So alot of people have been debating about how much better casters

>>53908462
We've had this conversation a thousand times before, and we've repeatedly established why it happens and how to fix it.

>>53908462
The real reason is that other classes have to roll dice to attempt actions which may or may not succeed, whereas casters don't have to roll dice to attempt spells and the spell attempts always succeed.

>>53908462
Fighter can also fly at level 5, it's called "asking your not-retarded party wizard to cast fly on you". Martials and casters are supposed to supplement each others, not compete.

>>53908546
How are you supposed to supplement someone who can do everything you can do and more?

>>53908546
>casters aren't overpowered because the other classes can simply ask the caster to help them

t. Hasbro community manager

>>53908462

The Martial/Caster disparity doesn't really need more description at this point. It's blatantly obvious to anyone with a lick of sense, and those who refuse to acknowledge it or actively support it will never see sense. Hopefully one day the stupid double standard will die, but for now it's still going to linger on, shitting up games wherever it goes.

>>53908529

>we've repeatedly established why it happens and how to fix it.

Yeah, but not playing D&D isn't an option for some people.

>>53908602
It's a second-hand report because I always DM, but the martials tend to achieve it by serving as a buffer the casters and the world of pain, and then they sweeten the deal with indiscriminately killing everything that gets close.

>>53908645

Well, there is also 'Play 4e'.

>>53908657

Also a good option, but sadly one a lot of people won't give the time of day.

>>53908649
Summons do that, and usually they do it better than the fighter.

>>53908787

There's no real point in arguing it. If people are playing 3.PF, either they're aware of the caster/martial disparity, or they've gotten so used to running the game their own way that it's basically a new system at its point.

Something that does need to be acknowledged is that a GM can make martials relevant, despite the attempts of the core rules to make them worthless. And while it might take effort and learning at the start, there are people who do it so naturally now that, playing with them, you'd think the disparity didn't exist. But, of course, 'The GM can fix it' doesn't stop it being an issue and a clear flaw in the games mechanics.

>>53908787
In 3.5 they're short-lived, take a while to prepare and are instakilled by dispels. They also tend to be weaker than martials unless you dedicate time and or gold to buffing them, at which point you could have just spent the time doing something more useful and let the martial do what he's made for. At least that's how it looked in the game where I had a conjuration heavy druid.

In 5e conjuration lasts longer, but you need to prepare it ahead of time, and power disparity between summons and PCs is even bigger. Again, summons are prone to dispel (but not as much because area dispel is gone), but since they're now weaker, they suffer more from AoE.

>>53908830
Or maybe they just don't know.

>>53908462
>finlly found out
How are the things in the early 2000 anon??

>>53908645
>>53908681
Then take pen and paper and spend around 3 months rewriting the system.

Go through a month of playtests with at least 3 different groups. One with experienced players, one middle ground and one full of noobs. Spend around a month more tweaking it. Another batch of playtests. Final tweaks. Done.

So around half a year. Good luck. That of course assumes that you can into math and are as retarded as previous designers.

>>53909837
Sorry, "aren't as retarded"

>>53908787
Which is why summoning is the actual problem. Remove combat summoning, make it a lengthy ritual spell only that can only be cast with special preparations, not something that can be done in a snap in the middle of a fight. Suddenly, martials serving as defense becomes much more important.

>>53908546
That doesn't fix anything though.
>"Hey man, can you cast fly on me?"
>"I could, but it'd make more sense to use fly on myself since most of my spells go off from a distance."
Not to mention, what can the Fighter do to help the wizard that's equal to a third level spell?

File: 300px-The_Book_of_Weeaboo_Fightan_Magic.jpg (26KB, 300x393px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x393px

>>53908462

>>53913733
Does it have an option that allows them to fly at 5th level?

>>53908462
Play 5e where the caster has to decide between flying or being immune to arrows

Vancian casting is the sacred cow that is source of all problems

>>53913781
More like 16th level.

>>53913919
Then what's the fucking point?

File: 1476854635335.gif (443KB, 506x516px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 506x516px

>>53908462
This is why the magic-mundane dichotomy needs to fucking die. We want magic to be powerful, yet we also want our fighters to just be guys with swords. We can't have both: either magic is so useless you're better off picking up a bow, or everyone has magic.

Everyone having magic means there's no more difference between casters and mundanes, merely between different kinds of casters. You can get warriors who use some kind of blade dance magic, monks who use chi, and your regular priests and wizards. To be competitive, all of them need some kind of magic.

>>53913733
Pretty much this, but you DO need "weeaboo fightan magic". In 3.5e core, a level 20 monk is just a guy who is really shit at punching things and who can mimic feather fall but only when he's next to a wall. By level 20, the level where you're only a step removed from being god slayers, a monk should at least be on par with Super Saiyan Goku. Yes, he SHOULD be beamspamming and flying and kicking hard enough to destroy continents. Because the wizard can do much worse than that by level 20.

>>53913802
Let's be fair here, how would you do a non-vancian casting TTRPG? Something like a mana system works much better on computers and would be tedious around the table. Or would you simply remove limits on casting altogether, much like how a barbarian has no limits on how many times he can swing his axe?

>>53914086

Nah, you don't need to make martials magic. You just need to abandon the idea that, unless magic is directly involved, everything is otherwise 100% realistic.

Martials being capable of supernally awesome shit through pure skill and physical capability makes perfect sense in a high fantasy setting, and is a good place to start for closing the gap.

>>53908928
As a focused specialist convoker I can tell you, KEK

>>53914128
>You just need to abandon the idea that, unless magic is directly involved, everything is otherwise 100% realistic.
That's also an option, though some grognards would also consider that weeaboo fightan magic. Also, toning down magic a lot would help too. I'm not for total and complete balance, but it should at the very least be possible to make a mage slayer character who doesn't just use spells to fight spells.

>>53914086
Mana wouldn't be that tedious. Just keep a d-whatever on hand to represent total mana. Spells cost X mana depending on what you're doing, and you get Y back for resting or not casting for a while. If you're worried about players cheating and not managing the d-whatever, you need to find a new group.

>>53914128
Do you want to know what the secret is? More high level feats, with base attack bonus as a requirement. Meaning casters can't take them. That, and this. >>53913679

>>53914221
>More feat trees
Fucking NO!

>>53914221

That won't help a damn thing. It's not about adding new feats, it's about completely rewriting the mundane side of the game to not suck.

That's the annoying thing in D&D. Basically everything you can do sucks, and class features/feats only make it suck less, save for just hitting them. So hitting them is basically always the right thing to do.

Meanwhile, magic gets to do whatever it fucking likes.

I like the Bo9S, but that shouldn't be a replacement for an enjoyable and interesting core combat system, it should be an addition to it.

>>53914086
>Or would you simply remove limits on casting altogether, much like how a barbarian has no limits on how many times he can swing his axe?
Not that poster but I think this would be a decent solution. You could build casters around using at most a handful of cantrip equivalent spells and then the bigger ones are just class features with an easy "once/twice per X" limit that you have on most class features.

>>53914250
It doesn't need to be rewritten. Imagine if TWF was turned into a single feat that gained power as you level, based on your BAB, and in the end it was stronger than taking all the previous TWF feats together could have been. Imagine if Power Attack and Cleave were a single, scaling feat. Weapon Focus/Specialization/Supremacy, Improved Critical, you don't need new feats, just scaling ones. That way even Fighter doesn't need to be changed, because it's defining feature, having lots of feats, is suddenly worthwhile.

>>53914248
Not more trees, just more useful ones.

>>53913781
In the Pathfinder equivalent, two different disciplines have a 6th level stance (available at character level 11) that grants flight with unlimited duration, and one class (the Harbinger) gets it at 7th level as a class feature. (They could choose a swim, burrow, or climb speed instead, but why?)

>>53914275
>You could build casters around using at most a handful of cantrip equivalent spells and then the bigger ones are just class features with an easy "once/twice per X" limit that you have on most class features.
The cantrips are alright, but the "X times per Y" class feature spells would require a total overhaul of the system. It would first of all require heavy slimming down of all the spells in the game, and especially the number of spells a specific class has access to. It would also mean the end of the wizard class, and probably the birth of multiple unique classes that all fit into the wizard category (evokers, enchanters, necromancers, summoners et cetera) as well as multiple classes that fit into the priest category (some kind of holy blaster, some kind of healer, a druid, maybe the oriental monk would fit here too).

Those are all good things by the way, they streamline the classes and prevent oversaturation of spells.

>>53914346

Nope. You need to completely rewrite the core combat system.

The problem is that the only action that exists by default is attacking. All the others, bull rushes, disarms, sunders, they're not worth it unless you specifically build for them, and even then they aren't very good.

My gold standard for a combat system is that two completely generic, boring people with no special abilities can still make meaningful choices in how to engage one another. D&D essentially fails this, but it shows that they attempted it by including those actions, they just made them all cripplingly disadvantageous to use to the point of them being essentially, well, pointless.

>>53914346
Typed this up in 5 minutes, the wording isn't perfect but it gets the point across.

Weapon Focus
Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon group, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You gain a +1 attack bonus on all attack rolls made with this weapon.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times, it's effects do not stack. The base attack bonus requirement increases by +4 with each additional purchase.
Scaling:
BAB....Benefit
+4......+2 Damage with weapon group
+8......Additional +1 to attack bonus
+12....Additional +2 to damage. You must use a feat slot to advance past this point.
+15....Additional +2 to attack and damage, add two weapons to weapon group
+18....+1 dodge AC while using weapon, cannot be disarmed, can use during a grapple regardless of size.

This combines the entire Weapon Focus feat tree into one scaling effect, and the BAB requirements for additional purchases means the final Weapon Supremacy effect will still only be available to the original weapon group. And, that only barbarians, paladins, rangers and fighters will get the final benefit but the rest of the feat's scaling effects are still worth using for another class.

>>53914250
>We need to rewrite the way martials work!
>But we shouldn't rewrite the way martials work!

>>53914403
You'd have to pay me to pick that shit, is pure garbage, did you ever play D&D? Hitting was never ever a problem, even if you gave me a feat that basically gives me + infinite to hit, I wound't pick it.

>>53914447

There's an interesting thought experiment that floated around for a while, asking how long a martial would stay relevant if he had plus infinite to hit and damage, effectively meaning if he got to make an attack roll, he would win a fight.

From what people could figure out, they'd still be essentially irrelevant around level 10.

>>53914086
>Let's be fair here, how would you do a non-vancian casting TTRPG?
Easily? I mean, lots of games have fatigue systems, even if you don't want to do anything else, you just tie each spell cast, or even each spellcasting attempt (We don't need to make spells automatically work unless saved against) cost you a bit of energy.

>>53914447
It's two feat slots for +4 to hit, +4 damage, +1 AC, can't be disarmed, and the weapon can be used in a grapple. Only the first weapon group you take it for gets the final effect so you can still play a specialist, and only full BAB classes can get the most out of it, so casters can't horn in on your thing. It's literally perfect. I have more for TWF, Improved Critical, and Combat Expertise.

>>53908462

Allow martials to do things that were restricted to Epic levels.

I think to do something like literally slip between bars to small for you is like an 80+ Skill check or something? Allow martials to do those sorts of things at lower levels and if the nipples of your autism arn't unduely tweeked by it maybe spells wouldn't completely trump literally everything by virtue of no one outside of boss monsters being able to do anything about it.

>>53914398
Yeah I'm aware it would need a total rewrite and require breaking up existing classes but as you said I think that's a good thing. I'd even go as far as saying get rid of the big spell list and just stick all the spells you can get in the class descriptions and compensate for the loss of a big spell list with a few more interesting class features that aren't necessarily spells.

>>53914505
>It's two feat slots for +4 to hit, +4 damage, +1 AC
That's shit.
With two feat slots you can get waaaay better to hit an damage, you clearly never played 3.PF.

>>53914403
Attack and Damage was never an issue for martials and certain spells can outright shit on you even if you gained an infinite amount of attack and damage.

The problem that martials have always faced is that there aren't enough meaningful decisions being made when it's their turn, it's either (full) attacking the enemy until one side is defeated or potentially waste your turn and give the enemy a free swipe at you.
>>53914467
They'd be irrelevant much sooner if the DM includes mages who use shit like fly, wind wall, displacement, mirror image, or any of the other spells that are effectively "you can't hit me" or "you miss instead."

>>53914505
>tfw with two feats my barb has +10 to hit and +20 to damage
And they're still shit and doesn't make me shine at all with the fucking wizard in the team around

>>53914467
>twf wings of cover
At 7th level I was tanking what even the barb couldn't tank

The easiest way to fix the disparity is to double the level of any spell which isn't direct damage. So magic missile is still level 1, but sleep is level 2.

>>53914511
Yeah, that and a general list of cantrips that all wizard-category classes get (and another set for all priest-category classes) that scale with level. This adds some versatility (summoners still get very minor buffs and damage dealing spells) without bloating the list too much.

Fucking hell, this would fix everything wrong with casters. Why hasn't WotC done this yet?

>>53908462
>Like let's take this in for a moment, usually characters who can fly are also fairly powerful beings in their own right or flight is one of the last things they learn before the end of the series.
This makes it clear the only media you consume is anime.

>>53914580
So we lower the level of spells that merely deal hp, but double the level of spells that can instantly end or trivialize an encounter?

>>53914530
>can't be disarmed, and the weapon can be used in a grapple
Quote the whole thing, friendo. And what two feats would that be?

>>53914541
I never said it fixed casters, I said it fixed martials. And the idea was to revamp all combat feats, not just the Weapon Focus tree. Here's Improved critical.

Improved Critical
Prerequisites: None
BAB....Benefit
+4......Crit range increases by 1 (20 becomes 19-20, 19-20 becomes 18-20, etc)
+8......Crit multiplier increases by 1.
+12....Crit range increases by 1 (19-20 to 18-20, 18-20 to 17-20, etc)
+15....Crit multiplier increases by 1. You ust use a feat slot to progress past this point.
+18....Choose one of the following: Stun, Stagger, Nauseate, Sicken, Trip, Bull Rush. One of these effects is automatically caused whenever you make a critical hit. The target gets no rolls to resist.

>>53914606
Ok, from now on I'm going to assume you're SKR because you have no idea what feats already exist that utterly blow up the ones you're posting and act like yours are crazy powerful

You have no idea what problems martials face and just assume "muh damage muh hit" is the solution

>>53914655
So, you DON'T know what two feats? Did you just make it up?

>>53914606
>+18....Choose one of the following: Stun, Stagger, Nauseate, Sicken, Trip, Bull Rush. One of these effects is automatically caused whenever you make a critical hit. The target gets no rolls to resist.
There're way earlier feats that give you that
Srly, 5 feats for that shit? you're crazy stupid, I just need 2 and I get that like at 11th level

File: 1437641347673.jpg (51KB, 555x344px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 555x344px

>>53914601
Oh yeah, because it's not like Clark Kent didn't take a while to learn how to fly and shit when he was first coming to grips with his powers.

>>53914675
It was two feats. The BAB scaling takes effect on it's own, you just pay one additional feat slot to get the final effect. It also increases your weapon's threat range and multiplier by 2, increasing your odds of critting and the damage you deal.

>>53914606
It's always funny to see a moron claim to have "fixed" 3.PF, only to post shit that not only shows that he knows nothing about the game but is weaker than shit that already exists within the game.

Seriously, go home, you're making an ass out of yourself.

>>53914675
Critical focus and Staggering crit, stunning crit, whatever crit for example, whatever I want. 2 feats, compared to 5 of yours, and I do it way earlier than 18th level

>>53914725
See >>53914714

File: how it should be.png (451KB, 750x1700px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 750x1700px

>>53908462
I just wanted to post this picture OP. I like it.

>>53914743
I still, for the same number of feats do that at way earlier level

>>53914543
Power attack and Reckless attack is a crazy drug

File: galina-levchenko-04-spellbook-1.jpg (388KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1600x900px

I would just make magic a skill, or a selection of skills, that anyone can attempt to perform if they have the relevant spell written down. Spellcasters would have a bonus to it in the same way fighters get a bonus to using swords and rogues get a bonus to sneaking or whatever else, but anyone can attempt to perform magic in the same way anyone attempt to use a sword, sneak or whatever. I'm sure it's been done. It makes sense as long as magic is just a skill anyone can learn.

Also, no "free" spells except at character creation, you have to find them or buy them the same way you find magic weapons and armor.

>>53914725
Critical Focus and Stunning Critical are PF, not 3.5. Staggering Crit slows for 1 round. Stunning Crit allows a save, Critical Focus gives +4 to confirm crits.

My feat increases threat range, making crits more likely. It increases the multiplier, which means more damage. It gives you the option of 6 different effects with NO SAVES allowed, they simply happen. An yours take 3 feat slots, mine just 2. And this you say is better?

>>53914814
>Stunning Crit allows a save
If you save you're still staggered for 1d4 turns

>>53914814
Yours come into play at a level nobody plays, mines come way earlier.
I with money can get weapons to crit on 13+ and auto confirm, no need to waste feats on that.

>People still thinks damage and hit are martial's problems
I'm playing a monk, a motherfuckign monk king of miss and missing isn't my problem (because I hit pretty fucking often and deal pretty good damage), my problem is the 1001 ways monsters and casters at high level can negate my actions rendering my attacks useless.

>>53914128
Nah, you can't make them better without some sort of magic included.
It doesn't matter how good you are at sneaking around, you would never be able to top a guy who can remove all nearby sound and become invisble, for example.
The thing about magic is that since it doesn't exist, it has two roles in games: replicate something possible through mundane means or do something impossible.
If you use it for the former, it would naturally be better than the mundane alternative, otherwise it wouldn't even exist. If firing a magic spell isn't better than using a bow in some way, then it would never have been developed.
The other half would consist of impossible things, which can be granted in non magical ways to non magical characters as well, but when magic characters usually are based around variety since spells include dozens of utility choices, to the point even someone who focuses on a very narrow field can still trump non magical characters sometimes.
I see three ways to solve this:
>make a combat focused game
Because only combat is pretty easy to balance against magical characters. This is probably the worst option since I want to roleplay, explore and talk, not focus only on fighting.
>make everyone magical
Doesn't matter what excuse you find to call it something else, this is what you'll want if you want a high power game where everyone is doing shit to contribute.
>add great costs or risks to magic
The way magic can make sense as a thing that has some downsides to mundane choices but still is frequently used, is if they're more powerful but require you to give up many other resources or are enough of a double edged sword you want to save them for the right time.

>>53914996
D&D has a couple of keywords beyond magic, it has supernatural and extraordinary. You can negate sound and still not be magic.

>>53914830
And with mine I can swing a heavy pick and crit on a 17 and deal x6 damage (or use a scimitar and crit on a 16 and deal x4 damage, critting every 5th hit sounds pretty nice), and bull rush the target into environmental hazards and/or away from allies, and to maximum distance no less because they get no opposed roll, auto-stun to make them drop items, apply three different debuffs depending on what would benefit the group most, or just keep tripping them, because no opposed roll means no size bonus.

>>53914996

>It doesn't matter how good you are at sneaking around, you would never be able to top a guy who can remove all nearby sound and become invisble, for example.

Only if you assume that everything is realistic unless magic is explicitly at play. I'm a fan of the idea of supernaturally skilled people just being able to do that stuff. A Rogue with a nigh enough sneak check should be significantly stealthier than a mage casting invisibility, because they are just that damn good.

>>53908462
You're not clever by addressing this you know.
You're not even being original.
You are so fucking late to these discussions you might as well have never showed up OP.

>>53915063
Are the you the shill from the other 3.PF thread?

>>53915036
>or just keep tripping them
You can't trip creatures two size categories than you, or that are immune to being prone.
You can't auto stun creatures immune to stun
And a long etc

You can do all you posted with money and 2 feats at lower level, but will still face the same problems

>>53914605
No, you don't lower the level of spells that merely deal HP, you just double the level of spells that can instantly end or trivialize an encounter.

>>53915036
>critting every 5th hit sounds pretty nice
It actually sounds unimpressive as fuck, I can already do that with keen mercurial scimitar (15-20 x4), what's all fuss about this? No feats wasted btw.

>>53915119
Yeah, immunity to some conditions/effects is a thing for every class, it's not like it's something that only bothers martials. An it doesn't change the fact that turning feat trees into scaling effects is a great way to improve the system.

>>53915193
>>53915119
PS, "and two feats" is a lie, the THREE feats someone actually botherd to post don't even do half of what my fix does.

>>53915193
Does a keen mercurial scimitar give you 6 no-save status effect options? Nope.

>>53915195
It only bothers martials because if a martial wastes a feat on stun, he's fucked forever.
If a caster wastes a spell on stun, he just needs to cast another spell, or sleep 8 hours and change his stun one.

There're tons of problems like this, damage and to hit aren't among them.

>>53915021
>By default, supernatural abilities are magical and go away in an antimagic field
1 minute of searching what they mean. So only extraordinary skills are non magical. From the looks of it very few characters only use that but I only skimmed through them. This by default makes most of the cast magical already.

>>53915044
You can eventually assume he gets the ability to become one with shadows or something like that, but that starts bordering magical stuff, which is an okay way to balance things, but let's not pretend it's not magic.

>>53915195

You're putting a band aid over a gaping wound.

Scaling feats could be cool, sure. They're also completely irrelevant to the actual problem.

>>53915247
>Again with the 18th level effect and two feats wasted
No, a keen mercurial scmitar gives me that at 4-5th level, 13 levels earlier than your shit.

Give is a +1 with nauseating, stunning or whatever for extra 8000 gp and I already do what you do at 18th level but at 5-6th

>>53915285

But it isn't magic. Unless you define magic as 'literally anything that functions outside the laws of reality', in which case everything in the setting is magic, making 'magic' a meaningless term.

The idea of supernal mundane skill creating results beyond what is possible in reality doesn't necessitate magic, it just necessitates embracing the idea that it's a fantasy world with a different set of rules, where that kind of thing can just happen.

>>53915285
AF negates psionic powers and psionic powers aren't magic. Just because Anti magic field has magic on it doesn't mean that anything that negates is magic.

>>53915081
No.
I'm just tired of supposedly intelligent people think that THEY are gonna be the super-special ones that totally matter and fix everything about a system, as if somehow they're the first person ever to think that.

It's not just stupid, it's fucking pathetic.
Do people have so few friends on this board that hey have to start arguments and discussions on a subject talked about more times and has had more in the past two months then the number of years they've been alive on this planet?

>>53915361
Why are you so angry?

Why even come into this thread if you knew you'd get this upset?

Are you a masochist?

>>53915252
That's why I also said removing combat summing is also part of it, if casters needed martials to do what they're intended to do, defend, then martials can't be so easily replaced.

>>53908462
here's a trick: make every class magical in some respect. Warriors should get magical jumping capabilities, magical sword swings that can reach 20 feet, etc. Mundane will always lose to magic, it can't be a contest and be realistic.

>>53915296
What game are you playing in where you have that kind of money at 6th level?

>>53915399
Or, martials get these things and they're not magical, they're physical. The fighter can jump over a castle wall because he's just that strong. Also, why in the ever loving FUCK do you want it to be realistic? Why do only martials have to labor under this delusion?

>>53908462
>So alot of people have been debating about how much better casters are in comparison to martials
No, this was years ago

>>53915411
In a game in where at 6th level you have around 13,000 gp. More if your friends lend you some.

>>53915443
I mean, no normal human can jump say straight up 10 feet. That's what I mean by saying that even martials have to be magical. It shouldn't be in the same way that spells are done for wizards, but you can't have a level 20 fighter just be someone really good at swinging a sword. They have to have some sort of magical power to be anything more than that. call it something else if you like but it really is magic.

>>53915443
Because people treat non-magical as being mundane, and mundane characters are shackled to the conventions of reality while fantastical figures like wizards are not.

>>53908462
>a lot of people have been debating
...is it 2006 again now?

>>53915486
My monk jumps 10 feet (actually more) and moves at 60mph (actually more) without magic (not even ki).

>>53915399
>Mundane will always lose to magic
Only if you're obsessed with the kind of cartoonish magic D&D is known for.

>>53915329
Yes, but you need to justify it somehow. I can get behind a guy being strong enough to pull a tree with minimal effort or jump incredibly high, sure. I can also get behind a magic trying to recreate such effects wasting so many resources that it would never be used, fade into obscurity or not exist. I can't get behind a guy just "being that good" at sneaking he could be harder to spot than someone else invisble, making no sound and floating unless he had some good explanation for that or the magic to do that(but invisibility or something simlar is extremelly common) , which I doubt could be made non magical.

>>53915360
I went to the wiki and it explicity said "supernatual abilities are magical". Does the rulebook word that differently? Because that sentence makes it clear they're magic, just not spells. If you're saying that the only magical things are spells themselves then this renders a lot of things non magical as well.

>>53915486
Giants should fall through their kneecaps the first time they take a step. Clearly biology doesn't work the same way we're used to.

>>53908462
I think the trick to making martials good is to don't play DnD.

>>53915532
>which I doubt could be made non magical.
Tome of Battle does that and calls it extraordinary, which means you can do it in an antimagic field

>>53915604
Can I have the description?

>Play 4e
>Play 2e ad&d
Problem solved

>>53915458
So your solution is to spend most of your gold on a sword, completely forgoing other items that you'd need for defense...instead of spending two feat slots.

Also, Mercurial is 3.0, not 3.5, and only increases the multiplier by 1, not 2. Do you really have to mix different games just to try and argue against my perfect feat fix for martials, and with inferior alternatives no less??

>>53915486
No, you want there to BE no martials by making everyone some variety of wizard so casters "win" by default. You are not fooling anyone.

>>53915532

> I can't get behind a guy just "being that good" at sneaking he could be harder to spot than someone else invisble, making no sound and floating unless he had some good explanation for that or the magic to do that(but invisibility or something simlar is extremelly common) , which I doubt could be made non magical.

They exist in a universe within which mundane skill can have effects beyond the limits of our reality. It doesn't need any more justification than that. Within that universe, being that damn good is all you need.

>>53915618
My mistake, invisible discipline is a supernatural effect, teleporting one is the extraordinary one, I thought it was the reverse.

But hey, if you can teleport and count as non magical, I dunno why is so hard to imagine invisible as non magical too.

Shadow hand disciplines btw.

File: MnM-logo-wordpress.png (59KB, 340x87px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 340x87px

>>53908462
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279503-D-amp-D-in-M-amp-M-a-new-approach-to-rebalancing-3-5-PF

Ahem.

>>53915604
>>53915618
It depends on the maneuver, some are purely mundane, some are supernatural effects. Like, pretty much all the maneuvers from the fire style are magic. But Mountain Tombstone Strike, the capstone Stone Dragon strike that deals 2d6 Con damage, is not.

>>53915636
Not him but yeah, spending money is and will always be better than spending feats, you can resell or improve that weapon later on.

Also yeah, offense will always be better than defense (unless we mean saves) in D&D, and at low levels you can't boost your defenses much, so yeah, that weapon will totally be worth its price.

>>53915662
uh? yes? I'm not attempting to fool anyone. Real people would get shit on when magic comes to play, and boring shit tier magic where create water is a level 9 spell isnt my idea of a fun game, so id rather buff martials

>>53915667
Yes, but as far as I'm concerned, they're usually explained in a way that fits. Being damn good will likely get you through all of the things that the mage can do, sure, but I'm not sure how far one can go and justify beating the magic.

>>53915686
Is it teleport is moving really really fast? I agree with you if it's the former.

>>53916134
Taking into account you can teleport through walls, no, is not moving really fast.

>>53909837
>That of course assumes that you can into math
Honestly, the only thing you need is probability theory which you should have been taught, or at the very least understood, in grade school. If you can't into this then you've honestly have far bigger issues in your life than what system to use when you play pretend.

>>53916134
That's because you're living in the western materialist box of a west/east, materialist/essentialist 2x2 matrix.

In most of the other boxes, being really good means swearing an oath so heavy it bends destiny or being so good an artificer, you can weave moonbeams to catch a falling star.

Preternatural skill can accomplish 'zen' things (IIRC Anima explicitly calls it this) that mere magic can't.

>>53916361
>playing systems with weeb ideas

lmao, what are you doing anon

>>53916584

Enjoying the breadth of what human cultures have to offer?

>>53916584
>Roland
>Hercules
>Siegfried
>weeb

I love when the culturally illiterate self-identify; though it's depressing that modernist Nip cartoons are the limit of your mythological knowledge. I suppose if you're really well rounded you could work in a Harry Potter reference.

File: aid1403097-v4-728px-Become-a-Shinobi-Step-1-Version-3.jpg (66KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 728x546px

>>53915532
The thing about skills like stealth is that most of us are not even remotely skilled at professional infiltration, and certainly not as skilled as some kind of fantasy master assassin. People have done things IRL where I would just say "that's impossible", but only because I don't know how it's done.

In RPGs there are levels of abstraction to cover that. If I pass a persuasion check, the words I put in the mouth of my character are probably not the right ones, but that's glossed over. I don't know how to convince a king to lend me his army, but my character knows. In the same way, a master assassin might sneak past a guard using tricks and techniques that I could never imagine. I come up with my best guess and the mechanics cover the rest. If the mechanics say my character is better than invisibility, I don't know exactly how but I'll buy it.

That's the problem with saying you need an explanation for everything. It's like a magic trick where you can see what's happening, but you don't know exactly how it's happening. Maybe the trick is so good it looks like real magic. When you add the fact your character might just be physically or mentally better than real humans, and has a higher level of skill than anyone in real life, I would expect them to do things I consider impossible.

Having said all that, I wouldn't push it too far. I'm not saying there can't be limits. Just that I wouldn't set the limits to "only things I can explain".

>>53914584
>Why hasn't WotC done this yet?
Presumably because a significant portion of the playerbase would flip their shit at such a radical "dumbing down" of the system despite the fact that most of said system is optional clutter or outright trap options and only a small core list gets consistently used.

>>53917457

Magic was the primary way to have fun in 3.PF, which is why people are super protective of it and freak out whenever it's diminished or threatened, like all the bullshit about 4e.

>>53917585
The thing is it's a vicious cycle when magic is the only way to have fun because it's the only really viable part of the game so people defend it which means it's only viable part of the game and only way to have fun. At some point you have to break the cycle and tell people to suck it up. Ideally you could roll it out as a variant rule set to ease people into it but that's a lot of additional work to make sure everything can function with both sets of rules.

>>53917671

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying why I think they haven't done it.

They also tried with 4e, in a way that I thought was pretty damn successful, but you saw how that whole thing blew up in their faces.

>>53917745
>Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying why I think they haven't done it.
I gotcha.

>They also tried with 4e, in a way that I thought was pretty damn successful, but you saw how that whole thing blew up in their faces.
Yeah that was unfortunate because while I haven't played 4e myself from what I've heard it was definitely a step in the right direction as far as streamlining goes. Maybe when 6e rolls around in 5 or 10 years we'll see some more radical departures as a lot of people getting into D&D now won't have all the hangups of the older players.

>>53917825

4e is fun, although it is a more focused game than most forms of D&D. Rather then being general adventuring stuff, 4e very much focuses on the idea of the PCs as larger than life, powerful and awesome heroes, and builds the whole game around that concept. If you enjoy the style of its combat (which is great, post math fixes) and are in the mood for heroic action roleplaying, it can be a great time. Still, I can also understand why a lot of people felt it didn't accommodate their preferred form of D&D, even if the people bitching about nonsense are far louder and more obnoxious.

>>53917863
Yeah I'll definitely have to give it a shot at some point just to see how it plays.

File: printablemm3businessfront.gif (27KB, 1050x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 1050x600px

>>53918020

If you ever get a chance, make sure whoever is running it knows to use the MM3/MV monster math (pic related) and to give the PC's an Expertise feat and Improved Defences for free. The system math was kinda borked on launch, but those fix it up nicely.

>>53918110
Thanks for the tip.

>>53915636
>perfect feat fix
Someone has a high opinion of themself

>>53908529
>We've had this conversation a thousand times before, and we've repeatedly established why it
Yup
>and how to fix it.
That is much less of a grand consensus here

File: 1430673555488.gif (891KB, 325x252px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 325x252px

>>53914086
>Let's be fair here, how would you do a non-vancian casting TTRPG?
There are so many games that do magic in ways other than vancian.... like SO many
>Something like a mana system works much better on computers and would be tedious around the table.
And vancian magic works GREAT in Jack Vance novels, but is equally tedious on tabletop.

File: 1432514505213.png (61KB, 180x148px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 180x148px

>>53914128
>You just need to abandon the idea that, unless magic is directly involved, everything is otherwise 100% realistic.
>>53914996
>Nah, you can't make them better without some sort of magic included.
>If you use it for the former, it would naturally be better than the mundane alternative
> If firing a magic spell isn't better than using a bow in some way, then it would never have been developed.
>Is incapable of abandoning the idea that, unless magic is directly involved, everything is otherwise 100% realistic.

Maybe you could just try for a moment to imagine a world where those assumptions aren't true, because it's called FANTASY

>>53918525
Ironically, fantasy is probably one of the most by-the-number genres you could ever hope to experience in your lifetime.

Like an action movie could be anything from "Die Hard" to "Terminator 2" but Fantasy will more-or-less boil down to "Lord of the Rings," and "Shit that was inspired by Lord of the Rings."

Even Sci-Fi gets more variance.

>>53914086
There's other systems which handle it well. Shadowrun has Drain, where casting spells can exhaust or injure you and the limit is how bad you want to get hurt. Mage the Ascension has Paradox, where failing a spell or casting too powerful a spell can put you in serious risk, as well as limits on plausibility for multiple coincidental effects in a row. Unknown Armies require all kinds of crazy shit to power it. And so on.

There's also all kinds of other ways you could handle magic. Roll to see if you succeed at a spell, with harder spells being more difficult; fail and you're unable to cast magic until you take some time to re-focus. Take a page from 4E's monster manual, where you get one use and then have to roll to reuse it. Separate spells into cantrips you can use like a Barbarian swings his axe, and rituals which take a lot of time and energy. And so on. Vancian is a silly way to do it.

>>53914086
One system I've seen is that you've got X 'spell dice.' When you prepare spells, assign as many dice to each as you want.

So let's say you have 5 spell dice. You can put 3 in Fireball and 2 in Fly, or however you want to split them.

When you cast Fireball, you can roll any number of dice assigned to it- in this case, 1/2/3. Some spells will use dice for duration, some might use them for damage, idk.

There's your mana system, while still keeping the 'prepared spells' aspect. Have another caster class not prepare spells but give them less spell dice and you've got wizards vs sorcerers.

>>53914996
>If you use it for the former, it would naturally be better than the mundane alternative, otherwise it wouldn't even exist. If firing a magic spell isn't better than using a bow in some way, then it would never have been developed.
>it would naturally be better than the mundane alternative...
>...in some way
You're so close, you just can't seem to make the connection. Magic doesn't have to be strictly better all the time, it just needs to be better in some way. Then there's a choice, where sometimes you'll go with magic and sometimes you won't. But if magic is always better than the mundane alternative, then there's no actual choice involved, and that's a failure of game design.

Quite frankly, the tradeoff could be "you require the same training you need to do impossible things instead of learning to only do possible things." Imagine a magic bolt spell which was strictly inferior to a bow in every way, but could be easily learned at the same time you learned to create magical barriers or heal people or speak with the dead. People would still learn it while they were learning those other abilities, because archery requires a lot of training unrelated to said abilities.

>>53908462
Just make it so the martial becomes inhumanly powerful eventually.
Chi, heroic spirit, doesn't matter what excuse you use, just let them break the rules a little bit too.

If you want to keep it less "high fantasy" like this you can restrict the mages to mostly utility things, like make it so they can only fly as long as they keep concentrating so can't fight while doing it and so on.

>>53908462

Wizards were never meant to be PCs. They were meant to be quest-givers and BBEGs.
Making caster classes available to players was a mistake.

There, I said it. I feel better now.

File: 1410135956453[1].jpg (74KB, 831x445px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 831x445px

>>53908462
I mean really

>>53919021
Gygax thoughts wizards were dumb and thought everyone should play Conan fighters.

>>53919150
Gygax thought that 2e was too focused on roleplaying too.

File: 1420399192673.gif (499KB, 500x408px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 500x408px

>>53918614
While I do agree that the legacy of Tolkien has shit up a LOT of fantasy, I feel like there's a lot more out there, unless you arbitrarily define fantasy as that which was shit up by Tolkien's legacy. I could name a bunch, but I feel like we'd get caught in a true-scotsman loop ("that's not fantasy, that's anime-fantsy/pulp-fantasy/science-fantasy/urban-fantasy" etc..) so I'll just encourage you to branch out of the Tolkien comfort-zone.


Total side-note, however, Tolkien himself often defined "magic" in his own setting as any skill taken to its supernatural extreme: i.e. something martials can fully attain in-setting without being "wizards."

>>53918739
>Shadowrun has Drain, where casting spells can exhaust or injure you and the limit is how bad you want to get hurt
I love Shadowrun's magic system. You want to hurt a guy? Toss him a Powerball at Rating (Magic). You want to level a small house? Up your Powerball to Rating (Magic x 2) and be ready to bleed through your eyes.

>>53916329
Number of people incapable of calculating probabilities of a roll for d20 surprised me many times in the past and probably will continue to do so in the future.

>>53908462
make it so your casters need to find books, scrolls, documents or tutors to learn how to cast each spell. Make it so flight and any other game breaking ones are hidden behind complicated dungeons which you could fill with magical items that balance martials out.

>that glorious feel when you figured this shit out years ago

File: Chaos Wizard.jpg (126KB, 819x1054px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 819x1054px

Aren't magicians supposed to be stronger than martials?

Realistically speaking, of course.

Hypothetically, Vancian spells now take 1/2 the spell level rounds rounded up to cast. Is this any better?

>>53914086
>Let's be fair here, how would you do a non-vancian casting TTRPG?
Spheres of Power, or something similar to that

>>53914809
Ohhh GOD NO I'm not going to trust my dm to give me every spell past character creation, FUCK THAT

>>53922427
I wouldn't mind it if there were libraries or whatever in all major cities you could unquestioningly buy the spells you wanted from

>>53915553
That's because of magic, the same reason giants work is what lets dragons breathe fire and makes a fighter strong enough to hit AND damage a god, magic

>>53919005
We made an excuse for doing impossible thing its called magic

>>53921689
God no that just makes playing a caster boring

>>53908602
Because it's more efficient to buff the fighter, A fighter can probably deal roughly equal damage to your spells over time, with spells expending a slot but having burst damage. So you can ether waste your spell slots on a bunch of blasts or help the meat shield do it with one or two. Still a bad way to design a system, as the only time martials are overly relevant are when the caster can't bring himself to waste his magic on a petty thing like killing shit.

Pretty sure the only way to make martials as fun as casters would be if your martial status also gave you a supply of army guys whose skill and veterancy are amplified exponentially by your level.
So leave the casters to play "I instantly solve everything" while martials play WH40k.

Whoever rolls initiative first gets their flavour of fun, wether its 1 sec of god complex or 50 minutes of miniature tactics.

>>53914606
Martial Study+Martial Stance

Stormguard Warrior+Combat Reflexes

PA+any PA-boosting feats

I think the real problem is that people make mages the exclusive magic guy.

This includes every kind of spell, illusions, summons, alchemy AND magic item creation. Splitting these up into multiple classes or sub classes is a good start. Also make magic item creation something anyone can do. Smiths forge magic swords, thieves weave invisibility cloaks. I hate settings where all supernatural elements are just le magic xd which everyone in this thread seems to think.

Oh, and there is nothing wrong with super human fighters either. It's fantasy, embrace it.

>>53908462

Wizards now can't cast fly.

Fixed.

The problem is that magic is so loosely defined in D&D that casters end up being able to do everything and anything which is obviously going to overshadow the guy working within strictly human limits.

Even Gygax said that he only really put shit like wish into the game as something for NPC's to use and grant, he didn't expect players to get to the level to use it. Likewise in the early days casters legitimately were fragile early on, leveling was slow and they could do very little early on before instant cantrips , so it was a risk /reward thing. The more people started playing narrative based games where players leveled fast , had plot armour and even started at high levels the more of an issue it became.

So you basically just need to sit down and work out what a caster should be able to do and when. I always felt this was best achieved with a strict focus on schools of magic , with anything outside them prohibited and to tone down the various game breaking effects.

No mention of Fantasycraft in this thread?

It is basically the answer to this question.

>>53914188
>>53914086
So... 3.5 Psionics?

Question. What about the following feats (specifically addressing for the magic/mundane dichotomy) - each line denotes the next part of the feat tree.

The character gains a barrier that acts as a +2 AC shield bonus.
Once per day as an instant action the character may discharge this ability to give all
creatures within 30 feet of them a +2 AC shield bonus for one round, plus one round
for every 5 character levels.

-------------------------------

The characters AC shield bonus increases to +4.
Once per day as an instant action, the character may discharge this ability to gain a
+10 bonus to any Reflex save, or a Fortitude save caused by a touch attack or ranged
touch attack spell or ability.

---------------------------------

The characters AC shield bonus increases to +6
Once per day as a full round action, the character may discharge this ability to grant
themselves total cover for a number of rounds equal to their Intelligence Modifier. This
functions exactly like planting a tower shield, except the character can still see and
attack other creatures through the effect. The creature must remain in the square in
which he activated this ability to retain its effects for the duration of the ability.

I have a whole list of these for a custom class I've been working on (21, 3 feat trees total), this is one of the more mundane ones. If you like it, I'll post one or two more.

>>53923764
Why did you post in this thread. What does this have to do with the OP. Why didn't you include what system this is for.

I'm assuming it's 3.x because of the terminology you used in which case it's rather complicated for minimal benefits. Also whatever it is you're trying to do can probably already be done within the rules so add why are you home brewing new classes for 3.x to the questions as well.

>>53923764
Sorry, this might be a bad example. Here's a different one:

Minor Spatial
You gain an insight bonus to initiative equal to your intelligence modifier
Once per day as an immediate action that doesn't provoke an attack of
opportunity, you may discharge this ability to jaunt through space 5 feet.
This effectively acts as a five foot step, allowing you up to two five foot
steps in a turn. yes, this works exactly how it sounds

------------------------

Greater Spatial
Prerequisites - Minor Spatial, Character Level 5th
You gain the ability to avoid damage as though you had the evasion
ability. This does not actually grant the ability, but simply mimic it's
effects through your superior spatial knowledge.
Once per day you may discharge this ability and step through a door, to
instantly teleport to another known door up to 100 feet away. Both doors
must be open to use this ability. At 8th level, this ability instead functions
as a dimension door spell, with a range limit of 100 feet. With either version you may take no actions after moving through the door.

--------------------------

Perfect Spatial
Prerequisites - Greater Spatial, Character Level 12th
You gain the ability to "see" in all situations. This functions as though
you had blindsight 15'. This ability does not actually grant blindsight
it simply mimics it through your superior spatial knowledge.
Once per day you may discharge this ability to jaunt yourself to an alternate plane of existence. You may remain on this plane as long as you choose, however, you can choose to return as a move action within a number of rounds equal to your Intelligence modifier, otherwise you are stuck in that plane until find a way to return (such as a second use of this ability).

>>53923883
Yes, it's 3.PF, and if you look at it, it does address the point of the OP. It gives martials further utility towards being on par with casters, as well as negates some of the casters power through their dischargeable abilities. Granted, they're general feats, so open to casters as well.

>>53908544
>casters don't have to roll dice to attempt spells and the spell attempts always succeed.
Which stupid system does that?

>>53923910
You're sticking a band-aid on an amputated leg, mate. Neat utility you can use once a day isn't worth a feat, and there isn't any number bonus that's gonna fix the caster/martial divide in that system.

Not to mention most of these are basically "you can cast a spell now" and a lot of people play martials because they don't want to spellcast.

>>53924005
Most of 'em. Can't think of a system off the top of my head where the spell doesn't automatically happen when you try to cast it, but my system knowledge is pretty narrow.

It doesn't always do anything, depending on saves and the like, but the caster succeeded in casting.

>>53924015
Ignore him, he's one of those "if you increase damage, AC and hit bonus you'll fix martials" who never actually played the game to a degree in where you see the actual problems (aka played beyond 5th level)

>>53924015
I suppose. The feats are meant to work with a class that has more utility for them, like being able to refresh them past the 1/day limit, but they are general feats so anyone can take them.

I'm actually working on a system where this isn't really a problem. You can go the Goku route, or the Avatar route and both are perfectly viable with their own strengths and weaknesses. I'm going to be putting together a quickstart over the next week (unfortunately, I keep losing artists, so the QS won't have any art). I'll post it here for feedback. Funny enough, in my system martials tend to be favored. They aren't more powerful, I think people just find them more fun to play.

But then again, I can understand how a 6 armed bug man that can move at mach 1 and attack 10 times a round would be as interesting as the elf floating 200 feet off the ground bathing the battlefield in lightning and lasers.

>>53924107
>I can understand how a 6 armed bug man that can move at mach 1 and attack 10 times a round
Unironically my 9th level human monk in PF (no 6 arms though but 10 attacks and mach 1, 3 if he spends some resources)
I still suck assess

>>53924015
>>53924068
Friendo, there's no need to troll or be rude. I've played characters from level 1-20 (after 17 years, it's happened a few times). I've given up characters that I enjoyed playing because (as a caster) they were too strong and overshadowed the martial party they were with - I know the problems. But you're not going to be able to fix the problem without giving martials some sort of magic, or stripping casters of some of there magic. To continue on with a vancian casting system, one thing that would need to happen would be to re-align casters and drop the top 3 levels off their spells. A full caster should go from level 1 spells to level 6 spells at 20th level to keep them basically on par with martials at similar levels. Then you would need to remove AoO from all combat maneuvers so that, in battle, from level 1 the martials have complete access to a range of battlefield control techniques. Also, the simplified feats system should always be in effect - feat taxes should be more limited than they are now and if used, should be improved. Also, disallow the creation of magic items. Doing all that would be a good first step toward evening out the disparity between martials and casters, but unless the martials have some sort of special abilities (like WFM) they will eventually get eclipsed, this way will just take longer

Unfortunately, you have to have a GM willing to do all that, and hope that casters will stay interested in casting enlarge person on the martial through level 4 rather than level 3 (and web to level 7) to continue playing the character.

>>53924151
Having lots of speed in PF doesn't give you any bonuses. In my system it does.

---------------------------

For every 4 points of speed the character can move an additional unit per action. Movement has a base score of 2 units.

For every 10 points of speed the character gains an additional action per turn. Characters have a base of two actions per turn.

For every 10 points of speed the character gains +1 to dodge, strike, initiative, reaction, and melee damage. See other attributes for the base score of these derived attributes.

-----------------------------

Game needs to be designed with the capability of moving fast in mind, or else it's going to be overpowered (typically what happens) or fall flat (PF super speed)

>>53908928
In 3.5 most fights are over inside of five rounds, which means summons last plenty long by the time you've reached fifth level, they don't take any more time to prepare than the Fighter takes to restore his hit points, and if the enemy can dispel then they're probably another caster and you don't need a front line anyway, you just need to spam save-or-dies and hope they miss their save first.

In 5e it is technically true that summons aren't as big a deal anymore, but undead and animated objects both serve the same niche.

>>53914505
If you are impressed by +4 to hit, +4 damage, +1 AC and some pocket change at 20th level, you have no idea how to Pathfinder.

>>53922895
>Because it's more efficient to buff the fighter
Nice joke.

Nobody who knows what they're doing is going to waste a spell slot on spells that deal damage, they're going to use their spell slots on the plethora of other spells that have the greatest chance to fuck up their opponents even if they manage to make their saves.

>>53922895
If you're killing monsters with damage, you're doing it wrong.

>>53924344
Best first level spells are color spray and enlarge person. At 3rd level spells it becomes a moot point whether or not to buff the fighter. With 5th level spells a caster doesn't need a party anymore.

>>53924945
Enlarge is 2nd I think

>>53908462
So you want to join in to the discussion, while adding nothing new?
You will fit right in, anon!

>>53916584
>anima
>not the most westaboo faux weeb system
Hahaha.
Yes anon play naruto inspired casters and not superior herculean demigods.

>>53908681

For what its worth, I started running 4e last month and have been enjoying it a lot. And I'm the kind of D&D GM who really only likes 0e whitebox D&D

>>53925464

Awesome man, glad to hear you're having fun. Did you get the memo on the mathfixes outlined in >>53918110 ? 4e works okay without them, but it took the devs an unfortunately long time to really understand their own game.

>>53918110
that image right there is why I dislike 4E. It just takes the strategising out i you can e safe that the monster there will have roughly standard HP and DPR values and stuff like outright immunity to weapon damage isn't a thing.

>>53908462
my way of doing it?

>As a caster levels, it becomes increasingly difficult to find and learn higher level magic
>From second level to third level, you go from being able to find the spell in most libraries to needing to go to dedicated magical libraries.
>By seventh level, you're only able to find new magic spells by looking through dungeon loot
>By 9th level, you'll only learn such spells by spending enough EXP to knock you back to level 1 and so much time you'd need to have extended your lifespan to figure out a level 9 spell or pry it from a seclusive master mage to whom such a spell would be their signature.

In otherwords: sure, they CAN warp reality.

But the odds of them actually figuring out how would be next to impossible.

Oh, also, monsters tend to have a sense for magical capability and will automatically target anything with aptitude for casting.

The stronger the caster, the further and wider and stronger monsters will come to devour them.

Also the more resistant they'll be to magic.

By the time dragons come for you, best to focus on buffing your martials.

>>53925570
The thing is, 4e also puts more emphasis on powers, positioning, status effects, and environmental effects; so the aim of combat isn't just draining the enemy's HP before they do it to you like it is in 3.PF or 5e.

In fact, I'd argue that it's the only modern D&D edition that actually requires strategy for combat since you're actively encouraged to use your powers as opposed to just spamming (full) attacks or SoD/SoL spells until the enemy is defeated.

>>53921664
No.

>>53915285
>but let's not pretend it's not magic.
Why not? My fantasy world has people that can do that shit. It's not magic it's just that the upper potential for all skill and physical capability is higher for the people in this world.

>>53926682
>it becomes increasingly difficult to find and learn higher level magic
Taking into account only wizards "need" to learn spells (they still gain 2 free per level) and the rest just learn them from free (Druid and Cleric know every spell of their list they just can't cast them yet) I dunno how that fixes anything

Congrats, you made Wizards slightly less OP (still they learn 2 for free and depending on the specialization they lear up to 5 for free per level), you basically put a bandaid in the great canyon and claimed you built a bridge

>>53926682
>Its a dude who knows nothing about the system claims he fixed it episode
Oh look they're reharshing last season

>>53925570
You are assuming that the mere numbers are what determines the capacity of npcs.
That is a poor assumption.

>>53925570
Is this bait?

>>53926709
>>53927375

Being fair, it's easy to see why people make that assumption. In prior editions of D&D those numbers were the majority of what made things different. 4e simplifies the numbers for functionality and focuses on powers, traits and the environment for adding depth and nuance, but for people who just look at the numbers without realising how much the system adds, I can see why it'd seem weak on the surface. A lot of the misunderstanding of 4e comes from people seeing structural changes without realising what those changes actually achieve.

>>53921664
According to what metric?
Real life mythology doesn't work that way.
Tolkien doesn't work that way.

File: Syndrome.jpg (28KB, 360x400px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 360x400px

Introduce a method of casting that martials may use.

>>53908462
>how is the martial supposed to compete?

MAGED

How to fix 3.5 class balance: pare your classes down to the ToB classes and the Bard.

There is literally no second step, Bards make fine primary casters.

>>53929012

Well, more broadly you can just stick with tier 3/4 classes and the game works okay. Limited casters and amplified martials.

>>53929064
Yeah, the underlying issues that are the mechanical design of 3.5 still remain though.

I'm not sure why those don't get more attention; the mechanics of 3.5 are complete ass.

>>53929098

Because every time you mention that the 3.PF defence force start going on and on about how it's a wonderful game and the only reason to talk badly about it is if you're a troll or a hater. That broken piece of shit is so fucking toxic.

>>53921237
>Number of people incapable of calculating probabilities of a roll for d20
what
how?

>>53921664
Magic isn't real, so realistically speaking no, they wouldn't be.

>>53929458
I don't know man! Sometimes I wonder if some of them even actually humans and not actually some alien creatures from other dimensions (definitely not a spacefaring species).

>>53927427
Tolkien casters are a poor comparison at best. Gandalf, who is one of the strongest casters in the world does all of three things - makes a barrier to protect himself from the Balrog, makes his staff light up, and calls some eagles to help hobbit shits get around (it's been awhile since I've READ the books, but I don't remember him using any more magic that that in them either - he might actually have used less). As far as casters go, he rates slightly below "witch that can turn you into a newt".

Anyway, OP was probably referring to Raistlin or Elminster.

Also "stronger" is all according to perspective. If you consider stronger to mean "bends reality to their whims" then you would be right that casters are stronger. If you consider stronger to mean wears kickass magical platemail and wields a sword the size of a small house, you're likely in martial territory.

>>53930024
One time he lightning bolted some goblins in the Hobbit.

>>53930024
Sets fire to pinecones to throw at wargs.

>>53930064

Also turning pinecones into magical incendiary grenades.

>>53908645
Beef up martials or nerf casters. Let a level 20 monk run at mach 1 without constructing their entire build just with high speeds in mind, allow a level 20 fighter to fall from 500 feet and walk away with minimal damage, allow a level 20 barbarian to knock down walls by charging at them. A level 20 archer should be able to slaughter a dozen regular men a round just firing normal arrows.

Alternatively make magic more restrictive and/or dangerous.

>>53930024
>If you consider stronger to mean "bends reality to their whims" then you would be right that casters are stronger. If you consider stronger to mean wears kickass magical platemail and wields a sword the size of a small house, you're likely in martial territory.
But wizards win in even in a face mashing contest. In case they want to be extremely smug they even can do it with their own hands if they chose the right spells.

>>53930210
>Beef up martials or nerf casters.

Why not both? I always thought it was bizarre the sheer magical power they give casters in 3.5. Cap them off at sixth level spells (I wasn't kidding about suggesting the bard be a primary caster) and then give martials some actual fucking options.

At this point I'm convinced that people that say casters win always forever are simply trolling because this ground has been well worn and tread upon and the only sort of magic system that exists in the D&D sort of magic that is viewed from the mechanical perspective rather than narrative one.

I don't know, someone had to say it.

>>53930375

...What?

>>53930024
>Raistlin or Elminster
>Main chars of books win
Don't fucking say
And Batman outran Flash without using his gadgets
Knocked Diana out in one puch
Survived being punched by an angry Zeus, and Ares
Survived the reentry on Earth and crashing against the surface at mach 20 without gadgets only his kevlar costume
Etc

Does that mean normal humans are tougher and stronger than gods and metahumans? fucking no, is just writer wank

>>53930601
Capeshit is always at infinite power level, the only question is which direction it's going on the number line.