this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
8 points (100.0% liked)
D&D Next - 5e Discussion
2406 readers
6 users here now
A place to discuss the latest version of Dungeons & Dragons, the fifth edition, known during the playtest as D&D Next.
Join our discord! https://discord.gg/dndnext
-- Rules --
- Be Civil. Unacceptable behavior includes name calling, taunting, baiting, flaming, etc. Please respect the opinions of people who play differently than you do.
- Use Clear, Concise Titles.
- Limit Self-Promotional Links. External links to blogs, kickstarters, storefronts, YouTube channels, etc, must be related to DnD and posted no more than once every 14 days. Affiliate links are never allowed.
This is a new community and the rules are in flux. Please bear with us (and give your feedback!) as we navigate building this new community. Thank you!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hot take, but I think the martial/caster power imbalance is imaginary, and has been even in 3.5.
It comes from people doing thought-experiment characters, like Pun Pun, rather than actual play. You can have a caster player say "I use this series of spells in such a way as to break the game" but in practice it happens far less often than "I murderhobo the NPCs to break the game" and is easily dealt with the same way. If your caster is just playing like a normal person and fireballs a dozen goblins or whatever, the barbarian great cleaves a dozen more, everyone has fun, all is good.
The problem is that the only way a fighter can interact with the world is by murdering people, while casters have a spell for every situation.
It's not so much that casters are stronger (although they definitely are), but that almost every situation can be solved by casting a spell, while martials are left waiting for the next combat encounter to do something useful - and even then, they are more useful as an HP sack than they are at dealing damage.
Pretty much the only mechanical way to reliably interact with the world. Since the results from skill checks aren't defined the point that comes across is that they matter less. Why can't the Fighter "suggest" to the ruffians to drop their weapons through their skill in Intimidation? They can of course but nowhere it is written as clearly as having the spell Suggestion.
To help non-spellcaster have reliable ways to interact and change the world there needs to be more details regarding skill check outcomes.
Because Charisma is a dump stat for fighters.
If martials had access to maneuvers, Commanding Presence, Disarming Strike and the likes would go a long way in improving their capabilities outside of combat, as well as giving them abilities with very specific outcomes written in the rules instead of having to ask the DM whether they can try to intimidate a ruffian to drop their weapon.
This is why I changed to Level up advanced 5e. Not only all martial have maneuvers but they also get utility out of combat as features as they level up. Is a really cool alternative to 5e becasue it shares 50% of the system we like and it improves in so many things that we(the group I play with) don't like
Also, even a fighter who dumped charisma can be intimating.
I feel like alternate abilities skill check should have a bit more spotlight.
The human 20 STR fighter PC wants to intimidate this guy by snapping this fence post in half like a toothpick?
Sure buddy, give me a Strength Intimidation check.
Other people might intimidate through words and sheer personality, but this guy's as strong as a Glabrezu, yet half the size, and can just bend a sword with his hands. (Oh shit, that's where all these bent swords are coming from)
While STR Intimidation is specifically mentioned in the rules, there's a lot more combinations that could make sense depending on the situation.
The problem is it relies mostly on DM fiat instead of neatly and explicitly described spells, so it's less obvious, less reliable and less used.
I do all that in my games, creative shit is always welcome because it feels good to be a player and come up with a innovative solution!
Yeah, as mentioned by Aielman15, Fighters tend to not have a good Charisma. So it's actually not just that Martials only have skills, but they are usually worse at those skills compared to Casters (barring Rogue, who is only outclassed by Bard). (Note: I use Martial here to mean "class without the Spellcasting pr Pact Magic features in their base class" and Caster to mean "class that counts fully for Spellcasting multiclassing and Warlock.)
Martials tend to excel in Strength, Dexterity, and/or Constitution and usually be middling at best in other stats. Since there is only one skill associated with Strength: Athletics, while, other stats have at least 3 each (except Constitution) a Strength based character will be worse at skills than other characters. Of course the relative strength of the different skills will vary depending on your table, but I think we can at least all agree that the Charisma based ones tend towards the top. They also don't get any more Proficiencies or Expertises than any other class (Bard and Rogue are again the exceptions).
In essence, pointing to the skill system doesn't really help, as Martials aren't usually any better than Casters at them, or are even worse in some cases.
What you are saying sure does highlight an impalance in the system, one that is probably hard to solve without removing what is "core dnd". Decoupling skills from attributes is one step. Maneuvers for all another. I don't know what else to do without starting to make it not dnd. And honestly I don't really need to do anything. There is apparently something out there called Advanced 5e for those that want "dnd but more". For me there are a thousand and one systems out there for me to like.
It's not about breaking the game. To match a caster in damage you have to build a munchkin martial, and even so the caster will still be more versatile.
Thankfully the Rules Lawyer has an entire video about this that captures my view so I don't have to write an entire post about it.
https://youtu.be/x9opzNvgcVI?t=9m54s
You didn't address one of the leading problems of imbalance: groups who do like one fight per long rest.
That creates scenarios where the fighter can swing four times for 4d8+16 total, but the wizard can drop two fireballs for 16d6 to whole groups of baddies (effectively becoming like 64d6)
The adventuring day is garbage and so long as the game is balanced around it, there will be problems.
In 3.5 fighters are OK in a fight. The imbalance was for the rest of the game thanks to wizards' utility spells.
Also CoDzilla since buffs stacked, which 5e's concentration solved.
5e is at a good spot, we usually play lower levels and it feels good,
@sirblastalot @Phantaminum
Lower levels is bit boring after a while, don't get me wrong, I like low levels but it losses the spark fast after 3 ccampaings at max level 5, mainly because there is low variety.
@Phantaminum @dndn
We're still discovering new things after almost ten years and around 500 sessions 🤷🏻♀️