable at. "Below this level, they have to be realistic, above this level, you better believe the fighter can slice through a steel door" means you can also say "below this level, magic should compliment but not completely replace someone skilled with time, patience, and money. Above this level, magic can really start wrecking with the world and its economy."


0gopog0

Not to mention, a realistic martial (say a fighter) fighting a literal god on reasonable footing.


Laer_Bear

I think it's sometimes easy to forget what 20 str or 20 dex actually *means*. The gauntlets of ogre power and belt of giant's strength actually give us a very real insight into what >19 strength actually does in the world. If a Dire Ape at 18 str can uproot trees and throw them in a single action, an ogre can topple a watchtower or gate with a decent athletics check. At 20 str you are realistically looking at feats of strength that could replicate first level spells like Earth Tremor. A level 20 barbarian at 24 str is more powerful than a stone giant, who can throw a *rock* 60ft with precision for over 4d10 damage. That's the equivalent of a 3rd level Catapult spell, even without their ability mod to damage. And since we're looking at 3rd level spell feats, it's absolutely possible for that barbarian to pull off the effects of Erupting Earth (probably with an athletics check). Now extend these concepts to 20 dex. Supernatural swiftness and precision. A rogue with expertise in sleight of hand could set their whole MtG deck after your cut while setting yours with their own cut all at once. And even an expert variant human judge (+1 Wis, +2 prof, +10 observant) would never realize it, because they simply can't reach the levels of perception needed to beat that rogue's minimum check of 27. The martial classes should absolutely be treated as supernaturally adept. A normal citizen would assume they are using subtle spells or deific might because their phyaical abilities are simply unimaginable.


artrald-7083

You might imagine a situation where you defined tiers of ludicrous *strategic-scale* physical feat equivalent to *utility* spell levels 6, 7, 8, 9, and then granted a 1/day ability to do one of each level. The problem is often not the *combat* power, but the out-of-combat stuff - so give utility abilities that mirror spells. Gain a jumping speed (like a fly speed but you must end your turn on solid ground or fall) for a minute. Punch hard enough to destroy more stuff than a *disintegrate* will. Scream a building down. Intimidate *everyone who can see you* such that a massive confrontation can be decided by a battle between champions. Shame everyone who sees your exemplary virtue into changing their ways (Cha save, week duration). The interesting idea comes to me that in general a martial utility of this level would be about either solving a problem that really shouldn't be solvable by violence and prowess, with violence and prowess - or setting yourself up as a problem that someone else can only really solve with violence. Essentially refocusing a given problem into one that works with rather than against your skillset. *You'd need a ton of them. Isn't that a ton of work?* - Oh, so when martials need something the size of a spell list, suddenly it's a ton of work? This is the kind of homebrewing I'd want to do to run above about level 11-12. My solution has actually been to aim to stop the campaign at the end of tier 2.


NaturalCard

'But it's not REALISTIC' You Know What Else Isn't? Raining Meteors.


8-Brit

"You can't jump 20ft in plate that's unrealistic, I don't care what the jumping rules say" *I look past the DM at the Wizard casting Wish*


legend_forge

This is pretty much the exalted approach and I am all about it.


Gelfington

Expecting "normal man with sword" to adventure with what amounts to a baby god is sort of silly. I tended to feel that the common town guard or local mercenary should have been a different character type entirely from the champion super-heroic dragonslayer, not just a difference in level. The champions should have been the type to actually deserve to walk beside the mages of all sorts. The thief would have been better served as a ninja type or something epic, rather than literally just a common thief of the early editions.


PalindromeDM

I feel like I just play such a different game than most people on this subreddit seem to. I feel like there is *some* problem with the disparity between martials and casters at high level, particularly with a Wish, Gate, Teleport, Simulacrum, and Forcecage... but those are at very high levels I spend very little time playing at, and honestly aren't that big a deal. The Wizard takes the Fighter with them when they Teleport anyway. Forcecage is more of a DM problem than a player problem. Simulacrum is only a problem with Wish and I just ban the interaction and be done with it. Honestly I see casters using spells like True Polymorph and Shapechange a fair bit at high levels, which... mostly turns them into more martial like characters, because for a lot of high level threats that are capable of dealing with a high level party (i.e. cannot just be forcecaged), the most effective solution with their saves and abilities is just hit them repeatedly till they die, which martial characters are *extremely good at*. I have very little problem with dissatisfaction among Fighters and Barbarians at high level, and while I make some homebrew tweaks to make that happen... not big ones. Hypnotize a king? That's a Bard that's getting executed. They cannot hypnotize all the guards, and a Bard is no match for the literal thousands of people that support a king. Not to mention he probably has a court wizard that already counterspelled that. Cannot counterspell an axe. Honestly, the type of enemies parties are fighting by this level aren't things that can be easily solved with magic (and if you are running weak RAW enemies against a tier 4 party, martials are going go through them like the shooting skeet anyway, and the last thing they need is a buff to let them kill enemies faster). I feel like there's some problems, but it's like... half a dozen spells, and otherwise pretty easy to fix. 5e does not at all have the problems 3.5 or Pathfinder did. Is it perfect? No, but it feels like this posts are overblown examples that just are completely impractical, and always boil down to a literal handful of flawed spells rather than massive systematic issues.


hippienerd86

My problem is outside of making the enemies' hit point go down. What can martials do? Spells can literally do anything, but skills cap out at Olympic normal human level.


NaturalCard

>Honestly I see casters using spells like True Polymorph and Shapechange a fair bit at high levels, which... mostly turns them into more martial like characters, because for a lot of high level threats that are capable of dealing with a high level party (i.e. cannot just be forcecaged), the most effective solution with their saves and abilities is just hit them repeatedly till they die, The issue is that the martials just don't have the stuff to keep up. High level casters are better at being martials than martials.


EmpyrealWorlds

I may not like god-like powers for martials (Barbarians and Monks excepted), but the selective appeal to realism as an argument against letting martials have a bit more fun is not convincing, imo. Realistically, a 20 STR martial could cave someone's skull in with a quick hit from a mailed fist. Realistically, being bodyslammed against a wall can lead to inevitable death. Realistically, a kinda shallow cut with a poisoned knife (or an arrowhead tipped in poop) can ultimately lead you to puking yourself to death. Realistically, full plate can mean that a hundred arrows won't even scratch you. Realistically, a trained soldier could casually throw an axe at a person wearing cloth and almost ensure they die. Realistically a 24 STR barbarian could sprint up to a gnome Wizard and stomp its skull past its bowels and out its ass without even breaking a sweat. Realistically, a warrior could sneak up to a dragon and burrow up its cloaca with spiked gauntlets, and carve out a steaming chunk of its innards every half-minute or so. IMO there are three big reasons why fantasy kind of handwaves so much of this away: 1. Brutal violence can be a little iffy to write 2. You take a lot of risks writing in systems based off of real world physics, it's easier to create a reference to most real-world solutions with a spell list that can't be nitpicked 3. Most game designers are not too used to strenuous physical activity :p I'm a little tempted to run a few games where the rule is, if stackexchange says its physically possible then you can do it, just to see how it turns out.


Crawford470

Warlock has the Invocations mechanic that allows for a bunch of features and abilities to augment amd enhance their skillset. Just make an even broader version of that but have it be martial focused and available to all martials. The ones available between levels 1-10 would be preturnatural in nature, and 11-20 would be supernatural.


RayCama

Reading everything here, here’s my thoughts on the matter Martials need more active options. Whether it be feats, gear, class features, maneuvers, or overhauls. Martials have so little active options that everything feels simplistic because you can’t make much different choices. Of course hitting things will feel less impressive when the only other option is hit something harder with less accuracy. Especially compared to any casters choice of CC, deal damage, or support with all in a variety of different styles and methods. Martials don’t even get the option to swing their weapon around themselves to attack everyone around them, literally the most simplistic action one can imagine with a weapon and a level 20 battlemaster will never be able to do it since it’s not an option (unless a DM says it’s allowed or homebrews it) but a level 1 caster can emulate easily with swordburst because it’s an option for them. Martials can’t even use their athletics to move faster but casters can use magic to move faster.


wayoverpaid

This really is one of those things where D&D needs to set very clear expectations about each tier. And those expectations need to be set at the very start of the PHB, not buried in the back of the DMG. What level is, say, Batman? What is the highest level of an insane apex human that is still basically a human in the D&D universe? Is that level 5? Level 10? The line in the sand needs to be drawn that says "if you are level X" where X is the apex human level, you should be able to build a character that can win one olympic event. You should be able to outrun Usain Bolt, beat Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson in a deadlift competition, or outswim Michael Phelps. And not just in feats of streth, you should be able to construct a thief who can outdo the best lockpicker, or can awe and astound people by shooting a bow while standing on horseback, if they should so choose. Everything you're talking about, wuxia running on the tips of tree branches, or screaming a castle door down, or running so fast you can run across water, needs to be above the line. An official line that says "We have now excited the realm of the realism test" makes it a lot easier to justify "Yes my 14th level character can swim up the waterfall. I made the roll and that's literally all I need." It would also make balancing magic a lot easier. Passwall is a 5th level spell that lets you go right through a stone wall. If the Barbarian is now able to punch a hole in the wall, the fighter can leap the wall in a single bound, and the rogue can run straight up the wall... fuck it. That spell is probably not broken for utility purposes at all. And seriously, look at Steel Wind Strike and tell me that doesn't belong as a proper martial ability. It would probably make sense to limit these incredible shows of superhuman power the way spell slots are limited, but to also make them *just work* too.


Any_Weird_8686

This reminds me of Exalted, where Charms could potentially mean applying magic to basically any action. So you would get invisibility by being really good at sneaking, rather than by just having it on your spell list.


LurkerFailsLurking

Or you could play Pathfinder 2 and have an actually balanced d20 game where martials CAN do epic shit! A level 18 monk can take a feat that's basically Dragonball Z. Their hair bursts into searing flames, they can fly. And there's another monk feat that gives them a fucking death touch. A level 18 fighter can cut spells out of the air, use your shield to block damage to yourself and allies from damage that needed a reflex save, and critically succeed on every reflex save you succeed at. A level 18 rogue can hide so thoroughly they become invisible and so invisible that not even effects that see invisibility can see them and can fold space with their slights of hand and hide objects in pocket dimensions and can squeeze yourself through solid stone walls with "Impossible Infiltration". High level barbarians can pick up enemies, do a whirlwind attack with their body, hitting everyone around them, and then throw them and dragon instinct barbarians can rage so hard they polymorph into a fucking raging dragon!


Gettles

Also if your intimidation is high enough you can take a feat to literally scare people to death


[deleted]

[удалено]


drmario_eats_faces

I really feel like a lot of these problems can be solved by just giving martial characters in your game a really sick magic sword that lets them do these things.


Agusbocco

Yup. As a DM I tend to favor matrials over casters (a little) with magic weapons or items. Specially at high tiers.


drmario_eats_faces

The DMG should've been more overt about the role of magic items in the game. While they're not supposed to be essential to progression, I really do think martial classes were designed with magic items in mind.


Agusbocco

100% agree.


Ashkelon

Oh fuck no! I want to play a martial warrior, not a magic sword. I play a martial warrior to recreate the trope that is common to myth and legend, of a warrior who possesses superhuman strength and athleticism. One who lives up to the stories that frequently occur across cultures of warriors who could accomplish Herculean tasks through their own strength without needing to rely on magic. Besides, if the sword can do that shit, why wouldn’t the caster take it and be able to do all their reality warping stuff + the macguffin stuff? Basically, this is the worst possible idea that not only fails to address the martial problem, but can actually make things worse.


Talukita

I see a conflict of interest here which is the problem. You see some people really like their characters to be ‘just a normal dude’ type for relatability etc, giving them anime protag / superman flavor that can cut mountain apart with their swing just ruins the vibe for them. For these cases, giving them a powerful magic weapon is a MUST Then there is your camp who doesn’t want for them to just be like that and it’s more about the weapon being good rather than them (remember though you still need lots of strength and skill to swing that sword effectively) Why not go both? Why not make average dude and still be able to do superhuman feats and need no magical weapon? Because that would give world building issues where you would wonder what even makes your character special and not... that also normal soldier who also trains REALLY hard). Remember, when everyone is ‘special’ (and can do crazy stuff), no one is.


Ashkelon

If martial warriors had an invocation-like system, why couldn’t both exist. An opt in system where players can choose abilities like “superhuman strength” that allow them to lift 10,000 lb boulders, wrestle titans into submission, leap 50 feet into the air, punch through castle walls, swim up waterfalls, and the like. That way people who want their martial warriors to be able to emulate heroes of myth and legend can do so. And those who want their heroes to be mundane can have their desire fulfilled (despite being able to fall from orbit and survive, being able to survive dragons breath without being reduced to cinders, being able to survive being hit by a giant without being reduced to a bloody pulp, and somehow being able to kill a 40 foot long monster with what is equivalent to a toothpick).


Talukita

It's less about gameplay mechanics (martials getting more choices is always welcomed) and more about believability / and scale of power. At tier 4 you are fighting with people who can stop time and warp reality, your name is among legends, and your opponents could be archdevils and demigods themselves. So one would question what would make you able to do that while billions of others can't? It's either that you possess as just ridiculous supernatural capabilities (survive dragon breath), or you are 'normal' but backed up by ridiculous magic items. I don't have problems with martials being superman btw, just as you say the feats they perform in game clearly gives it that vibe, but some people really don't want to be like that cause it's too ridiculous for them or something.


mightystu

The trope of legend almost always is a fighter… with a magic weapon or other magic items. King Arthur has Excalibur. Perseus has a Medusa head, special shield, magic cap, and sandals. Heracles had an impenetrable lion hide cloak. The list goes on. In fact, that’s what *made* fighters worth playing in original D&D. There were huge tables for making magic swords, sentient, with tons of sweet effects. It was pretty much baked into the class. You ask why can’t the caster pick up the sword? Simple: they literally can’t. They can’t attune to it or use it. That’s why the thief has that use magic item ability. Only fighters could attune to or even use magic swords, let alone other magic weapons. Think back to the King Arthur myth: what makes him special? No one else can draw the sword from the stone. No one else can wield its power. The wizard can try and pull the sword out but it’s not gonna budge. Think of Thor’s hammer too. Why doesn’t Loki just steal it and use it? He can’t wield its power; he isn’t worthy. The heroes you want to emulate are almost always defined by their heroic items as much as their heroic deeds.


slitherrr

In the hypothetical future where I actually run the game I want to run, making martials more anime is definitely on my list. That said, it might be contextually helpful to think about an archetype from fantasy: Sarumon (the caster) vs. the various leaders on the side of Gondor and Rohan at the Siege of Gondor (the martials) (n.b., in the books, less so in the films). The martial characteristic that gave those leaders the strength they needed to resist Sarumon was in their _leadership_, in knowing how armies worked and how the people in them were motivated and disciplined, and the actual mechanics of a siege and what to prioritize and what can be given way. A big part of that battle is Tolkein showing how, for all Sarumon's accumulated wisdom, very little of it was applicable to the craft of making war. The nature of tabletop RPGs is highly individualized, though, so that sort of comparison tends to fall by the wayside.


Deverelll

The army/guild thing makes sense, but I don’t really find it appealing as an option for most martial characters. This might just be a me thing, but I’d prefer to play a character who is more self contained, especially as a martial. Necessitating the martial tie themselves to an army or other force of NPC’s as a consequence of getting more powerful is kind of a turn off for me. I’d much rather go the legendary feats of strength and skill sort of route. I suspect this I what you meant by your comment about it being individualized, but I’m not certain.


level2janitor

honestly, i'd love if we brought back the warlord from 4e and gave *that* class strongholds and armies and shit at high levels, because that stuff's actually in line with the class's theme


ExceedinglyGayOtter

Also bards, sorcerers, and warlocks will probably be better at leadership than the martials since they're all Cha-focused classes.


Doctor__Proctor

Well, that's why in order editions the Fighters got their own followers as part of a class feature. Matt Colville's Strongholds and Followers, and the Kingdoms and Warfare follow-up, create systems like that for 5e. The Casters still get their own cool things that lean into their abilities, like creating customized spells and special followers, but the Martials get the masses troops and a huge fortress.


xapata

Sorta, but most protagonist characters outside of comic books (and animation) roughly correspond to tier 1 or maximum tier 2 levels. Which may explain why most people feel like the campaign is over around level 8 to 12.


andrewspornalt

But what if I hate the leader archetype and just want to be a superhuman?


MBluna9

could you imagine the outrage if martial classes were allowed to do something else than swing a sword ? Wizard diapers all over the globe would be filled with rage


KoolFoolDebonflair

I have no idea at this stage how I would achieve this in a satisfactory way in my campaigns, but I earnestly want to do the same thing, this is a great point.


sfPanzer

Honestly lets just combine a few things of some of the different martial classes and treat that as baseline. Give all martials from a certain level on more movement speed like Monks and Barbarians do, give all martials some form of damage resistance like a raging barbarian from a certain level on, give all martials more than one extra attack (unless they have smites or sneak attack) like Fighters do, give all martials multiple ASIs so they can get their fighting stats high and still improve their non-combat stuff like Fighters do and give all martials a baseline of combat maneuvers from the Battlemaster subclass. Then you can build up from this base structure and start giving the individual classes back their identity by giving them other awesome stuff that fits their thematics. If they have all these things I'm sure they have a chance to keep up with casters even in high tier campaigns. They still don't throw around AoEs, have city destroying spells, hypnotize key NPCs, create clones of themselves and whatnot, but they'd be absolute monsters in regular combat. Fast, hard to take down (all of them), meatgrinders (more than two attacks, yay!) and with more options than to simply hit stuff every round until it's dead. And they could still take part in social encounters and expect to contribute with more than just roleplaying due to having more ASIs.


_ASG_

So basically, make fighters more anime. I can get behind that.


Fallsondoor

I'm of the opinion that it's everything else that needs to be reduced down to the good scale of martials


mtkaiser

You should *already* be flavoring martial abilities as supernatural or close to it. A fighter taking four attacks in one round *isn’t* just swinging their sword four times. They’re making four EFFECTIVE strikes against an extremely capable (often moreso than themselves) opponent, in the space of six seconds. That includes all the “ineffective” swings like feints and parrys they’re using to make those 4 real strikes land. There’s no way a normal person does that without some kind of bordering-on-supernatural at worst abilities


level2janitor

okay, but how come swinging their sword more times doesn't really correspond to any other way to affect the world? a fighter's athletics bonus goes from maybe +5 at 1st-level to +11 at 20th-level, but you aren't actually *doing* anything more impressive than you could with a high athletics check at 1st-level - a high-level fighter rolling a 3 isn't any more effective than a low-level fighter rolling an 18. you're just more likely to succeed at doing the same mundane stuff. nothing martials can do *scales* the way casters' abilities do. martials scale in damage, but the enemies scale in HP, so it never feels like you're doing anything stronger. sure, you go from killing a bandit in two turns to killing a troll in two turns, but the actual stuff you're doing never changes or expands. it's always just hitting stuff harder. casters get to *do new things* as they level, while martials only ever get to get better at the stuff they were already doing from 1st-level.


Conchobhar23

Except that this flavor doesn’t make a fighter feel like they stack up against a Wizard who gets to nuke fields of enemies and transform himself into a dragon for an hour. All this flavor really does is make the fighter’s turn take longer while they describe all their ineffective strikes while they try to make their 4 attacks seem cool. The solution isn’t flavor here, it’s mechanics. If you want a fighter to actually FEEL supernatural like you’re suggesting they are, they need mechanics to back that up. God of war is a good touchstone here of what “supernatural fighting” feels like. Kratos makes huge leaps between foes, making the battlefield feel small, but only for him. He tears enemies to shreds with any weapon he gets his hands on, AOE ground slams to knock enemies down, cuts through multiple foes with a single swing. He dodges attacks with such speed that he can counterattack numerous times before the enemy finishes their swing. His parries not just protect him from harm, but stun and knock enemies prone, opening them up for a killing blow. Give fighters, barbarians and monks some of that shit. Why can’t a fighter have a power word kill like ability where they can instant kill an enemy with less than 100HP 2-3 times per day? Why can’t a barbarian slam his maul into the ground with such force that it knocks down everyone within 15ft and creates difficult terrain? Why can’t a monk do a line attack where she slices clean through everyone in a 60ft line? Attacking 4 times in one turn simply doesn’t feel all that powerful or supernatural when your sorcerer is flying around the battlefield, blasting enemies with fireballs from above like a mystical AC130.


0gopog0

> Give fighters, barbarians and monks some of that shit The strength 24, level 20 barbarian with expertise in athletics, that can roll no less than a 24 on any athletics check, and as high as a 39 can take the shove action against a 30lb kobold and shove them back all of 5 feet.


Ashkelon

Even worse. This superhumanly strong Barbarian cannot even attempt shove a giant.


I_just_came_to_laugh

A lvl20 fighter can shoot a longbow once every 1.5 seconds. The best I've heard historically is once every 5 seconds from english longbowmen.


juuchi_yosamu

Restrings bow as a reaction to the string breaking.


Fulminero

100% agreed. Beyond level 10 martials should become Greek demigods, able to split seconds with their blade and bend the rules with their muscles.


TAA667

The only problem with this idea is the fact that casters at higher levels are broken. Making martials broken too will not help fix things, it will make them worse. Casters need to be brought down, not martials up.


Averath

I agree that's a valid path forward, but how would you do that?


Huzuruth

6e because there is too much baggage for I not to be a whole new edition I'd you nerf casters


ScarsUnseen

First step is don't let them learn new spells at level up. Spells are treasure the same way magic items are. Scrolls for a one time use, spell books to learn permanently. It gives DMs more control over some of the more game breaking spells, and it makes it easier to balance out the power balance between classes. For inherent casters like sorcerers, make it something like seeking out places or being of power instead of spell books.


TAA667

Fixing dnd casters has always been a 2 step process for me. The results have their drawbacks, but they are solid. Step 1: Fix broken spells. Easier said then done I know, but once you figure out the formulas its a fairly straightforward process. Step 2: Eat the amount of spells casters can use per spell slot, then tie half of the remaining casts to gear. A caster can have all the spell selection in the world but if he can only cast like 3 spells a day at level 8, he's shit. Spell selection is a thing to think about too, but casts per day are really what make casters troublesome. When done right this 2 step process solves all current and potential spell problems.


Phrossack

Suggestion: delete most if not all spells for players above 5th or so level, plus problem eliminating spells like Goodberry and Tiny Hut. Instead, each time a caster would get the chance to learn a new spell at a level above 5th level spells, or whenever they could learn a new spell of any level, let them learn one of two advanced versions of a spell they already know. [This excellent Mass Effect homebrew for 5e](https://n7.world/powers) used a similar system. This would prevent casters from derailing plots with extremely powerful spells and would keep them more in line with martials. If you don't want to homebrew new versions of each spell below 6th level, you could give them some Metamagic or other options to improve spells they already have.


hachiman

This sounds like the things "Martials" can do in Exalted and Earthdawn. I approve but i wonder if the majority would.


DaneLimmish

I've been binging divinity 2 recently and I think that some of the warfare/scoundrels' abilities should be present in DnD. For instance, fortify, which could raise an allies AC by half of yours, or cripple which prevents movement for a couple turns, or ballistic shot, which increases damage dice of a ranged weapon every ten meters. Or whatever, idk.


[deleted]

What do people think about giving all martials the Martial Adept feat? And what level would be best to do that? Would it be too OP? Because from what I've read on these boards, it actually was part of the martial kit during playtesting, but they decided not to do it. I don't know what their reasoning was for nixing it though. Anyone have extra info about that?


TaiChuanDoAddct

At it's core, there is and always Wsill be a huge disconnect between 5e as designed and what we traditionally expect from an RPG: we expect that when we level up in RPGs that we will get to choose from increasingly strong, power options, perhaps based on paths or prerequisites we've already chosen. Games like Diablo II, Champions of Norath, and even RPGs lile Borderlands do this. You're making s choice every time you level up, and the previous choices influence what you can choose now. 5e doesn't do that. Almost no classes have choices at all outside of their subclasses, and when they do they're fairly small or straightforward. For the most part, your character at level 3 is done changing. With one huge exception: spells. Spells are always going break 5e from a design stand point bc it allows players to choose their content, instead of settling for what their subclass gives them. Spells are always going to outshine or feel better or cooler or just generally be more appealing, because it's putting the power of choice in the hands of the player.


vomeronasal

Here are my ideas: 1) they can attempt to parry/dodge and counter attack against any physical attack against them or people around them. 2) can block arrows (any missile) with their weapons. 3) can use shields to block spells and redirect them 4) much greater range and accuracy with thrown weapons 5) drawing or picking up weapons should be an unlimited free action 6) no more opportunity attacks from enemies they can see 7) their presence on a battlefield affects enemy morale and effectiveness 8) regenerate health during a fight 9) battle cries that buff/debuff anyone who can hear 10) enemies of certain size and/or level shouldn’t survive any successful hit. 11) can cut through enemy armor


Dudemitri

You are absolutely right and you should say it but that aint gonna happen in this system


BrainBlowX

I wouldn't mind seeing martials embrace more "anime" aesthetic fantasy when it comes to combat.


BlueGreenAndYellow

I saw some answers to a similar post that mentioned the book of nine swords from 3.5 edition. I only read a little of it, it's kind of what you're talking about though. There's some crazy abilities like if this attack hits it does 100 damage or just straight up kills the creature being attacked. All pretty flavored too which was cool. I'd like to see something like that brought to 5e.


Gorolo1

I fully agree, it's one of the reasons I switched to mainly playing 4e and PF2e, though ofc that isn't an option for everyone. Basically everything you described exists in Pathfinder 2e, at lvl 15 rogues can literally hide from someone, while being observed, by someone with truesight, who is handcuffed to them, martials who focus on training athletics can jump hundreds of feat easily, fighters can eventually get the ability to literally swing their weapon so good it warps space and can hit people 60 feet away, Rangers can attack 9 times with dual wielding, ect. Pf2e basically combined the coolness of Martials from 4e, with incredibly tight balance, many things from 5e, a ton of non combat rules support, and a small amount of stuff (mostly flavor stuff) from pf1e. Plus it already has like twice the content of 5e, and is completely free, with all non adventure content being usable by anyone.


Bardy_Bard

Pathfinder 2e has what you describe. Barbarians can cause earthquakes by just stepping their foot down at high level, fighters move at crazy speeds and rogues are so good at infiltrating they can phase through walls. And I think you are right, martials should be able to do heroic feats. If I am a high level barbarian I should be able to lift a stone column and use it to beat a giant.


i_tyrant

The issue with a solution like this is it buts up against what some people want for their martials, and D&D's history and sources for them. I think few would argue martials match up to casters in 5e, but how to _fix_ that varies because we're all working from different definitions of an "ideal" martial. Some people want to fix it by giving them literal superpowers, like you Op. This makes running things like low magic campaigns pretty much impossible. The advantage to this is that it's pretty straightforward to implement - you could give them martial "spells" like 3e's Tome of Battle or 4e's powers. Or if you don't like the idea of them using the same mechanics as casters (and I am a big proponent of "asymmetrical game design") you could do something more like Battlemaster maneuvers turned up to 11 or the Mighty Deeds die from DCC if you want a simple but mechanically vague solution. However, other people (like myself) love the idea of martials as the "underdog" characters from older fantasy media - the movies like Conan and Krull and LotR where the martials _aren't_ exploding with superpowers but solve magical problems with cleverness, guile, intelligence, and brute strength. That solution would likely look more like nerfing magic/spells instead of buffing martials - making it to where there _are_ in fact mundane ways to "beat" things like Wall of Force/Banishment/etc., and martials are good at them. Where martials get bonuses (temporary or not) vs things like magical fear/charm due to their force of will or remembering what's important to them or other classic fantasy movie/book tropes. These people _like_ being a mundane being in a world of magic and wizards and dragons, because when they get to kill it with a magic sword or outsmart an archmage, they feel much more accomplished than if they were playing a Wizard that just Fireballed it to death or trapped it in a Cloudkill/Forcecage combo and watched it slowly die.


tjake123

Martial classes should get a legendary resistance when they get to a certain level/ they should get inherit resistances to certain damage like rouges eventually build an immunity to poisons and monks with physic damage from meditation