this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023

10 points (100.0% liked)

D&D Next - 5e Discussion

2396 readers

5 users here now

A place to discuss the latest version of Dungeons & Dragons, the fifth edition, known during the playtest as D&D Next.

Join our discord! https://discord.gg/dndnext

-- Rules --

Be Civil. Unacceptable behavior includes name calling, taunting, baiting, flaming, etc. Please respect the opinions of people who play differently than you do.
Use Clear, Concise Titles.
Limit Self-Promotional Links. External links to blogs, kickstarters, storefronts, YouTube channels, etc, must be related to DnD and posted no more than once every 14 days. Affiliate links are never allowed.

This is a new community and the rules are in flux. Please bear with us (and give your feedback!) as we navigate building this new community. Thank you!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Martial power level (self.dndnext)

submitted 1 year ago by Phantaminum to c/[email protected]

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This post is more about what power level do you like in your games for martials and what do you do to make the feel the way taht feels good according to that.

In my case my biggest problem is how unidimensional they are, so advanced 5e has done the thing for me. I think that if we play at level 20 i would do some hombrew to push them even further but i like how many options they have.

I of the opinion that low level martials are cool but lacking in options and level 9+ martial characters are underpowered AF. That has to do tht as I subjectively understand dnd everything is made by magic, so the limit of physical feats should be as magic, like lifting tons or demolishing buildings with blows.

So, do you like martials in 5e or would you rather them to fulfill a different fantasy?

all 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I dont like martials in 5th. I like having options. I do t care which class or combo or multiclass has the best power levels or damage outputs. What I like is having fun with 15 different choices I can pick from every round.

Here is also a little story. You know how you kill a demiliche easily ? Telekinesis to immobilize them. They have -5 strenght. And it doesnt do a single point of damage. But once they are immobilised, they are fucked since they have almost nothing long range.

Sometimes power level is small talk when you accidently jam your finger right into a boss's weakness and exploit it.

And the best part ? One time, a martial did something like that to a boss.

Damage dice are small. Weaknesses are all the rage.

[–] Phantaminum 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah options are almost everything! Thats THE reason why I like warlocks. With little to no multiclass you can play a lot of playstyles.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Phantaminum I've been happy with a asymmetric balance, where martials are REALLY good at murder, and casters suck at it. You can get there with belts of Giant Strength and GWM (and giving out legendary resistance like candy) and ... being "comfortable" with huge damage numbers.

Alternately it's a lot of work to make 5e balanced at higher levels, and I'd consider if you'd be ok with an all caster party or another game system.

[–] Phantaminum 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I like to patch the game with magic items as well, but I tend to focus on giving extra options rather than pure damage so we have less continuous turns where someone says I attack

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Phantaminum the asymmetric balance I'm suggesting avoids "round after round of 'i attack''... but does so by virtue of dedicated damage dealers killing things too fast. It's not for everyone, but it is for some. :)

That sounds like you're not ok with the relevant amount of PC damage, and so I return to the "maybe a different system " suggestion.

[–] Phantaminum 2 points 1 year ago

Hey, thanks for your suggestion. As you may see I mentioned that Im switching to Level up advanced fifth edition. I think we have different ways to enjoy this game.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you've been playing and enjoying Level Up Advanced DnD 5e? Because I've been very curious about it, but haven't seen any review by anyone who's actually tried out the changes and played the game. I'd love your thoughts if you've actually been using it.

[–] Phantaminum 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It has been only in a couple oneshots but I will start a campaign soon. What I have noticed is that even at level 1 the barbarian in my party had more options, he choosed a battle hammer (d10 one) and it has a property called parry that is usable onece on your turn and it let's you ad 1d4 to your ac to a hit.

Is minor, but meaningful because now you aren't sucked with big damage weapons only. The bard on my party also feeled same way. Im looking forward to level 3+ to see what this system is capable of. Designing a combat is easier as a side note.

Also, there is a forum in which people talk about A5e here .

Is a bit crunchier tho, not as old editions, but more than standard 5e so be aware that not every player would like it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That forum is a gold mine. Didn't know there was a whole community around it already. Thanks for the insights!

[–] Phantaminum 1 points 1 year ago

You are welcome!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There's an argument to be made for "simple martials, complex wizards" in the case of players who are new to D&D or tabletop games in general, where managing a spell sheet would be a little daunting with like 300+ spells available, but that argument expires the minute your new martial players are comfortable with the standard fighter/barb/monk/etc. and decides "Hey, I want to have more choices and do cool things with resources like spellcasters get to."

At that point, I think it's fair to offer players the choice to rebuild their characters with new frameworks, including the Advanced 5e martials. Laserllama's homebrew classes also tend to be well-balanced while offering good options for play, and the martials are no exception, although ultimately, most homebrew options with a modicum of effort tend to fall within the power range the published options give, considering 4E monk and Twilight Cleric are both considered AP legal.

[–] Phantaminum 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey, Im one of those players I guess. My second character was a warlock and it was such an improvement over my first one. I would like that we had the level of costumization that warlocks offer or at least cool options. Battle master is ok in that sense, it gives you some cool maneuvers, but the there isn't a scaling like warlock's invocations.

Eventually I will work on my own progression for martial characters, to make them more flexible on early levels and more powerful at higer levels.

As much as I like A5e, they just solved one of those problems, so I would like to buff martials on levels 15 to 20. But I have some concerns about how should I implement that, not everyone likes the "air cut" patch or ground tremor.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I highly recommend checking out the Laserllama martial reworks, they all offer a choice of exploits that do all of those things.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Hot take, but I think the martial/caster power imbalance is imaginary, and has been even in 3.5.

It comes from people doing thought-experiment characters, like Pun Pun, rather than actual play. You can have a caster player say "I use this series of spells in such a way as to break the game" but in practice it happens far less often than "I murderhobo the NPCs to break the game" and is easily dealt with the same way. If your caster is just playing like a normal person and fireballs a dozen goblins or whatever, the barbarian great cleaves a dozen more, everyone has fun, all is good.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is that the only way a fighter can interact with the world is by murdering people, while casters have a spell for every situation.

It's not so much that casters are stronger (although they definitely are), but that almost every situation can be solved by casting a spell, while martials are left waiting for the next combat encounter to do something useful - and even then, they are more useful as an HP sack than they are at dealing damage.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The problem is that the only way a fighter can interact with the world is by murdering people

Pretty much the only mechanical way to reliably interact with the world. Since the results from skill checks aren't defined the point that comes across is that they matter less. Why can't the Fighter "suggest" to the ruffians to drop their weapons through their skill in Intimidation? They can of course but nowhere it is written as clearly as having the spell Suggestion.

To help non-spellcaster have reliable ways to interact and change the world there needs to be more details regarding skill check outcomes.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Why can't the Fighter "suggest" to the ruffians to drop their weapons through their skill in Intimidation?

Because Charisma is a dump stat for fighters.

To help non-spellcaster have reliable ways to interact and change the world there needs to be more details regarding skill check outcomes.

If martials had access to maneuvers, Commanding Presence, Disarming Strike and the likes would go a long way in improving their capabilities outside of combat, as well as giving them abilities with very specific outcomes written in the rules instead of having to ask the DM whether they can try to intimidate a ruffian to drop their weapon.

[–] Phantaminum 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is why I changed to Level up advanced 5e. Not only all martial have maneuvers but they also get utility out of combat as features as they level up. Is a really cool alternative to 5e becasue it shares 50% of the system we like and it improves in so many things that we(the group I play with) don't like

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, even a fighter who dumped charisma can be intimating.

I feel like alternate abilities skill check should have a bit more spotlight.
The human 20 STR fighter PC wants to intimidate this guy by snapping this fence post in half like a toothpick?
Sure buddy, give me a Strength Intimidation check.
Other people might intimidate through words and sheer personality, but this guy's as strong as a Glabrezu, yet half the size, and can just bend a sword with his hands. (Oh shit, that's where all these bent swords are coming from)

While STR Intimidation is specifically mentioned in the rules, there's a lot more combinations that could make sense depending on the situation.
The problem is it relies mostly on DM fiat instead of neatly and explicitly described spells, so it's less obvious, less reliable and less used.

[–] Phantaminum 1 points 1 year ago

I do all that in my games, creative shit is always welcome because it feels good to be a player and come up with a innovative solution!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, as mentioned by Aielman15, Fighters tend to not have a good Charisma. So it's actually not just that Martials only have skills, but they are usually worse at those skills compared to Casters (barring Rogue, who is only outclassed by Bard). (Note: I use Martial here to mean "class without the Spellcasting pr Pact Magic features in their base class" and Caster to mean "class that counts fully for Spellcasting multiclassing and Warlock.)

Martials tend to excel in Strength, Dexterity, and/or Constitution and usually be middling at best in other stats. Since there is only one skill associated with Strength: Athletics, while, other stats have at least 3 each (except Constitution) a Strength based character will be worse at skills than other characters. Of course the relative strength of the different skills will vary depending on your table, but I think we can at least all agree that the Charisma based ones tend towards the top. They also don't get any more Proficiencies or Expertises than any other class (Bard and Rogue are again the exceptions).

In essence, pointing to the skill system doesn't really help, as Martials aren't usually any better than Casters at them, or are even worse in some cases.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

What you are saying sure does highlight an impalance in the system, one that is probably hard to solve without removing what is "core dnd". Decoupling skills from attributes is one step. Maneuvers for all another. I don't know what else to do without starting to make it not dnd. And honestly I don't really need to do anything. There is apparently something out there called Advanced 5e for those that want "dnd but more". For me there are a thousand and one systems out there for me to like.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

It's not about breaking the game. To match a caster in damage you have to build a munchkin martial, and even so the caster will still be more versatile.

Thankfully the Rules Lawyer has an entire video about this that captures my view so I don't have to write an entire post about it.

https://youtu.be/x9opzNvgcVI?t=9m54s

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

You didn't address one of the leading problems of imbalance: groups who do like one fight per long rest.

That creates scenarios where the fighter can swing four times for 4d8+16 total, but the wizard can drop two fireballs for 16d6 to whole groups of baddies (effectively becoming like 64d6)

The adventuring day is garbage and so long as the game is balanced around it, there will be problems.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In 3.5 fighters are OK in a fight. The imbalance was for the rest of the game thanks to wizards' utility spells.

Also CoDzilla since buffs stacked, which 5e's concentration solved.

5e is at a good spot, we usually play lower levels and it feels good,

@sirblastalot @Phantaminum

[–] Phantaminum 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lower levels is bit boring after a while, don't get me wrong, I like low levels but it losses the spark fast after 3 ccampaings at max level 5, mainly because there is low variety.