One D&D and the Martial/Caster Divide
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ต.ค. 2023
- #dnd #dungeonsanddragons #onednd
There has been a lot of discussion about the Martial/Caster divide in One D&D and in 5e generally. In this video we discuss the design philosophy that may have led to this reality and what could be done to help address it. - เกม
You hit the nail on the head; WotC took away all caster weaknesses out of the perception that ‘Those aren’t fun’. But while so doing, they eliminated the game balance by making casters simply superior. Who needs fighters when bladsingers are the ‘fragile arcane casters’?
Something at the very least has got to be done about arcane caster AC. Heck, just making Shield a Concentration spell would help, but I’d prefer if they brought back armor restrictions.
@muddlewait8844 truthfully there never really was after 3e. I think one of the problems is that they're trying to avoid a PF2e meta situation (have to be optimal, and even what you'resupposed to optimally be is shit because of whiteboard numbers being good, but language being poor enough people complaon even when save spells only don't do something on a critical success) which is insanely difficult in the Gygax Descent games.
@@camiblack1you definitely don’t have to be optimize your character in pf2e, teamwork is quite a lot more important than individual builds
Sidekick rules from Tashas should just be part of the base game and they should label them with a tag that says "beginner classes". These are just classes that are really simple like the warrior class gets Champion and Brute as subclass options for example. Spellcaster (Yes, there's a sidekick class called spellcaster) gets subclasses that boost cantrips for example. Then from there, boost the base sidekick a little bit but make it very simple. If they boost it enough, maybe even some veterans will play them from time to time. Like if you join a table on the spot and don't have time to make a character sheet, then just use roll up a quick beginner class instead. When I DM, I sometimes use sidekicks. I think sidekicks are brilliant and is one of the best things to come out of Tashas. Now obviously, if they do this, they need to rename sidekick into something else. I think "beginner classes" is enough.
Then from there, they've solved the beginner problem. Then they can boost the base martial classes significantly from there and give them the tag "veteran classes". This isn't even a bad thing to do, like it solves multiple problems and it introduces 3 new classes to the game easily. That's easily more content. Maybe they could do more "beginner classes" in the future like a half caster option.
I've had this thought for a very very long time but I have never had the time to talk about sidekicks.
This is a brilliant idea and was essentially exactly what I had in mind when mentioning altering certain class abilities to be a bit easier to parse and understand. There's a fun intro adventure called Hidden Halls of Hazakor that kind of did this by introducing later class features to the classes at levels 1-5 but in lower power and simpler ways. It was always a great idea that stuck with me.
If you wanna collaborate on something related to this, I'm obviously more than happy to haha :)
Thats a cool idea, got me brainstorming on how to implement it, What would simple warrior be like, something for a sidekick or new player that requires little optimization just hit stuff and go. For spellcasters when I get a new player I tell them to try Warlock because thats pretty simple and straight forward, Eldritch blast and two spells is easy. I'd probably make a more generic "spellcaster" along those lines that servers purpose of both arcane and divine but without the complexity of eldritch invocations. However I'm not sure how many new players would be on board with that Idea.
I have a newish player in my group and she wanted to try my Homebrew Psionicist class (because Jedi, thats it, thats all the hook a new player needs to make a character). This is one of the most complex classes in the game, it gives experienced players a bit of a run around getting their heads around old concepts I brought to 5E like Attack modes, Defense Modes, Devotions and Metapsionics, Think Eldritch invocations but x4 with choices from seven different psionic sciences. We are doing our end campaign level 20 adventure this weekend and she has mastered the class in that time, even wanting more powers outside the psionic sciences she was limited too.
So even if you made "Warrior" a simple class that can match blow for blow with a battlemaster fighter and still be useful you are killing the learning curve that new players really enjoy getting into with their characters, and that could spoil the game, For new players just keep things simple start at level 1, and let them grow into their character.
I thought about that, or just bringing back the 3.x NPC classes with these changes and giving them subclasses that boost their power.. Though everytime i think about improving the expert I keep going back to Earthdawn Adepts.
One of the biggest challenges for 5e is DMing is hard, the martial/caster divide makes encounter design unpredictable and DMing much harder.
Always sucks when your 'easy' encounter TPKs the party because the caster isn't there that night, and your 'impossible' challenge gets one shotted by the caster who can pick the spell save to target.
Martials should have more options than just "Attack" or "Athletics check". Battle master should just be the basic fighter and other martial classes branch out from there.
The issue appears to be that WotC really want martials, like all of them, to be simple. Only Spells can be varied and interesting. I really don't get this other than a work-saving measure. You only need one martial class to be simple - the Barbarian seems obvious. Then you have the tactical Fighter and the opportunistic Rogue. I don't get how this would be bad.
@@RJWhitmore Wizards doesnt want 4e but the community is more or less at this point going 'just give us 4e, damnit.'
Kinda poetic.
@@RJWhitmore They completely lack imagination when it comes to fighters.
This would be supported also by better, more in-depth rules for most skills and better skill proficiency progression so you aren't doing the same things at level 10 that you were doing at level 3. This would buff casters too, of course, but it buffs martials more because casters can already do those things with spells.
@@trymv1578 the thing is, 4e still exists, people can play it or systems that are heavily inspired by it (like LANCER or wyrdwood wand).
The main problem of 5e is that a large part of the player base has never tried different systems, and is unaware of the existence of other TTRPGs or reluctant to try them, and WoTc tries to present DnD as a system that can be used to run basically any type of game to capitalize on it, and some parts of 5e suffers from this.
Class balance is NOT "everyone is equally good at everything," though. Class balance is "everyone's niche is equally important." And that's what people are saying when they're talking about the Martial/Caster Divide - there's a perception (whether true or not) that casters make martials irrelevant by the teen levels because they can do everything martials do, and better.
Didn’t they say that in the video?
From what I can tell, it happens earlier than that.
in order to actually understand how classes should be balanced I would recommend playing pathfinder 2e. Each class has something they are best at and it is really refreshing to actually see martials be the best at something and pathfinder 2e is really difficult to play if you don't have a balanced party (atleast if you are going for challenges of the appropriate difficulty. However, the difficulty system of pathfinder is very easy for the dungeon master to change if things are too difficult.) You need both martials and casters to really succeed which feels good.
@@Shadow-bk1im My Pathfinder Society main is currently mid-4th level so yes, I am familiar with Pathfinder 2nd Edition, which is a refreshing change after Pathfinder 1st Edition took the whole "class balance" thing that was already out of whack with D&D 3.5 and went "Yeah, nah, we're going to make this worse."
"Class balance is NOT "everyone is equally good at everything," though"
With all due respect, fuck that. This is such an outdated mentality that does nothing but segregate classes into fun classes, AKA the ones that do more things, and not fun classes, AKA the ones that are limited to few things. This dumb idea needs to die.
It really does need to be said that this Martial/Caster divide seems to be focused mostly on how crazy Casters scale. Anywhere around level 3-5 your wizard is going to fight for their lives with shield/Mage armor if you leave them unattended. On the other hand, by level 20 Monks get to do a 1-hit KO move on one enemy.... while Wizards are casting "Wish" and travelling through time and space. I know which of the two i would rather be.
A quick note about your True Strike example: Wizards don't need to dip a multiclass or take a feat to use a light crossbow with true strike. Light crossbow is a standard wizard weapon.
I'd give them Martial powers, and have newbies play a Sidekick class to start, if they thought it was too complicated.
Having newbs be sidekicks, who are actually in-game protected and helped by more senior characters, is brilliant.
I second this. I find the whole idea of "newb classes" repellant to begin with, and especially so because it's always a warrior. What if the new guy wants to play a magic user? You're gonna stomp on his dreams and hand him a barbarian like it's a set of training wheels? "You can play the GOOD classes after you've put in your time, freshman."
I say drop the idea altogether, but if you absolutely must, do something like this so there are "new guy" options for more than one fantasy archetype.
@@alarin612 I agree. I would never force a new player to be a Sidekick class, but if they felt overwhelmed, I would recommend one of those instead.
@@EugeneGM1 My man.
I will say that Laser Llama's Fighter fixes most, if not all, of these problems. I merged their class with the playtest Fighter. *chef's kiss*
The best martials have been since i started was the Tome of Battle in 3.5, which basically gave martial classes the options of maneuvers like spell lists. Think of this as Battle Master, but much more powerful ranging from 1st level manuevers giving an extra d6 of damage to a 9th level manuever letting you make two rounds of full attacks on an enemy. They also had Stances, which gave a static boost rather than using a meanuever resource. Some stances did things like adding damage, boosting AC, or even giving damage reduction or immunity to critical hits. Yes, it was only 3 classes from the book that got this benefit mainly, but it does show an example of how to apply benefits to martials that is at least comparable to casters.
For the love of all that is good , monks need weapon mastery built into their fists
10000000% yes.
Yeah, that was so stupid, though they should also let Martial Arts affect Weapons again too so you aren't pigeonholed into only using Unarmed Attacks.
Just count monk fists as weapons
@@joeleek9976 It would still need a specific Weapon Mastery applied, which Unarmed Strikes don't have available
@@halozoo2436 agreed. My answer was somewhat shortsighted.
Bouncing off two of your points:
- You dont need to give martials more ASIs, just have them give 3 points instead of 2
- Fighting styles can become a basic stance system for the martials. The gishes pick one style and are locked into it, the martials get a handful and can choose between them each turn (no action)
This is a great idea.
A lot of what happens with martials can be chucked to how smoothened some parts of the game are becoming, for example, newer species options for players no longer include height and weight suggestions, which I previously used to tell if a character was able to lift or throw another based on their carrying capacity (since the limitation of size is quite harsh). In the DMG there's a section that tells you how much HP and AC several generic objects of different materials have, and I feel that's a must read for both players and DMs, because martials are uniquely equipped to single-target things such as a section of stone wall, and if your barbarian goes "I could maybe clear 27hp with my greataxe in one turn, so I can maybe just use my attacks to enter this stronghold". this is a part of the DMG im TERRIFIED WOTC may erase and simplify, or make it simply impossible due to gamification.
it goes without saying but I love how much Baldur's gate 3 bumped Strenght as a stat, and a lot of what they did should be implemented, because in 5e, if you want to use an enemy as an improvised weapon, or you want to throw them, there's simply not rules for that, there's just this vague "you can't use sentient creature as a weapon". all that is needed for this to work is a small table that indicates the weight of creatures of different sizes (you grab the ones for existing medium creatures, multiply them 8fold for each size category and youre done), then you just add sentient creatures count as improvised weapons, their weight limits how far you can throw them based on your carrying capacity, and presto!
also on this note, Melee combat should be incentivized with greater damage potential, as you are getting in much more risk, the feature that does this the best is the Paladin smite, since it only works on melee hits, barbarian also does this, and honestly, barbarian is good, it only stars falling off at around level 7, when the spellcaster's magic start comparing to the power of Rage, but rage starts plateauing in its potential
Melee takes more risks and has less utility both in and out of combat. The fact that they also deal less damage is absolutely insane to me. I don't mind dealing a little less damage, but I need battlemaster fighter type of utility to make up for it.
I am doing the best I can with my way of mercy level 6 monk. D6 damage is still d6 damage and my entire play style is centered around mobility. 16 ac and 45 hp doesn't get you very far in melee. I did use my patient defense action once. All the monsters just ignored me for the round. Great use of ki there.
@@joeleek9976 it sorta says something about monk that it can barely benefit from feats, and always preffers an ASI, pretty much the only prominent feats a monk can take are Mobile (to avoid wasting Ki on step of the wind) and Seninel (For reaction attacks)
@@joeleek9976 Isn't that metagaming on the DM's part? The monsters have no indication that you're using patient defence until they actually attack you, right? And even then, it should probably take several attacks before they work out _why_ you're so much harder to hit now.
@@FlameUser64 indeed it is. I also have it filed next to no monster ever attacking me with a projectile after I got access to deflect missles.
@@joeleek9976 Ugh. That sucks a lot.
I think, ideally both martials and casters would have their own simple and complex class/subclass options. Neither fantasy is incompatible with either style of gameplay, despite what WoTC seems to imply.
Thing is even a newbie can work with getting special attacks. The issue with why classes are hard is choices. For example. Casters have a lot of choices to make in their spell selections. There are good spells, bad spells and everything inbetween. But if WotC gives "easy" classes just more mechanics, they just have, like power attack, or improved crit rate, or maybe an anime style dash and slash attack it won't really change the "difficulty" of the class, it just makes them better.
Also in my personal experience it's always the new players, that go straight to casters, because well, spell casting is fun. So keeping martials simple for inexperienced players feels like a swing and a miss to me anyways.
Honestly things like a dash and slash or whirlwind attack or big slam or the like being baked in martial powers you can pick from would do a _lot_ even for the kinds of people who just want to hit things with a weapon. After all, those are you hitting things with a weapon, but _cooler._
@@FlameUser64 Make Steelwind strike a BM maneuver you cowards
The biggest issue is in the spell design. There is a small percentage of spells that are far superior to the other spells, like Spirit Guardians for clerics, wall of force for wizards and conjure animals for druids. Each of these spells could easily be shifted up 2 levels, without being modified, and still be picked and casted eagerly at those levels.
Bring these few OP spells more in line with the rest of the spells, that will go a very long way to close the gap. I don't think anyone is complaining that the druid is outdamaging martials with errupting earth, or flaming sphere. But putting 8 giant crabs on the board combines to deal more damage than the fighter, more control than the fighter with sentinel, even more tankiness overall than the fighter.
Also balancing spells will make the entry to spellcasters much more easy on new players, right now if you pick chromatic orb over sleep at level 1, you are just shooting yourself in the foot, so while we are at it, get rid of the trap options.
There is a huge problem with doing that, at least for the Cleric is that a lot of the times there are those must-have spells, all, or nearly of the other spells at that level just suck. Not because of that one or two good options, but because there are just so many really bad ones.
It is just creating other problems in order to maybe help another.
@@josephbeckett2330 Well, the only other real way I see of addressing the Martial Caster divide is buffing martials a lot. But then you get the problem the other way around. Where new players, or players who just wants something different than their 5th cleric casting spirit guardians, they are underpowered.
I will grant you, there are also many spells that need a buff.
Personally I think that the true solutions to the Caster vs Non-Caster isn't really possible in One D&D, as there's 3 things that would need to happen to help mitigate the issue:
1. Bring back the At-Will system from 4e, this would help the Classes have a shared floor as they scale the same way, while also making sure everyone has abilities they can use at any time, incidentally helping Casters with versatility between utility and combat options. This could be kind of done with Weapon Mastery being changed to be abilities that are chosen with each Attack Action rather than be locked by your Weapon.
2. Give Non-Casters more Skill and Tool Proficiencies, offering more utility out of combat that enables players to have more ways to interact with the game world beyond combat on any Class.
3. Introduce a new system that gives Non-Casters their own answer to Spell Slots, as while it sounds lazy, the biggest issue with the Caster vs Non-Caster divide is how Casters can use Spells to do big and powerful things with one Action, meaning that they can win fights in a few turns with their powerful Spells while Non-Casters are effectively limited to what they always do. My idea is that Non-Casters get their Daily Resource that can be used to activate powerful abilities to let them do big things like their Caster brethren, perhaps something called Exploits, which I would personally make scale similar to a 1/2-Caster's Spellcasting but with a few more Slots/Lvl to represent their dedication to the ways of martial combat. Barbarian, Monks and Rogues can learn Exploits similar to how a Sorcerer does, with Barbarians learning powerful melee attacks and defensive abilities, Monks get all manner of mobility and multi-attack abilities (because of course the get to fly around as spinning torrent of kicks and punches). Rogues meanwhile have some sneakier tricks up their sleeve and the better ranged attacks of those 3. Now as for Fighters, they are special as a Class that Prepares their abilities like a Wizard as they are the masters of pure martial combat, choosing to ready techniques each day they've trained in from a manuscript of exercises and such (which isn't necessarily a written explanation, often using pictures to demonstrate), they also have a little bit of everything to choose from, even if they lack some of the more unique abilities exclusive to the other 3, but they also get the most abilities that directly buff their allies and offer a Warlord style build to the Class.
"At-Will Powers"... you mean actions which don't cost resources? Like... the very resources that the 5e design team wanted _every_ class to have for their short rest mechanic will be used?
You can tone down Barbarian's "Rage" at low level and make it At-Will... then slowly bring it up to its current power level through... actual levels. Thus, it's not too weak at low levels and at high levels it can become pretty powerful.
Monk's Ki/Discipline should only be used for abilities that are truly powerful/spell like; for example Stunning Fist. Flurry of Blows, in 3.5e applied a negative at low level whenever used... but he Monk got 1 extra attack. Thus it's useful at low levels, but only slightly better (average damage wise) than just a single attack.. while at higher levels, it actually becomes good.
Then again, in 3.5e, there was an attack penalty baked into the math for each subsequent attack (the first two attacks by high level Monks don't have the attack penalty when the Monk does Flurry of Blows which is why it was a good ability).
If the martials had abilities which didn't cost resources... while also being good (not necessarily powerful for their level)... the caster-martial divide would be closer.
It also doesn't help that everyone has the same basic proficiency bonus... which means a caster with armour and weapon proficiency are able to out perform a low level martial.
As for #2... Skill and Tool proficiency only matters when the skill and tool usage matters... does 5e/One D&D actually provide an incentive for them?
As for #3... *Sigh* this can be resolved with a combination of #1 and #2... more precisely, having #2 be affected by #1. Specifically, Skill Feats.... which allow those who have them to do more than those which _don't_ have them.
@@aralornwolf3140 At-Wills were Attack Powers that cost no resources to use, meaning you always had access to them which meant you always had tactical options available on any given turn in addition to any limited-use abilities you had, think Cantrips but Attack only and available to everyone. The reason I suggest bringing them is because they add a lot more tactical choices to combat in a relatively simple way and allow for a more balanced foundation to build upon as every Class has their basic abilities scaling at the same rate, also incidentally helping Casters not have to spend Cantrips Known on both combat and utility options which is definitely nice (especially on Bards). It's also a straight up better and more interesting alternative to Weapon Mastery as they (usually) aren’t Weapon-specific, typically just caring about using a Melee or Ranged Weapon or being a Caster.
As for expanded Skill/Tool selection, it's a way to help balance out against Casters having utility Cantrips, which could also be paired with more ways to regularly use Skill/Tool Proficiencies to make it matter even more.
As for my Exploits idea, it is specifically to make sure that the Caster vs Non-Caster gap is actually closed without going to the nuclear option of making everyone use the exact same mechanics, adding a new set of abilities that have the power of Spell Slots without actual magic, enabling them to properly match the power a Caster can pull out in a single turn, something that is practically impossible to do any other way.
@@halozoo2436,
The "At-Will" powers of 3.5e were feats characters could take... martial characters, like fighters, had more feats... as their source of power _were_ the abilities from their feats... power attack, spring attack, etc.
Again... for whatever reason 5e's design team decided to strip the martial characters the ability to have powerful at-will actions... some of which had out of combat utility. *Shrugs*
I'm not disagreeing... I should have mentioned that 5e is basically 3.5e Simplified with Aspects of 4e Thrown on Top... with the "short rest" abilities effectively being the "once-per-encounter" abilities.
@@aralornwolf3140 Personally I prefer Feats to be more of an additional set of options, not the main progression and I also hate simply giving certain Classes more Feats/ASIs a lot, so I much prefer the idea of bringing back At-Will Powers since they can work well for every Class and give the game a solid baseline of balance as every Class would have their basic abilities scale at the same rate, making for a better start to balance everything else from there, plus they all but remove the repetitive gameplay of just taking the Attack Action every turn because you don't have any other options.
What I am seeing is as follows:
Make the battle master part of base fighter
Let barbarians crit more and use their primal power (STR) to do more out of combat stuff like skill checks.
Let rogues make a cunning strike to really damage their foes with their shots
And let the monk do monk things more instead of limiting them so much with expensive Ki point costs.
Seems like the designers are… KIND OF listening with the playtest. They didn’t give base fighter maneuvers (annoying), and they actually made monk WORSE for some inconceivable reason.
But they did boost the fighter in other ways, they gave barbarian more non-combat utility, and they also give the rogue a decent feature called “cunning strike”.
They aren’t taking it nearly far enough though… especially for the poor monk.
And they also made a fighter and bard subclass that both do monk things better than the monk does now so… WOTC really hates the monk.
Thief: I'll pick the...
Wizard: i cast knock
Fighter: Im going to leap over the...
Wizard: i cast fly
Barbarian: im going to attack the...
Wizard: FIREBALL
I'd like to see each class have an entry level subclass . Or have entry level martial and caster classes to help people get started. Let the new players just play and get used to it. Then let them see the full breadth of what's possible.
I'd prefer if complexity was mainly determined by the Class rather than the subclass based on what resources they have to manage. For example, a Simple Caster class that doesn't use spells or spell slots at all, but instead functions more like the 3e Warlock and Dragon Shaman, with subclasses determining what kind of magical effects and party role you specialize in. Another example would be a Complex Martial class that has martial techniques of varying levels that you can learn and perform, like 3e's Tome of Battle, with subclasses determining which categories of techniques you have access to or specialize in.
I'd honestly love to see a truly Simple Martial that has zero resources to spend but absolutely ridiculous durability AC, damage, even expertise in skills and extra bonuses to stats. The kind of character who doesn't need spells because by Tier 3 they're grappling giants, leaping 50 feet in a single bound, and throwing their axe like a boomerang to decapitate ten guys at once.
@@ObsidianKnight90 I half agree with both of you, and I think the right answer is a compromise.
A base class needs some defining in-world characteristics, as well as staple features that everyone knows, and all the subclasses build around. And yes I do think those staple features largely define the complexity of the class. For example rogues staple features make them generally more complex to play as than fighters.
buuuuut that doesn't mean subclass can't also play a significant role in the mechanical complexity. The easiest example would be comparing Champion to Battlemaster + Eldritch knight. Champion is as simple as they come, requires very little decision making both in taking the features, and in using them, since they're mostly passive anyway. Meanwhile the other two are having to pick multiple options from a diverse list, adding more at later levels, and managing the new resource thats needed to use those options
All in all I feel the base class generally sets the simplicity floor, and there should be at least one subclass that hugs that floor (like Thief, Champion & berserker). Meanwhile the other subclasses define the spread of complexity within that class, with some subclasses requiring much more on the players part to manage and play.
The big issue with 5e is those skill floors, because every magical class except warlock is based around the exact same spellcasting system (and even warlock isn't far off tbh). It polarizes the classes into "martials" and "casters" since all the 5e casters share similar appeals mechanically.
I wish they'd add 2 new classes.
One is the martial equivalent of wizard, basically battlemaster dialed up to 11, with tones of "tactics" (basically spells) that each have different effects, and different limitations on their use. Some might be uses per long/short rest, others might be limited to times per location or target. Like most casters they have a big ol list to choose from, varying from combat oriented to utility. Individual subclasses unlock exclusive tactics based on their theme, like instilling mass terror Viking-style, or Subduing enemies grappled by you.
The other one is the reverse; caster equivalent of fighter, with extremally simple base class, and good spread of subclass complexity. Take fighter as a base, replace their weapon proficiencies with non-scaling cantrips that deal similar damage to weapon attacks, and have similar extra effects to weapon masteries. Then replace every extra attack feature with "extra cantrip". Now replace action surge, second wind, and indomitable each with free-casting a specific spell based on chosen subclass. Boom. simple caster done
Actually the first level feat part, since you mention it at 7:11 feels like a massive slap in the face for martials. Where martials usually had an AC advantage over casters due to armor and shield proficiencies, which didn't balance the two, but at least made martials feel tankier, now everyone can grab medium armor and shield at level 1, and 1 wizards beating fighters, rangers and barbarians in AC, because they had the audacity to pick up a two handed weapon is going to become commonplace.
All that, while the nice power spikes for martials are locked behind 4, so these characters won't even have meaningful build progression.
Also the changes to GWM and Sharpshooter totally brought down martial damage ceilings
@@someusername9591 yeah, that is a big deal
IMO 4e had the closest caster/warrior divide, at least early because the warriors had their powers which could do a lot of cool things and just straight up do hella damage.
I really think we need to look a bit more at 4e in allowing martials to have options on their turn.
A bit of aoe, big hits that still do things on a miss or a successful save. Stuff like that
I’d let Martials have boosted Skills and Saves at any odd-numbered level where they don’t get significant boosts.
Like, Fighter gets Extra attack at 5th and 11th, and a bonus Action Surge at 17th. So like around 3rd, 7th, and 13th levels, they can get a bonus Saving Throw Proficiency or Expertise in a Saving Throw they already have.
It remains simple and you don’t have to mentally juggle more. You’re just more resilient against effects and hazards during times Spellcasters get even more spell slots and higher spell levels.
And then you can go deeper with options and flexibility through the subclasses. Like Champions being fused with Samurai to gain expertise in two Skills from Athletics, History, Intimidation, and Persuasion to be like a folk hero, just as an example.
You don’t need to make the game more complex, just double down with their existing play fantasies.
I wish saves scaled at least a little bit, because DCs outscale saving throws so hard it's not even funny.
@@TheAusar Mhm frfr and melee characters can also get targeted by saves much more easily as well, and casters can use Silvery Barbs to stack things even further.
The number of ways pure martial characters have the deck stacked against them is wild.
Just give Non-Casters their own variant of "Skill Slots" at the same Full Caster slot progression and have a known set amount of Maneuvers from the Battlemaster list.
(Battle Master stays mostly the same, as their features would stack on top of this. Though their Maneuver dice should always be higher than everyone else at the same progression.)
This would greatly increase the versatility of Martial builds inside and outside of combat. You could also make class restricted maneuvers.
This was the 4th Ed philosophy; but alas, players felt it was too flat. Everyone became wizard; magic wizards, martial wizards, and charismatic wizards.
I think nerfing problem spells that are must-picks would make a huge difference in overall class balance. Apart from that I really like having access to more options. The new rogue features are an example of this. Each martial should have a feature like it. A feature that gives a list of options.
Not necessarily; a lot of spells that are good are not good because they are numerically overtuned (Fireball aside) - they are good because they offer options. Furthermore, usually other spells tend to suck precisely because they don't offer options (often mediocre damage that martials outperform unless AoE), or they offer weak conditions on top of damage. Seriously, look at the lists of what people consider good spells and other than the developer-admitted Fireball they don't tend to have damage attached - because all the damage ones are poor.
For example, look at level 2 Spells; Web is a standout because it offers the ability to restrain or slow down a group of enemies - there are not a lot of other spells available at this point that can do this (the newer Rime's Binding Ice is also a good spell for this reason). What would you do to 'nerf' this spell? Not have it restrain? So... a higher spell slot Grease, without the prone affect. It already has concentration, costs the highest level spell slot available when acquired, has an action cost (there are no two action things in 5e, like anywhere), etc. The Save DC is the caster Save DC - thats pretty standard, and it already targets Dex which most group of enemies tend to have good bonuses against. It is difficult to see what could possibly be nerfed without just taking away the option altogether. You could take away the minor fire damage if set alight, but honestly people try to NOT get them set alight, so that hardly affects the spell. There are already conditions on it like anchor points. You could go from a 20ft cube to a 15ft cube I suppose, but thats usually not what makes the spell good - it would just affect *some* use cases.
Actually nerfing spells that are the good spells without taking away the very option they are even considered good for is difficult - frankly, I don't trust WotC to manage this correctly. We don't need less options in 5e, but more. If anything, I would make the weaker spells perform better to increase the options. I would make monsters have more abilities, have more health, and with special ones having an 'epic resistance' conferring advantage to break out of control spells from the second save onwards (rather than noping spells altogether like legendary resistance does) so failing saves is still a thing but not a fight ender. I would give martials new abilities and let them use the environment in more interesting ways to simulate spell like effects.
But, 5e is the simple life edition, so it wont get those things.
@@RJWhitmore So what you're doing here is setting up a proxy. It's not quite a strawman (Web is a pretty good spell if under-used by my group) but it has the same effect. Set up one spell to be fixed, argue whether the fixes could be done, then apply it wholesale. The problem with that however, is that it doesn't scale well. Web might not be necessarily fix-able but Spirit Guardians is a little too strong for its level as a control and damage spell. Counterspell is WAY too powerful and WOTC is even changing their rules to get around that fact.
And the solution you're providing is a good case of theory vs. reality. In theory, more options are good. In theory, everyone should be overpowered so no one is underpowered. But in reality, that makes for some VERY awful DM work. Because the needle starts balancing on an ever finer edge. Too far one direction and you end up a fool, too far the other and you TPK the party. And as a DM who's erred on the side of caution more than once, a bad encounter can be either one that's too easy or one that's too hard.
I wish they gave martial battlemaster manuevers as their version of cantrips. Then make stronger battle manuevers to represent their super human capabilities. For outside of combat, i like the second wind utility for ability checks. Though i was surprised it was not a Superiority die. The martial classes figthing style should be imrpoved upon. How is it that the dueling figthing style not increase with proficiency to demonstrate the player progression in their skills. Defense can be improved by scaling to half their proficiency. Gwm fighting style can become the great weapon master feat. Etc.
After seeing the effects of Slow on an enemy caster, where depending on a d20 roll they might take two actions to cast one spell, I had a potential solution to the martial/caster thing come to me: what if some spells just took multiple actions, like, all the time? And I don't mean the out of combat ones that already do, I mean what if it took two or three actions to get a Fireball off, or set up Spirit Guardians, or cast Banishment. They might be able to use their movement while casting this spell, but won't be able to cast any other leveled spell, and they'll have to maintain concentration on the casting process. Smarter enemies will be able to see the caster casting, and will have the chance to attempt to stop the spell by targeting the caster. Give martials more abilities that block enemy movement and make grappling more prominent to players, maybe allow grappling as an opportunity attack. Oh, and if the caster does fail the concentration? They lose the spell slot. Casting gets more risky, and becomes something the party needs to work together to support.
Also, I've been told that in previous editions the Restrained condition prevented the use of spells with somatic components. This also might help, especially because a strong Paladin or quick Rogue is going to find it less difficult to break out of restraints than a Wizard who lives in the library or a Cleric who, while capable of wearing chain mail, has spent most of his life in prayer. The Wizard's obvious counter is Misty Step, but that forces the use of resources.
Still doesn't solve that cantrips scale in a way most martials' attacks don't. The fact that a Warlock at level 11 is getting more Eldritch Blasts, from 300 feet away with the right invocation, than a raging Barbarian is getting melee attacks with their greataxe, and is hitting a less-often-resisted damage type with it if the DM didn't at least give out a +1 greataxe at some point, forces the martials to waste a feat on Great Weapon Master and risk missing a lot more often just so the guy who's lived all his life in untamed wilderness inches from death and learned to channel the most primal sort of anger can keep up with the con artist in the back who just sold his soul to a devil or a talking sword to get power. Fighter has it a little better, but the Warlock still gets their last EB earlier; apparently WotC thought a fourth blast from 300 feet away was less OP than a fourth halberd swing at 5 or 10 feet (when not action surging), the latter of which was totally worth being a capstone equal to a Cleric calling up a literal miracle on demand once a week. Then again the capstones are pretty hit or miss in general and outside the scope of this discussion (as they fit more into the lack of official support or balancing effort for play above ~11th-12th level, which isn't an unrelated problem but needs to be tackled separately).
My take is that whether the gap exists or not (it does), all classes should be fun to play. If you gave me a class with just sneak attack as its ability I would never play that class because I know I would get bored of that really quickly (not saying rogue is bad or that's all they have) Compared to mages, I don't think martials have enough in general and its easier to get repetitive. Though I think mages need more beginner cantrips as I see the same ones too often and that also gets repetitive.
When it comes to ease of learning, depth should always exist but can be voluntary. My analogy for this is like public pools, theres a 4ft end and a 10ft end. If you want to go deep you can, if not you are free to chill in the shallow end. But if the entire pool is 4ft then you cannot possibly go deep whether you want to or not. Systems should be designed like the former pool where you're allowed to enter the deep end when/if you want.
Given this point, I think the feats idea in this video is pretty good but it should be optional still. Fighters can be the simple class but are allowed to take more feats than mages throughout their career if they want. Training downtime seems to unfortunately favor int builds since the days it takes to learn a new feat only consider int from what I recall. Martial training should be more based on str or dex.
Mage damage is too high imo. Theres no need for magic to do as much damage as it does like fire bolt shouldn't hit much harder than a baseball. I would rather mages have tons of utility and deal low to middling damage. I think mages can have high damage as long as they work for it by upgrading spells or getting tactical with using spells in specific situations like lighting in water or oil+fire. Combinations like those should be where they get their high damage from (at least for Wizard), not simply firing a spell. Physical arrows should do more damage than your average projectile spell, or at least more than any projectile cantrip since arrows are a limited resource. So I think all spell damage should be reduced by a die type or 2 with cantrip projectiles dealing as low as 1d4. But again these can stack with other things, like lighting into water could deal double just as an example, or pushing someone into fire created on the ground should do a lot of damage.
My usual issue with 5e's balance isn't a dislike of things not playing the same but rather that certain classes/options are so strong that it feels like you're missing out if you don't choose them. I don't know about including more feats into martial progression, but one thing that I've always disliked as a martial was the lack of meaningful choices level to level compared to spellcasters. I think the martial/caster divide can be addressed mostly by tweaking spells that are outliers, and giving martials more non-combat utility (which we're seeing that in the playtest).
In pf2e it seems like the way they handle martials and spellcasters is that spellcasters are better at aoe damage whereas martials are better at single target.
I'm fine with having varying levels of complexity between classes, but I just want things to be more even.
This is already true in 5e. A martial character does currently do more single target damage. What you said makes sense even your comment wasn't accurate. They aren't the same. They aren't formatted the same. They need something equivalent to rituals based on skills that work out of combat. They did in the 4th edition.
Fundamentally, the martial caster divide should be evaluated in two circumstances - A) inside of combat and B) outside of combat across the 4 major tiers of play. I believe the BIGGEST issues is mid-late tiers of play OUTSIDE combat for non-casting classes. I've been begging WOTC in the surveys to give non-casting classes useful non-combat abilities (in addition to combat ones) at key levels in tier 2 and tier 3 to help these characters on the parts of the game that don't involve combat.
Another solution would be to make martial classes freakin gods in combat (as their archetype title kinda suggests) so that soellcasters can feel more of a versatile, good at everything kind of class (and similarly, specialists and support classes should be insane at what they do as well).
@@arxidiaTOUtsolia I dunno about "gods" but I think that the martial classes should mostly out DPS non-martials. They should also be fundamentally tankier (like they get +2 to all saves) as well.
@JJV7423 No that's dumb and makes magic pointless.
Why would anyone ever study magic ever if just hitting things with a pointy metal stick is the superior option?
Magic should feel mysterious and powerful. Otherwise it's not very magical.
Plus, caster already have to spend the first 9 or so levels being starved for spell slots, having access to weak ass dinky spells, and being made of tissue paper with no armor training to the point a stiff breeze can kill them.
Martials are useful across all levels of play, they don't have to suck for almost half their leveling experience.
@MisterZimbabwe my brother in christ, Casters are tankier than most martials. And you have plenty of spell slots given you don't blow them for no reason
@@solarkhan484Are you stupid? A level 4 wizard can die to two hits from a regular dagger from a basic goblin if they roll decent on damage. Tell me you have never played 5e without telling me you have never played 5e.
Ive been really falling in love with Starwars 5e. Not even just as starwars, but just fun game design.
Every martial class has the potential to be the basic champion fighter, or the complex battlemaster fighter. Its so versatile!
Plus there's all of the masteries, styles, equipment types and feats. That's what I love about SW5E and what regular 5e lacks: options. If you give a martial player options they'll come up with something to do outside of "I walk up to thing and attack."
I would like to see things like tripping and shoving and grappling be more satisfying to utilize without making monsters that use it too deadly or spellcasters that inflict that stuff with spells feel better at doing it.
Its wild on insisting that fighters are meant to be smart tactical war veterans and simultaneously insisting apart froma few subclasses that it has to be the beginner option when barbarian feels tailor made as an introductory class that also feels well suited to its fantasy. Telling a new player "If you think this fight is important, activate rage and then you take half damage from the goblins and you hit them a bit harder" is still very easy to understand and keeps them in that fun mdoe of charging into battle, shrugging off attacks and hitting back like a truck.
Considering how many feats are basically just an evolution of certain fighting styles (great weapon master/fighting, shield master/protection, defensive duelist/dueling, sharpshooter/archery, etc) it feels like martials should either get a separate list of combat related feats that they get for free at higher levels like what pathfinder does, or yeah, those feats should be granted for free to players that get those fighting styles after a certain number of levels
for me, no... but, the who should be the last one to die in lvl is a barbarian. The class that should be the best dmg dealer in the game at all lvls is the fighters... but i can make a spellcaster to more and better then the both classes, thats my problem with the game rn, and yes, there are helping in other aspects 100%, but i kinda hopeful for them do some feat for the high lvls that adress that
Also consider; the best offensive option in the game is a spell, the best defense, spell, the best utility, spell again, the best magic armor and weapons? You guessed it, Spellcaster only.
Its such an obvious problem that WotC clearly knows and doesnt intend to fix it.
Hmm, that’s interesting for sure. I have opinions about the feeling of the martial-caster divide, not the power-level or power-scaling, as the numbers are self-explanatory IMHO and often what hooks a new player is the FEEL, NOT the upper bounds of their possible damage output. Newbies will learn the numbers as they play, what matters is that it feels good to whack things with a sword vs. casting spells at things.
On one hand, it’s really cool when a new player realizes “wait, I can do THAT?!” and they pull off a really cool strategy that was always there, but they just didn’t see it at first. That means that complexity is not the problem, the problem is how that complexity is communicated.
Case in point: as a Spellcaster levels up, they get increasingly more complicated AND more powerful spells that opens up the possibility space of what they can do on their turn. As a Martial levels up… they don’t really get more powerful features and abilities that increase the possibility space of what they can do on their turn. They kinda do, but things devolve to “I use my attack action” and that’s what causes the disparity in the first place.
Then again, Wizards of the Coast have failed to answer this question: what is complicated about martial techniques? What about getting into gritty melee is complicated? How can WotC retool melee combat to reflect that depth of complexity that slowly grows from only a few initial options at the first few levels?
Monk is on the right track, in this regard, and Rogue/Barbarian is halfway towards the right track. Monks start out with basic biatch Martial Arts, but then they get Ki and Flurry of Blows and Step of the Wind and Patient Defense. As they level, they become more capable and can use more resources on their turns because their Ki scales with their level. Once Monks get Stunning Strike and the higher level defensive options, they get increased survivability that they can spend their Ki on, increasing their strategic options and getting them to more carefully consider their turn. By the time a Monk gets to Level 20, the width and breadth of the things they can do just clowns on other martials.
From simplicity, blossoms complexity. I know numbers-wise Monk isn’t the most powerful, but in comparison to “I use the Attack action, then Action Surge to use Attack action again” it’s a completely better feel to play a Monk vs. playing a Fighter.
Fighters don’t get as much progression of complexity, and Rogues/Barbarians only kinda-sorta get that progression through their use of Sneak Attack/Rage which changes how they approach combat. One feature creates an entire class that plays differently from other martials, which is a good thing! The problem comes when those classes are still using their basic biatch strategies from Level friggin 1 at Level 20, with barely any evolution of those strategies.
So the martial-caster divide can be fixed by letting more Martials blossom their strategic abilities as they level up. A newbie to DnD is more likely to stay if they know that the stuff they do later on as their character levels and grows with the player’s skill level is that much more cool than when they were whacking things with their sword when they first started playing.
So how do we make Champion Fighter, the most biatch-basic subclass of Fighter, grow their strategic options naturally as a newbie starts playing vs. when the newbie gets their first character to Level 20? An answer to THAT question might help bring Martials more in line with Casters. How do you preserve the outward simplicity of the subclass while still increasing the strategic options as the player progresses? That’s a trillion-dollar rework that can break this conundrum wide open IMHO, and lead to real progress.
Much of the issue comes from the fact that so many DMs allow Long Rests far too frequently, often after just one or two battles, which allows the casters to go Nova as a regular occurrence. Fighers and Monks get most/all their class features back after a short rest already, while full casters have to stretch their resources over the entire adventuring day. If DMs would adhere to this schedule, it would go a long way to bringing back some built-in balance. The only change that really needs to happen is to allow Barbarians to recover some/all Rage on Short Rest.
Another commentor mentioned SW5E and I really think the changes they made in that system is the way to go. They basically pile on the options so that you're free to build anything that you could think of. There is no one "correct" way to play a martial class because there's plenty there to toy with. You could certainly go the polearm mastery/sentry build, or you could build a sword and board shield tripping specialist who locks down the big bad. Or you could be a grenadier. Or a sniper. All with enough feats, masteries, styles and equipment types to come up with a strategy beyond "I do damage lol "
And it's all still governed by the action economy being completely unchanged.
For instance, my party had no melee combatants in it so I knew that I'd have to be the meatiest meat shield that ever meat shielded. So I made a mix of Armormech Engineer (Armor Artificer) and Fighter to make a sword and board brick. Instead of a choice between two upgrades to your armor like Artificer does, SW5E gives Engineers somewhat lengthy lists of modifications they can make to whatever they specialize in with the number of modifications you can put in an item being governed by your level. After my modifications were done my armor was sealed to the environment (4 hours of air for operating underwater or in a vacuum) gave me +10 walking speed (for a total of 45), permanent spider climb and can move in water at full movement speed and ended up with a 23 AC.
Fighter gave me access to Shield Style, which lets me use a heavy shield without the light weapon restriction (there's multiple types of shields), can shove or trip using the shield as a bonus action and can use shields as an improvised weapon. (Yes, I did beat someone to death with my shield) I then coupled that with Onslaught Mastery, which gives me extra melee damage when I move 10 feet or more in a straight line, but more importantly I get to make an attack of opportunity when a target falls prone or gets back up if they're next to me. In another level or two of fighter I'm going to take Sentinel Style which will put 4 levels of slow on anything I get an opportunity attack on.
Sounds OP and yes, I am doing really good damage while doing all of this but I'm still kept in check by the action economy. I have to burn my bonus action and reaction to do it and it only happens to a single targe. I made that build to charge the big bad, knock him on his ass and keep him there while the rest of my team takes out the cannon fodder. Meanwhile casters can CC or destroy entire rooms of enemies so I'm still being outdone by full caster classes who can CC or just nuke an entire room with a fire ball. But you know what? It's still a lot of fun and my party appreciated it when I charged the Sith Inquisitor, tanked her force powers, tanked her lightsaber, knocked her on her ass and kept her there away from the rest of the party.
TLDR: Options are what 5e Martial classes need.
SW5E is fantastic.
I'd argue that options is what 5E needs.
@i am still not sure why the character creation is so limited josephbeckett2330
So far I think their way of "closing the gap" is to give every non-spellcasting class a magical subclass.
Something I think they desperately need to let go of, is the notion that martials needed to be the more "grounded and realistic" classes. LET THEM DO CRAZY THINGS THAT SET THEM APART FROM THE COMMONERS AND ALLOW THEM TO KEEP UP WITH CASTERS
@@iselreads2908 I'm all for that, but the answer isn't "let's give everyone spells and magic."
I feel like the solution would be give martials less “regular dude with a sword” flavor and more “person so competent and fit that they surpass normal human capabilities”.
A high level fighter shouldn’t be the Hound. A high level fighter should be Hercules, Kratos, or Dante. Don’t let reality restrict them.
Extra ASI for more customization is a great point, but i would also add that if the one D&D included the 3 house rules of Treantmonk that would reduce the divide so much with such simple change. For those who don't know them IIRC they are:
1)Shield spell does not exist
2) you can cast spells in armor ONLY if the class from wichyou gained the spell gave you that armor proficency
3) anyone can choose to take -5 to hit for +10dmg (this i am not sure IIRC)
The issue is that Magic has no real drawback. And swinging a sword becomes obsolete. A kobold taking 1d8+3 from a longsword attack is likely to die (~75% chance you'll roll a 2+ on the d8, giving you the 5 damage you'll need to bring the Kobold down.). This is a downward slope, when you fight stronger foes, that same sword attack does proportionally less damage, and the same exact roll of 2+3 is only one-third of an Orc's HP. And yes Martials have ways to increase DPR, but unlike Casters they need to put increasingly more resources into it. This is where people like Treantmonk get their DPR formulas from (65% to hit x Average Damage x # of Attacks). If you assume 3 hits at maximum damage from the above longsword example (8+3)x3=33. A Fireball has a range of 8-48 damage and you'll have ~54% of rolling at least 28 damage, difference is that only cost you one action and you do not need to worry about hitting more for additional damage. Perhaps WoTC needs to forgo the extra attack and instead multiple damage dice, the 5th-level grants +1d8 for the sword attack if you attack a single creature, or alternatively you can make multiple attacks against multiple creatures... The other problem is that we can resolve anything, why use a disguise kit when you can cast a disguise-self spell? why try to pick a lock when you can cast a knock spell? I think you can see the pattern. Sorry for the wordy post. PS. I probably got the DPR formula wrong, please don't judge.
They could just make martial classes not suck ass in comparison to casters, it's really not that difficult, seeing as many other systems have done it.
And if they want something simple to play for newbies, just make a new class called "freelancer" or something (like in oldschool Final Fantasy games before you got access to Jobs)
This freelancer beginner class would start as basic as they wanted; lvls 1 and 2 would just be basic attacks, movement, dashing, etc. then, at lvl 3 it would branch off into 4 subclasses, purposely called something generic like "Attacker; Healer; Caster; Specialist" so it would be easy for the newbie to know what each could do just by reading the names.
- Attacker would get a more basic version of rage and action surge, just so they could get started on learning how to dish out damage more efficiently.
- Healer would get some basic healing spells and a couple of buffing spells, so the newbie would learn to support the team instead of going wildly into the fray.
- Caster would get some basic damaging spells and some debuff spells, to learn about elemental resistances and saving throws.
- Specialist would get skill proficiencies and a basic version of sneak attack for example, to teach the newbie the value of outside of combat interactions through skills and how to take advantage of conditions and other situations to get the sneak attack bonus.
These are just an example of course, the point being newbies could just start with this super basic class and explore one of the 4 main roles in a party of adventurers. Once they felt comfortable with this, they could then make a new character in a proper class and begin exploring things in depth.
In older editions, the way martial classes stayed relevant to something like the wizard was the level scaling. But 5e made xp uniform for leveling, so as early as level 5, the gap starts to widen between the wizard and the fighter or any other martial class. Even just by the simple pick of fireball. Which come on, who's not taking fireball? It's iconic. Even your mom would take fireball as a caster if she saw it because it's simple and easy to understand and use. Almost like what WotC wanted the fighter to be....
Maybe an unpopular opinion, but martials are gernally fine in combat. Sure they could use some more choices, but across dozens of players I've been with, I never really felt the sword guys were having issues in combat; hell, they'd usually be on the MVP side of things...
...until we got out of combat, and then they are useless. No, really, there's quite literally NOTHING a martial can do that another character can't. The rogue has Thieve's Tools? Guess what, the cleric has the Criminal background and has proficiency on that too; even if you factor expertise, the cleric can still just Guidance and make up for the difference anyway. The monk can walk on water... at high levels, during their turn, and then they fall down. Yet the Druid can Walk on Water.... starting at lvl 5, for the whole party, and during a full hour too. The fighter has... uh.... I guess he could take Skilled with the extra ASI?
Give me one, JUST ONE unique ability that martials have. And no, "You get an extra skill proficiency" is not a unique ability.
People tend to forget that fighters and barbarians are just weapons swingers. Just be okay with that fact. People crying for more than that lead to aberrations and manga-comics playstyles where warriors are more gish than just warriors. Now, having said that: i don't see why weapons swinger have to be bad at social skills. Ask your DM to get some extra skill points here and there. But don't expect a warrior to do something else than be good at weapons swinging. That's childish...
@@francoiscolin6692 Problem is - almost every fighter and barbarian type of character in media and mythology are not just "sword guys". Tacticians, charismatic knights, strong individuals who can knock down a column or block the river with a tree with bar hands - there are tons of things martial character should be able to do (like in mythology). But DMs would start crying "ANIME!!!11!" if you try to swim in plate armor (you know, like Beowulf who done it with 30 plates on his shoulders), let alone making a bridge from a tree with bare hands.
@@notsochosenone5669 Annnnnnd you need specific active skills to do this....? If it's true well, it's your DM's fault and yours because it's a role playing game which means the principle skill IS the theater of the mind. You want to punch so hard a dam can break? Attack roll, strength roll VS AC of the building. The problem with gamers now is that they think tabletop RPG are video games. They need butons to smash.
@@francoiscolin6692 Well, you see - in games like 5e with zero framework for skills you actually need straight up examples for things you can do as a class. Caster have this, martials don't so now it is DM fiat if you can or can't do things or you would hear "breaking walls is ANIME" all the time. 5e is rules heavy, so you need rules for major stuff like ability to break walls.
And don't even start with "gamers this days" - old editions have castles, followers and bashing doors as a class features of fighter - they probably also thought TTRPGs are videogames if they couldn't just use skills and roleplay for this.
@@notsochosenone5669 Simple question : do you need a very specific rule with a very specific active skill for breaking a door in 5E with your warrior ? If yes, we're not playing the same game. If no, congrats, now you've realized that anything bigger and stronger than a door is nothing more than... anything bigger and stronger than a door. And you don't need more.Heck look at every fighters in every fantasy books or movies : they are swinging weapons and using the environnement. They don't have kamehameha. Yez wizards have more active skills and so what ? Your only active skill as a fighter can basically do anything if you as a player is smart enough and if your dm id note dull and narrow minded. As i said : you just want buttons to press.
IMO there's obvious potential for a newbie-friendly character Class in Warlocks.
They get less spells, less spell slots, and more always-on abilities. There's just less to keep track of.
I could see there being one Druid subclass that gets three animal forms in total, and have to wait until a long rest to switch one out, in exchange for each form having more power. Still awesome and versatile, but again, less to keep track of.
Once there are some basic casters, we can talk about complicating Martials.
I personally think there ought to be a Martial Arts system all Martials share, the way Casters share a spell system.
Every Martial gets a Kata they can put techniques in and practice on a long rest. Your active techniques give you access to tactical abilities like Battlemaster Maneuvers. And most importantly, you can pick up new techniques as you adventure, the way casters pick up new spells. Spend time with a barbarian tribe, pick up Reckless Attack.
In the end, though, I don't think the divide will be healed until people bite the bullet and face the fact that Martials need to be *unrealistic* in order to reach parity with Casters. I'm talking "jump a hundred meters up in the air and slice the top off a mountain with your sword" unrealistic. You can't just bolt a low-fantasy part onto a high-fantasy part and expect them to work smoothly together.
It's fine to let low-level Martials be realistic, olympic-level athletes. A level 20 Barbarian, on the other hand, ought to be able to tear down a castle with their bare hands...
I agree with most of what you say except about not debuffing spellcasters. If you only increase power on all sides, it is becoming increasingly difficult as a DM to challenge the players. If for example the casters have to worry about not being interrupted by an attack while casting an spell, they would be more afraid of casting in melee, and by that they won´t be able to do as much as the martials
can do. So, by debuffing spellcasters you are highlighting the strengths of the martials.
I think more bonus ASIs is definitely the way to go. 3 for Fighter, 2 for Rogue and Monk, 1 for Barbarian, 0 for Paladin and Ranger
The fundamental problem of that they feel obligated to plan out 20 levels of play when there are only actually 10
Problem is - no one plays at higher levels because of lack of high level support from wotc. There are like zero official high level adventures - all of them end at 14th level tops (at least i don't remember any adventure for 15+ level). On top of that DMG have almost zero useful information to help DMs to, well, dm the game. They have some worldbuilding stuff, monster stuff, but almost no DM stuff. You literally can read 4e DMG and have more useful info for 5e.
@@notsochosenone5669 one of the many things 4e did well for which it gets no credit
I think that there being some imbalance between the classes is one thing, but what D&D 5e has had since launch is not "some imbalance".
Once you start to figure out what spells do and how to use them, a moderately optimized spellcaster will match or exceed martials for single target damage and defense, while also providing options for control, utility, support and AoE that no martial has any answer to. And spellcasters can do most (or all) of these are the same time, while martials can only be decent at damage or defense, but never both because they use mutually exclusive builds.
But this is only scratching the surface of the problem because half-casters exist, so there is literally no way around the problem in encounter and campaign design. A DM can go out of their way to make encounters and campaigns that keeps spellcasting in check to some degree, but Fighters, Rogues, Barbarians and Monks are not meaningfully stronger as martial characters than Paladin or Ranger even under the most ideal circumstances, and certainly not at the levels you're most likely to see played at a table. You could be a Fighter or Rogue, but why bother when a Ranger will bring almost as much, as much or sometimes more damage while also providing powerful control and utility options?
You don't even need to actually understand spellcasting much. You can pick spells that you think sound cool or fitting for your character and accident your way to a build that is stronger than most martials. Someone playing an Illusionist Wizard who picks up Hypnotic Pattern because it sounds like the sort of spell they should have at lvl 5 is going to be incredibly powerful, even if that spell selection wasn't done for power gaming reasons. A Ranger who thought that Pass WIthout Trace sounds cool and like something a Ranger should do would achieve much the same.
The problem isn't even necessarily that the Fighter and Rogue are "weak" classes. The problem is that they are weak, one dimensional and can be overshadowed by sheer accident because spells are so independently strong.
Maybe bump down the capstones earlier and make better capstones for the later levels
I do think all martials being on the fighter's ASI progression can go a long way to helping alleviate the monotony of playing a martial. It opens up the door to more interesting subclasses that would normally be too MAD to be appealing and eases the burden of taking feats over ASIs.
1. Martials should be able to perform cool feats based on their attack roll or a "hero die" or something, never once per long rest; that's spellcaster stuff. 2. At higher level, martials should have the option to spread damage out to multiple targets, making them a whirlwind of destruction. But they should also have non-combat abilities, to make them more useful generally. 3. Nerf the living hell out of wizards--especially with regard to damage. There's no way a wizard should be able to do the same kind of damage as a fighter AND also be able to teleport and charm. Kill damage-dealing cantrips altogether. Endless whacks are a martial thing.
As cantrips upgrade at high level, weapon masteries should as well.
Classes that can use Masteries scale damage in other ways, either by more attacks or Rogue gets more damage for SA, and they also should be getting magic weapons adding more damage. Scaling WM's just aren't necessary.
The one D&D martials to plenty of damage.
@@andrewshandle , i agree. But i still fell like some masteries would work better with a scaling, like topple. But in Damage, martials are fine in the current srate.
I think every martial class should, by level 3, have at least one viable feature not requiring a resource to use for their action, bonus action, and reaction that caster classes and half/gish classes don't get. And they should get more options as they level, and more passive boost choices like fighting styles, etc. Or, at bare minimum, expand martial subclasses and let them be fluid across the options there...I don't think any DM would reasonably think it'd be overpowered for a Storm Herald Barbarian to change aura's between desert, sea, and tundra on a long rest (or even a short rest, imo). Or for subclasses/classes that are more resource based, give them more resources, more options, maybe ways to regain those resources mid-combat (like dropping below half health, or upon the first time you're healed in combat, or upon a successful physical/mental saving throw, etc.)...just something to provide incentive to remain engaged in combat, something to provide more interesting decisions than falling into the repetitive routines many martials end up in.
Like, mainline casters get major boosts to their power and utility every other level, and none of the martial classes are provided class/subclass features that match the raw power or utility or creativity of what mainline casters get with new spell levels. I'm not looking for fighters to become wizards and have to choose one or two new abilities every other level from a list of like 500+ possibilities, but there should be some sort of martial equivalent. For all the hate 4e and 3.5's tome of battle received, they came real close to bridging the gap in D&D without sacrificing the specific roles and flavours involved. I think WotC could gain a lot by looking at what PF2e managed with martials to give them more options and capabilities without undermining the roles and feels casters take up.
Helping martials be more efficient by ensuring they have something interesting to do with every action/bonus action/reaction every turn would be a start.
And for casters, I think having pre-set "templates" of pre-chosen spells (kind of like when creating a character, you can go with the starting gear vs rolling for money) could help streamline the more complex casting classes, so people can jump in without a lot of prep. These templates could focus on simple, effective spells that don't require a lot of interpretation or complex results/options, so they're more user friendly. I think that could take the weight off of the fighter and other martials for being considered entry level. Even if it was a new sorc subclass, or cleric subclass, I think it'd be worthwhile.
What hate did Tome of Battle recieve?
@@josephbeckett2330 I've known people to say it broke the game, made casters irrelevant, was wildly unbalanced, that it killed 3.5.
I don't agree with those criticisms, but I remember them being pretty common at the time
They should address the divide heavily. Weapon Mastery isn't the best solution when looking to solve it. I think Martials like Fighter, Barbarian, and even Monk should get the treatment they deserve
Can this new True Strike potentially be used in combination with sneak attack for example in an Arcane Trickster build?
I think the Main reason we have that Problems are mainly overpowered spells that are better in every Exploration scene then the Ranger an overpowered spells that make more damage then the rogue and are able to better Beat Traps and locks then the rogue. we have better social Interaction spells then a normal charismatic Character. I think that Main Problem are actually Not the classes but the spells. I think that the spells in the phb mainly need an overhaul and a heavy debuff instead of even more class buffs
Man, makes me miss 4E, it was SO well balanced! Shame we can't convince people to switch back
Part of the problem is that with each edition they made spell-casting easier and gave casters more power. "Back in my day" magic-users actually used their quarterstaff because they had to save their spells for important opportunities. Casting in melee combat was dangerous, and spells could be interrupted by any hit (no Concentration checks). As each limit on casters was chipped away, martials didn't grow in power correspondingly.
While I wouldn't recommend rolling back to the "good old days" of AD&D, casting should be less videogamey, have some risk, and require some forethought. Martials could use some base buffs as well - I won't go into a list, but I'm sure folks could come up with something similar.
I mean, if you want to you can use the badly named gritty realism rules to have casters not using spells all the time
As a side note, what levels do you guys typically play at? I've played a lot of hours of 5e but nearly all of it has been levels 1 to 8 so casters haven't gotten the spells that really short circuit encounters.
I think WOTC vastly underestimates peoples' ability to keep track of things when they're invested. In the case of casual players, even if they forget that they have certain abilities, that's not necessarily a giant problem, that's something that the player will learn along the way, IF they continue having fun. As far as martial characters are concerned, they end up having fewer fun abilities that let them deal with specific threats or challenges, which leads them to having class envy with casters.
Frankly, I think a big problem is in just how pointless short rests are in regards to refilling martial special attacks and abilities; it's just a trap for parties who happen to forget to mention that they're just going to plop themselves down and have a little tea time before carrying on so the DM can say 'well, you didn't SAY you were taking a short rest earlier, so you can't do that!" .... who is that fun for? I mean, besides toxic DMs.
Short-rest class abilities are refilled after combat ends. Period. No tea time required. The only thing short rests should be for is to regain some hit dice and that's it.
In fact, I'll do one better. Short-rest class abilities are refilled upon defeating or assisting in defeating an enemy in combat. Call it 'fighting spirit'. Martial classes are driven by the momentum gained by defeating their enemies, and that's what lets them do their fun special abilities MORE rather than having to ration them. Rationing abilities is what casters do, martials should be the ones who can be far more liberal with their use.
Even the mage slayer feat is pathetically specific in when it can be used. What magic user is going to attempt to cast at melee range? Martial classes in particular SHOULD be trained in dealing with mages, as they're the biggest threat in a battle anyway, they should be able to use their reaction against spellcasters unless they're actively being given cover by allies. At higher levels, martials should universally have the ability to interrupt or at least PUNISH spellcasters who don't bother with cover. Lemme tell ya, there's nothing a fighter loves more than to be able to use their reaction to throw a dagger into a caster's chest; even if the caster manages to maintain concentration and casts anyway, the fighter at least got off some damage and felt like they didn't just LET someone do something that obviously would have left them open.
the battle master should not have been a class sub type. it should have been a feature that all martial classes got. they all should have superiority dice with a list of generic maneuvers. Then each class should of had class specific maneuvers to choose from. It would scale with levels in both power and variety(the die size increases, number of maneuvers known increased) this would eliminate dead levels. There would be enough maneuvers that could boil down to "Hit thing better or Harder" so as to keep it simple enough for the player that just wants to swing the sword .
This, i think, would do the most to bridge the divide between casters and martial classes. You could have some maneuvers that mimic spell like affects. You could even have some martial classes chooses maneuvers to prepare each day from a list, like some casters with spells. some martial classes could regain superiority dice on short rests, some on long. It could mimic the magic system in a lot of ways, while feeling distinct from it.
Might I be able to convince you that 4E did basically this? I agree it's a really good idea, a really good idea
One thing that I think REALLY needs to be done is go through the spell list and adjust those spells that lay outside the norm. This means BOTH boosting dysfunctional spells and also nerfing overpowered spells.
Hypnotic Pattern and Sickening Radiance aren't even close to comparable in power.
Once the spells follow a more consistent power curve, it's more possible to adjust the overall martial-magic comparison. If not addressed though, you'll continue to have overpowered and useless casters at the same time.
Might I also suggest giving martials their own flavor of spells? Similar to Martial Maneuvers in source and purpose, but similar to spells in resource management and accessibility? Something like what 4E did?
@@nathanstruble2177 if you mean resource dependent abilities, I think there's a lot of fertile soil to be farmed there.
But, assuming these new features have some reasonable balance to them, it doesn't address the outlier spells.
There's a level 4 Conjuration Wizard out there right now, totally confused by people saying wizards are overpowered, and planning to never play the class again.
There's also a level 18 wizard played by a very average player, who keeps making the rest of the party irrelevant by solving every encounter solo.
The current spell system is simultaneously broken in both directions. It needs fixed, badly. Until then, attempting to balance other parts of the game is pointless.
"It's a discussion, not a dissertation"
Is the vibe that r/onednd desperately needs
Hahaha but like for real...
@@InsightCheck yeah I'm very active on there and sometimes it's a bit of a headache
I go from time to time but often shy away from posting because anything you say feels like it's going to get shredded, it feels like nuance is hard to come by there. I've recently gained a bit more courage to post a few comments but it's a bit of an unwelcoming community.
When I think about it it's kinda hilarious considering I post on TH-cam, a place renown for having toxic comment sections but I find, shockingly, more nuance here sometimes haha.
@@InsightCheck yeah I've noticed you posting there a bit more recently. There was a post about dnd youtubers there where you shared your opinion which I appreciated. We've had mini discussions on a couple threads in that community and I've always appreciated your takes
I have improved all of the Fighting Styles in my home games to give martial classes a boost, and added new styles. Each style now has 4 ranks. Martial classes have predispositions towards certain styles, allowing for more of their class levels to count towards improving the style (Rangers: Two Weapon & Archery, Paladins: Defense & Great Weapon or Dueling, etc) with Fighters counting their full level towards all styles. Styles improve from the base at levels 6, 11, and 16. I've also included an Extra Training option in the game for developing skills, languages, styles, and the like for rounding out characters . Those Extra Training intervals occur at the proficiency bonus break points (5, 9, 13, 17). So fighters can pick up additional styles to represent a breadth of experience in combat. I also have a spell specialization system for Wizards and Sorcerers to help differentiate one character's Mind Whip from another character's Mind Whip.
Conan the Barbarian absolutely wrecks magic users whenever he comes up against them. Same with other legendary warriors like Hercules, Jason of the Argonauts, ext. While Martial characters do deserve better buffs at higher levels, like allowing them to get more strength, constitution, and dexterity points, I feel that it isn't just the game that is the problem, it is the failure of the DMs to give martial characters gear that is appropriate for their level. This can also be a fun challenge for a DM, because you shouldn't be limiting higher level gear to just putting a higher plus number next to a sword, or a dagger that glows when goblins are near. Some of the weapons and equipment of your martial characters should give them spell like abilities, and they should have enough of them that they can hold their own against casters.
On top of your suggestions; I suggest introducing an additional balancing aspect within the attunement slot system. This way, spellcasters might have fewer attunement slots while martial characters could have a few more.
Magical items start to pile up and become really powerful at the same time that the casters overshadow materials.
Ngl, i dont care if martial are weaker( which i have never seen that in any of my game) the primal urge to play a monk is just to strong ngl.
Easiest way to facilitate both simple and complex play in martials is to give them options which are either complex or simple. e.g. Do you want weapon masteries or do you just want an asi?
I actually think they might address the martial/caster divide through nerfing spells. Casters will likely still have the most skills (I have a spell that will do that!), and they'll probably still do the most AOE damage, but I'm not so sure they're going to do the most damage to a single foe or shut down encounters by themselves when the next version comes out. So in that way, I think they will address it. I'm not sure this matters to me all that much to me though. The thing that bugs me the most is how much time the player of a caster takes vs the player of a martial. Between extra action economy (through summoning) and thumbing through tons of spell options, the player of a caster generally takes a lot more time at the table, to the detriment of those waiting on them. I'm not sure I have an easy way of fixing that other than "be prepared", but I wish there were.
Scaling fighting styles sound like a great improvement!
Give fighters "Reduce roll needed to score a critical hit by 1" every 6 levels (Lvl 7, 13, and 19), and maybe bonus to their AC to represent their battlefield prowess.
I have yet to see this martial/ caster divide crop up in my games so doubt it exists. I have seen rogues stealth better than invisible characters. I have seen barbarians surrounded by enemies and come out of the fight looking for another enemy and wizards go down to a couple of well aimed blows from a giant. Parties with no martial characters are weaker than parties with a mix of casters and martials. Just see how well casters do when they don’t have to option to stand back and keep out of melee.
That being said how many characters are truly just martial with nothing else? Certainly much less than half, more so if you allow multi classes.
I don’t see an issue when there are still plenty of players choosing to play fighters, rogues, barbarians and monks. I think this is one of these urban myths born out of the occasional times a powerful spell wins a battle on its own.
@11:20 that's only because monsters in 5e don't follow player character rules and generally do not cast spells, instead having abilities that replicate the effects of spells. In, say, 3.5e, the biggest benefit to being a melee martial is being able to threaten enemy spellcasters (consistently the most terrifying foes in the game) with attacks of opportunity. The same goes for PF1e, though PF1e made it easier to not get interrupted.
part of the problem is casters have to much health which so the one thought of weakness just isn't true
aka squishy caster phallacy
This is something I agree with, with the exception of the Cleric. Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks should be D4s, and Druids I think D6 (Rogue too).
I think you are missing the fact that power doesn't have to be complex. In 4e the essentials books released at the end of the edition had simpler streamlined versions of the classes that were more powerful than the complicated forbears from the players handbook. Also, the scenario where magic just bypasses entire categories of challenge (good berry makes starvation impossible, so huge swaths of exploration are now ignorable; pass without trace and invisibility make the rogue's expertise in stealth irrelevant, etc.) could be removed/reduced leaving those challenges intact and letting martial solutions matter. Relatedly, a greater use of resistances and vulnerabilities, especially things like making creatures vulnerable to just one of slashing piercin or bludgeoning the way that they are often vulnerable to just one elemental/magic damage would really open things up for martials. Removing challenges that can only be solved by magic, for example forcefields are a key offender here in that only magic can effect them. Screw that, let a bard sing at the resonant frequency and shatter it, or the barbarian brute force smash it. None of these solutions make D&D "not D&D" none of them make it more complicated. And they barely count as nerfs.
I'll also add that going back to the BECMI black box Master set and looking at their weapon mastery rules plus the Mystara AD&D Savage Coast boxed set rules for fighting styles might be a little more complex, but they really would go a huge way towards making martials feel awesome. The old Mastery from BECMI scaled such that daggers go to 2d4/3d4/4d4 in stages and their critical hit modifier increases as well; other weapons get defensive bonuses, to hit bonuses, ways to intimidate less powerful enemies, and new action options not just mods to existing actions. The fighting styles are actual schools of combat with learned maneuvers as you progress in reputation and training with your school you learn more maneuvers, eventually killing blows.
But the single most important thing you nailed: remove every circumstance, spell, etc. where a spell-caster does the martial class' schtick better than the martial class does it. I'm really glad you got that and called it out.
I've developed a few features designed to make melee classes keep up
For example I gave my barbarian player bonus action wrestling grapples that can inflict status like a Sleeper hold who puts target to sleep or pile driver that inflicts paralysis on a fail..
My D&D hot take (aside from just moving to other games that do everything D&D tries to do but better) is that both the generalist martial and generalist spellcaster classes need to go, and that every class in the game should have a more focused scope of both physical and magical abilities. A class should have a niche, a couple of fighting styles and spell paths that exemplify that niche, and archetypes to accentuate that niche in ways that set them apart from others in their class. If you're a rogue, you're not just able to use some stealthy spells and spells that make your lockpicking better than anyone else's, you're not just able to sneak attack and shadowstep between dark places and cast spells that let you target enemies in the dark with pinpoint accuracy: you're the only class that does that shit. If you want to focus on the magic, you have a casting ability (Int, probably) and abilities that work well with it you can exploit more. If you want to focus on the physical, you have your primary physical ability (Dex, almost certainly) and a mix of feats and abilities that work to make you good with your tools and skills alone. As for general martials, I also think by giving each niche a combat style it masters, you encourage people to play characters who aren't just "good at attacking, athletics/acrobatics and nothing else", which ultimately becomes a detriment to any character not in a combat-only session.
If you want to have more than one role in a party, it should come from multiclassing, not from having enough pages in a spellbook or an hour of prayer time to decide who you're overshadowing that day.
From my experience as a wizard main is while there is a gap between martials and casters is utility and combat effectiveness. Many people being up aoe damage when i mention that casters are significantly worse off in battle. To the aoe argument I only have to say then are you fine with your caster constantly dealing damage to your Allie’s who will just run up to the enemies. Then people will mention then what about casters casting spells that limit the enemy in some way. The only enemies that will be effected by that is the people your barbarian could have killed in one turn. Bosses almost always have legendary resistances which are something built specifically against casters to say fuck you, you don’t get to do anything cool. The spot for combat that casters get to shine is if you get to have a jump on the enemies which most of the time your Allie’s will just run in and not allow you to prep. Another thing is the enemy is very frequently going to be resistant or immune to an elemental type but very rarely a physical damage type. One example of where this can go wrong is at levels 3- 6 we only faced demons who I still don’t get why they are resistant or immune to both poison and necrotic. The whole time between those levels my necromancer wizard could only do a very very little amount of damage.
They need to either do away with feats altogether or make them more restrictive bsed on class and the like. 2nd edition didnt even have feats but weapon and non weapon proficiencies which were great so if you want to call the warriors ability to wear armor a feat instead of a class ability you have created a problem.
I have to ask, isn't the point of levels 1-3 to ease a new player into the game? If your very first game of DND is anything over level 5 then you're going to have a lot of features to learn and it's going to be overwhelming even with the "simpler" classes. "But think of the newbies" seems a poor excuse not to give martials some interesting tools/skills/manoeuvres at higher levels.
As for what I would do...
For Fighters, I would get rid of the Battle Master subclass and make Superiority dice & Manoeuvres a class feature, each subclass getting their own free & unique bonus manoeuvre (For example, Samurais having a slicing manoeuvre that - upon a failed dex saving through - reduces the targets AC by 1. Psi Warriors would have Psychic Assault which would have a chance to stun or confuse the target creature etc).
Monk, I would change the amount of ki points to wisdom mod + level and increase the martial arts die by one (level 1-4 is a d6, 5-10th is a d8 etc).
Barbarians should be tanky powerhouses so I'd consider granting temp HP whilst raging along with a couple of special attacks you can also only do whilst raging? Like an AOE attack that can target anyone within a 10ft radius (dmg scales with level, may knock targets prone on a failed dex/strength save?) and a charge attack that'll do an additional, scalable amount of damage dependant on your level if you travel at least 10ft before attacking?
Those 3 things seem like a good starting point to expand upon.
The campaign itself and how players play has as much effect on the divide as the class mechanics themselves. There's lots of cool stuff having a big STR or DEX stat should enable (pushing boulders on enemies, forcing open doors, etc) that just aren't provided often enough in most campaigns. Also the divide lessens significantly once you start getting creative with how you use the martial since they'll start looking for all those STR opportunies that should have been baked into the base campaign itself.
What about the melee/range divide?
Yeah this is a fair point. Melee is all risk with none of the reward. Perhaps a topic for another day.
the best solution if you want to stay in 5e is to play level up's a5e , martials there have a bunch cool features for physical feats and special maneuvers that recharge in a short rest, making so they can do cool stuff almost every encounter while casters can do cool stuff daily
If you want to close the martials/casters divide, you have to enforce the rules in the game that limit casters.
Only one long rest a game day. Take short rests.
Have large numbers of npcs flock to the fighter's war banner, the barbarian's tribe, the rogues thieves guild, and the monk's monastery once the party hits tier 2. Give the martials a castle to defend early on and have the casters wait to tier 4 to develop their magic tower or demiplane. Tell the wizard they need an apprentice with at least fifteen sidekick levels before they can finish their demiplane, and the warlock needs to kill their patron and take their place before they get any good toys. Sorcerers and bards can attract theater troupes, spy networks, or sex cults, but the in-game rewards of those organizations are limited until their lieutenants/stage directors get enough sidekick levels.
Really think about spell components and how they should be implemented. If a spell has verbal components, then it is always noticeable when a caster is using their mouth to cast spells. If a spell has somatic components, then they need at least one hand free, and they need to do visibly obvious motions that use most of their body.
Anyone educated or who has seen a caster can spot silvery barbs being cast.
Simple ball gags and handcuffs block spell casting for all spells with a V or S in their components.
A shadow monk casting silence on themselves or their clothes and then grappling a caster shuts that caster down.
Being grappled means your hands are occupied. It doesn't need an extra bullet point in the conditions page when it's obviously spelled out in the spell casting chapter.
If you want to cast without components, then take war caster, the shield version of war caster, or subtle spell. If you don't have those, then you can't cast spells when a 18 to 30 str opponent grabs your wrists.
Take a page from BG3 and make shove and jump bonus actions that move yourself or a target the distance of your jump calculator without eating your movement.
Have you tried the Valor RPG from Valorous Games? I ran a one shot of it and had a pretty good time with it. Rather than classes, you get 5 main attributes that can be mixed and matched for all sorts of playstyles and everyone gets all sorts of cool moves built with Technique points. A big strong character can hit a bunch of enemies around him or straight up ram through a horde, while "magic users" are also a lot simpler than the casters, it's as simple as picking stuff you like (want a line? Want a burst? Want it to be ranged? It's as simple as spending a handful of points.) It was surprisingly easier too for my 5e playing friends
I am a veteran player of dnd since 2nd edition. That being said martial melee characters excelled in heave hits while casting classes Excell in spellcasting. In combat SPELLCASTERS cast an aoe spell like fireball or etc actually help melee characters to hit primal targets while martial characters help their casters giving their party casters the space between them and enemy to cast aid, bless guidance etc. What I think would actually would be balance is not NURF the spellcasters. BUT give martial characters more tools to Excell in what they do, if weapon mastery was given to all martial characters in 5e and actually revised them by letting them use more frequently maneuvers and other skills while keeping spellcasters strong in what they actually do.
That being said I tottaly disagree with the changes to warlock, wizard sorcerer and druid and cleric, by limiting the prepared spells to caster any party loses versatility, same goes to martial not having options. To the warlock case though, the workdine in 5e that solves some problems is burned down by the changes. Pacts of blade, tome and chain becoming I vocations is problem to it's course not to mention that warlock became half caster. While wizard have bladesinger and warlock have hexblade that doesn't mean that both of them are better than fighter or barbarian or any other martial class. The choice of hexblade and bladesinger is bring versatility. Also as a caster main player I say pump up the martial classes to Excell in what they do their maneuvers, heavy hits, give them to all superiority die like battlemaster and abilities but leave casters powerfull also. In the end of the day as all players when we sit on the table and play we all feel good and we actually feel that our character we choose to play actually is powerful as it progresses. But that's my opinion. If we need balance we need a strong cleric that bring bless, aid heroes feast, healing word like 5e, a paladin to smite like nova in 5e, a wizard, sorcerer and warlock drop those heavy aoe spells to a minion encounter making the life of martial characters in melee easier, while we need more martial characters pumped up with abilities like battlemaster that they can use a superiority die to use a unique ability, example a barbarian with a superiority die might add lightning damage when raged and as a passive stuns his enemies. A fighter push more feet his enemies making them to be in range in that heavy dmg Evard black tentacles, or Fireball, or Incidiary cloud. At the end of the day martial characters alone can't do anything as casters alone can't do anything. Dnd is a game of cooperation teamwork amd synergy. So to the design ing team in my opinion one message must be sent, stop nuefing casters or martial characters, if you really want balance make all martial ac spellcasting characters powerfull in what they Excell with. Give to a player that want to play martial class options like battlemaster fighter, bring excitement to them to play and versatility, I mean if Barbarian has an ability like while raging nor only adds extradamage which could be on certain element, but also that damage could dazed, frighten, blind his opponents i see no problem there in what I say and considering that Tha barbarian with that unique ability has an ally like a paladin that can smite like nova, a Ranger with sharpshooter hitting hard, a wizard sorcerer drop a fireball, a warlock drop hunger of hadar, a druid call lightning, a cleric drop his spiritual weapon and bless and aid his party I see really no problem in that party. But that's my humble opinion
The problem with the champion fighter isn’t that it’s simple it’s that its weak. They should have been the passive kings; rolling crits on 14+ having weapon expertise, adding +10 to initiative and getting both proficiency and advantage in all saving throws. Still not complicated but powerful.
At this point the fighter and barb do more dmg over time than the casters, which I think is good, they also have been taking a much lighter touch on wizard, while buffing the sorc but not in a damage output way (especially with twin nerf). I think they have a lot right with warlock, but it still needs some refinement. In general I think many more mechanics need to scale, fighting styles, weapon masteries, and maneuvers should be available to all classes and should have level scaling based on your class. Something that if focused in will grow strong, but if a caster just dips into will work but be outscaled by the straight martial. I think the ranger needs some love and the monk needs a massive kick in the pants. I think many things they have addressed have helped the divide, but there is much more that should be done.
Nailed it :)
Great break down of the martial/caster divide and some of the other issues with it. I agree that over all that every class must be balance perfectly to each other and honestly this can make things interesting. Casters can wipe out armies by their selves but generally they arent, they are engaging with fantastical creatures many of which have their own magic or magic-like abilities along with Magic Resistance, so with out effective magic what are they then lol? Martials are the guys who keep the bad things away long enough for casters to deal with or they may have to seek out the source of what is blocking or resisting their arcane efforts. Martials over all need more engaging and interesting abilities that they can use that casters cant, but they usually do it better like you said.
Multi-Classing is problematic and Ive never been a fan of it to much, unless it is story driven thus Ill discuss it with my DM and let them know what I was gonna do; how I was going to role play it even before I multi-class and see how they feel about it. It almost seems like most people who do multi-class dont worry about the stat requirements for doing it although its not terribly hard to reach. The biggest thing I dislike though is for example a 3rd level fighter decides that they are multi-classing into wizard and in most cases its hand waved and you now have the abilities of a 1st wizard with spells and spell book. Mean while current wizard in party studied and practiced hard for years likely, to get started or vice versa, the mage can now use all weapons and armor proficiently and casting in full plate armor is no big deal (even is they dont have enough Str, since it only lowers their speed by 10' i believe.) This also start to have PC's taking over another's PC's niche.
Some of the other problems in my opinion is with their whole philosophy of having a simple class, super simplified with the Champion. Firstly, this class is super boring and rail-roady so if their plan is to frustrate and bore some one in effort to get them interested in DnD....nailed it. People will play what they want to play and new players will often need coaching for awhile no matter what and ultimately IMHO again, I think that the other players in the group will be the make or break point for them enjoying DnD. A good DM is also very important as a bad one (or inexperienced) can cause a good group to implode.
Ok I rambled too long lol, cheers great vid.
Words to live by "A rising tide raises all ships" Martial need to be buffed, and to do this in a way that makes everyone happy, buff casters too, just not as much. I hate Wizard class features and subclasses, they are pretty boring save for a select few(and features like portent are pretty OP and disruptive). There is alot of room to give wizards cool class features to make them not just about their spell list. Because lets face it, some wizard spells no matter how much you buff a martial need some slight nerfs, Like planeshift and forcecage. So when you do nerf what really needs to be nerfed give back to the class in other ways with more fun options.
I think at this point the argument that martials are the intro classes and the casters are the advanced choices. If that’s the concern, then put the sidekick system introduced in toshas and preface that either before or after the class options in the new phb, you could even rename it to new players intro classes/side kicks. You can use the side kick system for new players, and each one dips its toe into the different play styles and not over whelming them with learning the game. Once they under stand the game and it’s mechanists, you can set them free. You could even put in suggestions for transitioning to a main class option once a player feels comfortable enough to leave these intro classes/side kick classes. Just my 2 cents.
Answering the question of how to bridge the power gap is actually pretty simple, in my opinion. Just no one will like the fix. Reduce the spells per day that casters have.
In levels 1-3, casters and martial are about just as useful because the caster has to be judicious with their spells and relies on the martial for protection.
Later in levels, the need for protection goes down and the amount of casts and power of spell increases.
So if a caster could only cast 3 spell per day no matter the level it fixes the problem.
Low lvl are supposed to be the introduction almost no spell slot/ability and at etch level you get a little more.
If you;re really stumped about it then create a nemesis for your caster which ONLY the martial can solve its very simple, give the adversary 2 weapons one that acts as a ring of spell turning grants bonuses to spell saves (+4) and another one that each time you strike someone with it a dispel magic at the level of the weilder happens, this will take down protective spells contingencies at random and also give the added effect of a radius that denies translocation magic's like teleport. Now you have an arrogant wizard in dire need of a warrior ALSO dont discount the common people they wont like the wizard but the warrior is a savior to them. You play it all wrong and dont cause disadvantages the wizards SHOULD have like it costs more while the warrior free drinks and women with daughters bringing food all the time. If you dont play to ALL the perks of the marital and play the downside of being mistrusted as a caster then you already fucked up!
Mortaility also for player characters that use the system whould be nice.
As an idea. Maybe Fighters or Martial classes should have Expertise on Attacks and Scale up Damage. It should also be a main class feature like heavy armor for fighters. If you multi class dip, you don't get it.
Expertise in attacks would shatter bounded accuracy, and although I agree with it just giving them higher damage doesn’t really solve the issue at hand. The problem is really in the diversity of options. Martials only niche is doing single target damage, when it really should be more than that.
Versatility and power is not necessarily the same thing as "complication". Letting the martials do cool things, especially in situations that aren't combat, doesn't mean that they will become inaccessible. Just let them do cool things.
Heck, better yet, nerf spellcasting. Spellcasters are so overpowered by the time they get 6th lvl spells that the DM is forced to put them in way more hard or complicated situations just to keep the game from getting boring, leaving martials in the dust.
The power creep for the game went off the charts with Tasha's, grew from there, and continues to climb with the playtest. If spells are just brought in line with the actual math of 5e (fireball should be 6d6 for example), and some are just done away with (feeblemind, banishment, wish, meteor storm, power word anything, silvery barbs, wall of force, and so on and so forth--there are so many game breaking spells), and others are tweaked (counterspell), the martials will actually match the power level of their counterparts in combat. Just give them some stuff to do while exploring or talking and then everything's hunky dory.
The fighter is supposed to be the guy that is not good at much but people should be scared when he drows his sword. And in fact it's not the case at all, he does as much damage as the other classes. He should shine much more in combat. So in my opinion the fighter average dps should be multiplied by 1.5 minimum.
I would agree give the martials more feats. Taking away great qeapon master and sharp shooter were really bad ideas. Theybshouldnhave made feats along thise same lines not removed them.
I will say though there is an easy way to get around all of this. The DM can make magic weapons and items useful for martial classes more available through the campaign.