>caster vs. martial thread >caster can have god-like reality

File: popeye feats.jpg (833KB, 800x5600px) Image search: [Google]

833KB, 800x5600px

why cant a fighter just develop the ability to deflect spells back to the user?

>>54965824
shut the fuck up

>>54965856
That's what mirror shields are for dumdum

>>54965824
Some nerds just won't accept jocks having a position of power when playing pretend.

>>54966066
this, though these threads are mostly meme at this point and i'm pretty sure no one is really that assmad about the idea

File: _tg_-_Traditional_Games_-_Search_mundane_transcend_-_2017-08-20_09.28.31.png (71KB, 1311x374px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1311x374px

>>54965824
This is relevant:

File: shut the fuck up.jpg (61KB, 614x676px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 614x676px

>>54965824
my muscles dont require/use up ammo

>>54966104
STAMINA BARS
MANA BARS
VANCIAN SYSTEM/USE PER DAY A SHIT
SHIIIIIIIIIIT

>>54966090
But if you could just train like a Saiyan and keep getting stronger, wouldn't everyone do that? Why would people read books when you could just kill a million rats and move mountains with your bare hands?

File: 1501299003988.jpg (311KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1280x720px

>>54965902
Thanks for the tears caster-fag

>>54966131
Gary didn't intend for casters to be a popular class, so go back to your fucking basement

>>54966131
>Why would people read books when you could just kill a million rats and move mountains with your bare hands?

Diminishing returns.

>>54966131
anyone can kill a million rats

>>54965824
Play something other than D&D.
Problem solved.

>>54966133
shut the fuck up, faggot.

>>54966066
>>54966090
>>54966104
>>54966170
you assholes shut the fuck up too.

>>54965824
When i play martials, i don't want them to have any arcane powers. I want them to be incredibly badass, but not reality-bending.
(That's why there is nostalgia for spell-less ranger.)

I think caster players and martials players both want to play slightly different tone of game.

>>54966104
They do, they're just called carbohydrates

What if you made it so whatever makes it difficult to cast magic while wearing heavy armor also inhibited also magic passing through heavy armor? Like, make it so that steel is a natural magical inhibitor so that characters in full plate get advantage on all their magic based saving throws or something.

>>54965824
Why do you assume most people who call out the power disparity for the bullshit it is want casters to have god level powers?

Casters should be at a power level that fits with the martials whatever that is in this setting. Or simply not be available as player classes if that is somehow impossible.

>>54965856
Because that wouldn't solve the problem. The real issue is utility and untargeted AoE control spells breaking the game.
A real spellcasters will pile in debuffs until you can't do shit, and then send in allies or summoned creatures to kill you.

>>54965824
Martials, will they ever learn?

>>54965824
Martials do have Hercules level strength on D&D by high level. Does anyone even play D&D here?

>>54966961
Sure but nobody ever thinks "wow that guy with 18 strength is like hercules" because d&d these days just hands out stats at 18 or higher at level 1, they aren't a huge important thing and the game is practically built around the fact that if you're playing a strength based class you better have at least 18 strength or you're garbage. Replace strength for whatever primary stat your class uses

>>54965824
>martial can't have hercules level strength because it's "unrealistic"
Please, they're not even allowed to perform Olympic level feats cause some out-of-shape retards can barely bring themselves to do a half-dozen push-ups.

>>54966131
That's a monumentally idiotic point of view. Just as well, why the fuck would anyone kill a million fucking rats when you can just read fucking books and move mountains?

>>54967082
>he doesnt roll a straight D20 for all his stats

dont know who you met but they're playing wrong

>>54967082
This is why I play OSR games. Modern D&D is bullshit.

>>54966131
>But if you could just train like a Saiyan and keep getting stronger, wouldn't everyone do that?

Because hard work is hard, which is why people are fat and lazy?

>>54966961
They don't actually have herculean strength. They have very high strength and can thus carry a lot, hit well and hit hard. But Hercules can hold up the literal sky. He can divert a river with his hands.

While there are spells that do that, there is no support in the system to do things like that as a martial class.

>>54967245
This is truth.

Also
>But if you could just study like a wizard and keep getting stronger, wouldn't everyone do that?

>>54967082
In 5E you can't have any stat above 17 at level 1 by raw points buy... Only way to do it is to get lucky using rolled stats in which case it is more of a 'woah moment'.

You can have an ability score increase at level 4 which can bring you to 18 but by level 4 you're getting really powerful anyway.

Again does anybody here actually play D&D?

File: tfw2.png (312KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 600x600px

>his dm doesnt balance melee players with buffed items to make them viable when paired with magic users

tfw

>>54966843
>When i play martials, i don't want them to have any arcane powers. I want them to be incredibly badass, but not reality-bending.
'Reality bending' is a function of level, not character class.

>>54965824
Limit casters' range of spells. Make them have to specialise to get anything out of their powers. A fireball-wizard cannot open locks by magic, unless they're trained in... whatever magic discipline would allow them to do that.

I mean, it wouldn't work in D&D, because even magic specialisation is fucking broken in that system. But if I were making a system from scratch, that's what I would do.

>>54967285
>what is spellbook page limits
>what is 1 spell a page
>what is forcing the gathering of components


its easy to neuter a wizard if you play dnd the right way

File: retarded-pepe-interdasting.jpg (11KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 250x250px

>waaah wizards are broken when you play them wrong mechanically!!!!!

>>54967257
Not him but I think the problem with 5e's bounded everything prevents people from actually being Hercules
Your average Commoner has 10(+0) into everything. A Hercules has 20(+5) into Strength
In an arm-wrestle, the commoner still has a like 40% to win

>>54967358
>5e

theres your problem

>>54965824
I want to differentiate my martial class. What do you think of my work in progress?

Barbarian - Brute: with an attack the barbarian can also chose to shove, prone* or grapple (1 max)

Fighter - counter attack: one* attack action against attacker.

Monk - zone*: within the monk melee striking range (martial art striking range leason)

Paladin - retribution*: receive half damage rounded down, return damage receive rounded up against attacker

Ranger* - precise strike: ranger always hit his mark within inner range, deal half damage rounded up if attack roll is lower than target ac.

Rogue - exploit*: backstabbing rework

Prone*: recommend for adventage attack with melee for critical, broken?
One*: same as extra attack or no?
Retribution*: might give it to monk instead
Ranger*: a ranger never miss. Nothing gain, but steady damage.
Zone*: can't think of a fluff for it
Exploit*: meh

>>54967255
>commoners exist
There's your reason.

>>54967366
>>i think the problem with 5e
>5e has problems
Thanks for the quality post

>>54967379
p good, gonna show this to my DM

>>54967405
>memes
>>sarcasm
Find a rope to hang.

File: yay.png (31KB, 720x644px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 720x644px

>>54967405

>>54965824
Magic, in any meaning, is a placeholder for any kind of technology or set of skills that is yet to be sufficiently understood by the general populace. Think of historical events like witch hunts.

THEREFORE, supremacy of magic over mundane skills is a must. And that is ok, because magic should be exorbitantly costly and ultimately limited in its application. It should require time and sacrifice. If your game system does not sufficiently reflect this balance, change your system.

These guys get it:
>>54966104
>>54967300

>>54967300
Sure, but it still feels weird that wizards just get a big box of toys labelled "magic" as they level up, instead of having to pick and choose what powers they actually want. Skyrim (and Oblivion and Morrowind before it) at least got that right: a Destruction mage, an Alteration mage and an Illusion mage will all have radically different skillsets, which in turn will massively influence how they play.

Also, being forced to gather and keep track of the materials needed to cast basic spells sounds like tedious bookkeeping, and screw that. I don't want to stop magic-users from having fun - I just want their fun to complement everyone else's.

File: ATP.png (72KB, 469x277px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 469x277px

>>54966104
>my muscles dont require/use up ammo

>>54966938
then deflect the debuffs back to the caster

>>54967462
this is literally only an issue at lvl 7+ and that point you should have multiclassing/prestige classing happening. If your melee characters cant keep up by then, they're retarded

>>54965824
Wouldn't they just become casters if they could that?

>>54967445
>Magic, in any meaning, is a placeholder for any kind of technology or set of skills that is yet to be sufficiently understood by the general populace

No it isn't you moron.

dual wielding greatword warrior 4life

just make a warrior magic
i mean
something that makes sense the warrior become as op as mage
something like his will became so strong that his soul acts on his body strengthing it

File: 1503208533868.jpg (66KB, 960x676px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 960x676px

>>54965824

its magic
it is literally cheating reality

>>54966938
>Because that wouldn't solve the problem. The real issue is utility and untargeted AoE control spells breaking the game.
Honestly, this just sounds like your fighter isn't being creative.
I have a hard time believing that Hercules (or any sufficiently powerful martial character) wouldn't be able to use their strengths and skills for utility or to counter AoE spells.
Acting like your inability to find creative solutions using strength and skill is evidence there are none is just silly.

>>54966938
Pretty dumb, high level melees are stronger than elephants.
>throw a fucking boulder
Now you have your mundane AoE.

>>54967191
That's why you require 25 push-ups to join the group. It's a surprisingly great way to filter the biggest shitheads.

>>54968076
The crossover of the venn diagram of "Can do 25 pushups" and "wants to play dnd" is fairly slim.

Get them to do like... 8-10 burpees without stopping. It requires less actual dedication to fitness. (I'd be suprised if someone who wasn't actively doing something to work out their arms for a few minutes a day could reach 25 without sweating so hard playing with them for the next three hours requires a gas mask.) but puts enough strain on the legs to know that they're not complete fucking slobs.

File: 423423421.jpg (57KB, 555x614px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 555x614px

>>54968076

>>54967246

A high level barbarian 17+ , which Hercules is, can get a strength of 24 giving them a +7 , and a +12 skill bonus in athletics with the brawny feat, for a total of +19

A DC 35 check is for a nearly impossible task such as the heroic feats you describe which means the barbarian can achieve them on a d20' roll of 16 or more. Admittedly difficult, though give them advantage, such as from their friend Iolaus helping them , and they have effectively a +5 bonus so it's closer to 11 or a 45% chance roughly.

So by RAW it's possible for a high level martial to do feats like that. The problem is DM's balking at it and just saying no because they don't understand how relative power levels and DC values are are meant to work.

>>54966131
Why would anyone kill a million rats when you could just read books?

>>54967782

Because 5e doesn't have a mechanic to cover situations like punching a mage in the throat or solar plexus to make him or her unable to say verbal spells, or to break their fingers so they can't use somatic spells.

Once wizards get into the mid levels, they are the most important and useful characters and the rest of the party is just there to stop them from being bum rushed.

>>54968235
I always ruled grappling would make non mental spell nearly impossile to cast.
It's pretty obvious.

>>54968235
>Because 5e doesn't have a mechanic to cover situations
1. That's a 5e mechanics deficit problem, not a caster vs. martial problem

2. You are implying that if there is no mechanic to resolve something, it can't be done.
>Suddenly no characters can breathe or digest food!

3. >>54968288
This

>>54968235

In D&D you describe what you want to do, and the DM narrates this and works out an appropriate roll if applicable.

If you describe yourself doing an action outside of the rules the DMS role is literally to facilitate that. So if you describe crushing a windpipe to stop someone doing somatic you work out an appropriate roll ( say strength Vs opposed Dex/strength to avoid) and go for it.

Seriously does nobody play D&D here? Or do you only autistically follow what's in the book like it's some video game manual and do nothing outside it wh n the entire point of the rules is to facilitate you doing things outside of them because it's.impossible for any rules set to explicitly have rules for every conceivable action.

>>54968435

I play DnD but the DM is one of those autists.

>>54968477

I think this is the main problem really. Bad GMs will follow whatever the spell does as they're explicitly written down but ignore when the martial wants to do something interesting because it's not explicitly written down.

>>54968477
>I play DnD but the DM is one of those autists
For all the shit /co/ gives to forgists, I'd make obligatory to understand to concept on social contract before starting any type of rpg.
People should make sure to be on the same page before the game.
People should understand that DMs can't be anal and players can't be assholes.

>>54968134
Ironically, cripple of the cart-bound type is likely to have stronger arms than average person of the same demographic.
And you can always trade push-ups for pull-up at 1:1. I'm sure nobody would object to that.

>>54965824
Monks should have this but fighters should just get so ridiculously skilled at combat that they're basically untouchable

File: negi_vs_rakan.jpg (817KB, 750x1087px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 750x1087px

PERSONALLY, I don't think "martial" alone should be a source of power, and I think that everything should have a source of power. No matter how absurd it is, if it's more than normal, we deserve solid crunch and fluff as to why and HOW.

For magic, we get the explanation that the reason why someone can do things that are unexplainable is that they are pulling energy they don't have from somewhere else and acting as a conduit. From such we get "spells", which are rules that somehow change the nature of the base game into something concrete. They have a duration, range, power level, and set effect. Wunderbar.
Doesn't matter from which higher level of reality magic is drawing from, we know that that is what is happening.

Now, in some systems there is Body arts/Chi/Psionics, which is another form of magic that stems from the body and mind respectively. These are also fantastic, because even though some of the effects may be unreasonable, they are set in duration, range, effect, etc.
I love these, especially when a ki mechanic is set with either spells or martial arts techniques. Some of them CAN be foils for external magic, if not being straight up equal.

Now, so long as there are set rules, and a logical source, everything is good, BUT, it gets stupid when you don't accept logical sources and rules. When you want it to completely and without fail upend both the base level game, AND the magic rules, and then having some sort of complete aversion to anything that says "anime". No.
Get out, and shut the fuck up.

Example: Tome of battle in 3.5. Perfectly valid, worked well, had techniques that expressed higher degrees of martial power. Shat on.

4e, had a martial power source that had a defined role, and did it well. The powers were well defined, and explained well, and even if they were CRAZY, they were explained and defined well. Probably best iteration of fighter in DnD. Shat on. Also, mind you, had rituals that everyone could do.
But without rule or limit? No.

>>54968529
No frankly that's the game's problem. The DM shouldn't be required to make a ruling every time a player wants to do something more interesting than attacking for hit point damage - it's a huge extra burden and if you have to rule on the spot it's always going to be inconsistent and overpowered or unfair from the player's perspective or something...

Magicians get abilities that interact with the game world in clearly defined ways - so should everyone else if they're playing the same game.

>>54968036
Not every place is going to have a boulder and even if it did, you'd still only be doing 1d4+STR damage with it.

Not to mention, STR is pathetically weak in 5e since your carrying capacity is STR*15 lbs while lift/drag/etc. is STR*30. So in order to lift a one ton (2000 lbs.) boulder, a martial needs a STR score of 135 for their carrying capacity and a STR score of 67 for their lift/drag/etc.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but you're better off playing 3.PF if your aim is to throw boulders because in this game, that's just not happening.

>>54966141
>Gary didn't intend for casters to be a popular class

>Mages have access to dozens of spells.
>Each spell has its own unique material components and effects.
>Mages are capable of one-shotting entire encounters if they aren't killed by level 5.
>Also one of the few things in earlier D&D that's actually clearly written with an upper limit.
>Has the fastest means of healing.

>Gary didn't intend for casters to be a popular class
Then he REALLY fucked up then. Think about it, I could be some faggot swinging a sword around in the hopes that the DM gives me a bonus for aiming at his legs or I could be a magic user and cast a spell that shoots a lightning bolt that bounes off solid objects, potentially one-shotting anything in one hit if you manage to angle it correctly.

Yeah, I start off with shit HP, THAC0, and AC. Sure, my spells give me penalties to my initiative depending on how powerful it is, but dammit, there's something inherently satisfying about casting spells.

>>54965824
at least you have the decency to lead by up and saying this is a troll thread

>>54966961
see >>54968817
Martials are about as Herculean as the people who wrote the rules.

>>54965824
>>martial can't have hercules level strength because it's "unrealistic"


By your logic, if christians think god can move faster than light, they must also think that scifi with faster than light travel is realistic

>>54967281
You really can't.

>>54965824
Caster gets dissolved by Gelatinous Cube while a teenager. Martial cuts it up and serves Jello while a teenager.

So fucking stupid...

>>54965824
martials have every right to become as good as casters when they get remodeled to have a resource management system that has the same outcomes for running out of resources just like casters.

Why do people think that Barbarian is so much better then fighters most of the time?

On a side note why the fuck do people still go on about caster supremacy after save-or-suck theory has being disproved mathematically for years? Play a buff caster is just better most of the time.

>>54968817
I concur that strenght is dumbed down in 5e but:
- martial caster disparity is lower, so 5e is not a main contender for this topic.
- it's easy to refluff rules. when you are stronger than an elephant in a human body, who cares about mundane carrying capacity? and assign a proportional damage.

>>54967082
Because GMs are just bad these days and they do not understand that handing out high starting stats breaks the game, or rather the CR system.

>>54968076
I have a shoulder tear, how much do I have to squat to get in?

I hate high lvl characters. You should only be able to reach them thanks to divine patronage.

>>54968435
Two things.
1) The rules are supposed to be there to show what is or isn't possible to do by your average PC.
2) The rules are there to set the tone of the game and maintain internal consistency.
If the DM has to invent new rules every time the player does anything that's more involved than "I attack, I hit, I deal XdY damage" then that's an issue with the rules, not the DM

As someone who has run dozens of games over the years, you get really overwhelmed incredibly quick when you have to juggle the world, the NPC's, the antagonists, and the mechanics while still obfuscating the rules as much as possible from the party, who expects that all of their decisions will have merit.

>>54968986
Not him but I think at least 1 or 2 platelmao

>>54968235
I'm fiddling with the idea of homebrewing an Inquisitor/Witch Hunter class that focuses on battlefield control and being able to essentially use a reaction to attack a mage with what amounts to a poor man's counterspell (that is, shooting the bastard to interrupt the incantation). Any ideas for such a thing?

>>54966938
why can't casters and martials both have access to the same type of energies, and use them differently? One uses them to buff their body the other to modify the outside world.
that way the ability of a spellcaster to apply debuffs on a martial will also depend on the martial's level and martial techniques

Part of the issue is that GM are often more reluctant to give magic weapons and armor than spells to the wizard.

File: 061105.jpg (270KB, 692x546px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 692x546px

>>54968771
Okay genius, what's your solution to resolving the situation where the player wants to do something that doesn't have mechanics explicitly written for it in the rules?
Do you simply say "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it?"
>tfw the characters still can't breathe

>>54968910
you really can tho

>>54967281
A) Magic Item-based itemization is cancer
B) It doesn't solve the core issue of the wizard's debuffs and AoE

>>54969141
>i dont like it so its cancer
>it doesnt take away caster abilities waaaah

>>54968940
>martial caster disparity is lower
"Lower" is not the same as "non-existent" though and even then, it's not that there isn't a disparity, it's just that it's less obvious than it was in 3.PF.
>when you are stronger than an elephant in a human body
Your average elephant can lift ~300kg (~661 pounds) with its trunk, so your average martial would need a STR score of 45 to carry that weight and 23 to lift it.
>who cares about mundane carrying capacity?
I do, because if a 20 is supposed to be the upper echelon of physical strength, it'd make sense that the numbers match the fluff.

What's the point of investing points in STR when it doesn't give you anything to use that STR with?

>>54968900
Can't move the prime mover, amigo.

>>54969039
>The rules are supposed to be there to show what is or isn't possible to do by your average PC.
I agree that certain systems have a deficit regarding this, forcing the martial PC to be creative.

>If the DM has to invent new rules every time the player does anything that's more involved than
Okay then, please address this question >>54969124

>>54969049
just make it a feat/talent.
classes with specialized enemies are bad design.

>>54969064
>why can't casters and martials both have access to the same type of energies, and use them differently?
The most common answer I see to this is, "But the the martial is just another caster!"
I really never saw a problem with martials being so martial that they're effectively magic.

>>54969162
If you admit it's lower, just agree wih me.
>Your average elephant
Did you actually check how much an elephant can lift?
I surrender to your autism.
>20
Str can get much higher than 20.
>What's the point of investing points in STR when it doesn't give you anything to use that STR with?
I wrote that it SHOULD. The point was to make it count more.

>>54969124
>>54969164
>Do you simply say "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it?"
Yes, because it means that the game is not meant to account for that specific circumstances because it doesn't align with the premise being set by the game.

Even then, this is assuming that there's NOTHING in the rules giving even a vague hint of how shit could work. Like there's no rules for molotov cocktails in the Shadowrun 5e CRB but there are rules for improvised weapons and fire damage, so it can make them and not break anything because of it.

In games like CoC on the other hand, it wouldn't make sense to give you rules for reach weapons since it's more of a horror/mystery game and most creatures in CoC will damage your sanity or outright kill you anyways.

>>54969210
well I mean if they surpass human limits their strength is effectively supernatural. You can either achieve this by magic or technology.
And I don't really see how they are casters, since tthey don't cast, but just get stronger.
If you don't like them having the same source for their pwoers you could use something different. Casters have access to myscital energy while martials use vital energy, which makes their bodies stronger, tougher more agile etcetera. And gives resistance to magic.
Alternatively magic is a very difficult and time intensive subject and magicians need to specialize in order to have any kind of proficiency. Kind of like IRL becoming a doctor or a physicist or an engineer and then having to choose a specialization in those fieldsand having to dedicate years to master it.
So casters could become very powerful, on a very limited aspect of magic, or have a wide array of relatively weak spells.

>>54969040
I'd let them pass if they can rack 2 plate without being told the weight in lbs/kg

>>54969251
>Did you actually check how much an elephant can lift?
Yes I did.
>http://www.elephantsforever.co.za/elephants-faq.html
>Str can get much higher than 20.
It can, for the same reasons that you can go up to level 20. You're not going to break that threshold in most games so citing its existence is worthless for this discussion.
>The point was to make it count more.
How? I mean, you could increase the carrying capacity but it's not going to necessarily fix the stat in and of itself,.

>>54969324
>It can, for the same reasons that you can go up to level 20. You're not going to break that threshold in most games so citing its existence is worthless for this discussion.
Moving the goalpost. Low level martial means low levels caster, so you point is moot.
>How?
Ad ex following 5e philosophy of rulings not rules. High str martial want to throw a boulder? Just make it a str + prof + other stuff check. Without putting the boulder on a fucking scale. DC should make it possible for "herculean" warrior. Math is pretty simple for that.
And that just to endear you, because your starting point was pretty dumb even without considering strenght.

>>54967462
If gathering spells resources is tedious bookkeeping, you have a shit imagination or your DM is shit.

You need like a 10,000+gp value diamond to cast wish? "But where am I gonna get a diamond that valuable that's so specific bawwww"

Guess what? Maybe you shouldn't be able to cast Wish willy fuckin' nilly, maybe you're only gonna cast it once in the life of this entire character, that sounds right out of a fantasy novel (funny how we're playing a fantasy game), guess you're gonna have to wait and see if a dragon you slay has a diamond like that in its hoard, or maybe you can contract the Thieve's Guild to steal one for you - OH NO, YOU'RE FORCED TO ROLE PLAY! IN A ROLEPLAYING GAME! OH FUCKING NO

No, you can't cast polymorph, you don't have a butterfly cocoon. No, you've been in the underdark/a fucking desert for three weeks, you haven't once told me you want to keep an eye out for spell resources (if you do that enough I guarantee I will throw you a bone and a plot hook - you spot what you think is the right flower for your spell, it's not, but it is growing out of the decomposing corpse of a dead adventurer, his mouldy but sill full coin purse clutched in one skeletal hand), and do you think this is an area where butterflies will thrive? Maybe you should have checked at the forest at the mouth of the cave/oasis.

FUCKING ROLEPLAY YOU NUMBER-CRUNCHING TURBOAUTISTS

Make everybody use magic; someone uses it to throw fireballs, others to punch monsters

Reduce caster power.

Merge them with clerics. Call them a Sage.

Sages are now the support class, good at healing, buffs, and debuffs but is not a combat powerhouse like a Fighter.

All classes contribute out of combat. Fighters as leaders of men, Rogues as lock pickers and sneaky people, Sages with identifying items and cantrip spells to set up camp and the like.

GG, no RE.

Do all of this meme threads exist to provoke 4e nostalgia?
Are we in a conspiracy?

>>54969421
thanks for backing me up there buddy

>>54969421
This is a really important yet often ignored part.
spell components are not super common. or they shouldn't be. reality defying spells are insanely hard to cast, even with the knowledge of such

File: Autistic Wiznard screeching.png (411KB, 3555x2198px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 3555x2198px

>itt

>>54969482
Is there a non weeaboo version of anima?

>>54969381
>Moving the goalpost.
Not really.
> Low level martial means low levels caster,
Wasn't implying that, your average campaign will end somewhere between level 9-12, and this metric is based off of personal experience, adventure modules, and surveys polled on WotC's website.
>High str martial want to throw a boulder? Just make it a str + prof + other stuff check.
The feat "Tavern Brawler" already grants this bonus.
>Without putting the boulder on a fucking scale. DC should make it possible for "herculean" warrior.
And what exactly would you set the DC for in order to lift a boulder? Also, the funny thing is that a because of how bounded accuracy works, a Bard with 16 STR and Expertise in Athletics has a better chance to lift a boulder than a Barbarian with 20 STR.
>And that just to endear you, because your starting point was pretty dumb even without considering strenght.
If you're going to call someone stupid, it'd help if you didn't misspell the last word in the sentence.

>>54969421
Spell component pouches exist faggot.

Nice try though.

>>54969471
>>54969421
>>54967462
Making people gather spell components before every single dungeon crawl just forces the narrative to focus on the mage and gives less opportunity for non-caster classes to roleplay effectively.

Chances are, the quest to claim 10,000gp worth of diamonds is going to be way more interesting than watching the Fighter polish his sword for a few hours and even if you found a way to incorporate other classes into the shenanigans, it's not going to offset the fact the premise that the rest of the party are accessories to the mage's bullshit rather than actual characters.

>>54969499
>Not really.
Yes, really.
>your average campaign
Even if true, and it probably is, it does not help your point. Or you should re-counstruct your point.
>which DC
I just described it. I can't spoonfeed you numbers, no time.
>bounded accuracy
Interesting, but wrong. You can rule martial stunts get prof bonus only with martial. You can decide that a str + atl focused bard should be able to lift and throw boulders. You can rule that expertise should be limited to realistic checks only.
>If you're going to call someone stupid, it'd help if you didn't misspell the last word in the sentence.
If you're going to check grammar, it'd help if you had any reading comprehension.
I never called you stupid, just your point.

File: Welcome to Moth.png (52KB, 813x664px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 813x664px

>>54969494
Over-the-top does not always equal weeb, anon.
You could do a campaign set in Moth, for example.

>>54965824
>>54966090
The problem is that herculean strength, or godlike sword mastery, or resurrection abilities through medicine all feel like magic. If my martial class was as strong as reality warping powers, I would have to justify that in some way. Very quickly, it ends up feeling like I'm not just a good swordsman, but like I'm actively using magic to improve my capabilities. My fighter can't have supernatural abilities and also be totally without magic.

That is to say, true non magic classes, by definition, cannot have abilities beyond the capacity of the human body.

>>54969624
/thread

>>54969593
>Yes, really.
Not really.
>you should re-counstruct your point.
It's not my fault that you misunderstood my point.
> I can't spoonfeed you numbers, no time.
How long does it take to give me a number? Even if you say "oh, it's pretty hard" that'd still give a DC to work with.
>You can rule martial stunts get prof bonus only with martial.
That doesn't really work though since anyone could feasibly gain proficiency with any skill they want, thanks to feats and backgrounds.
>You can rule that expertise should be limited to realistic checks only.
I hope you realize the irony of citing realism while talking about someone throwing boulders around.
>If you're going to check grammar, it'd help if you had any reading comprehension.
Coming from someone whose too "busy" to give me a DC, it wouldn't surprise me if you couldn't be arsed to check your spelling.

>>54969624

Magic =/= Arcane magic.

Yes in fantasy worlds everyone has 'magic', but magic is not some separate force of reality but instead a part of it. There are no atoms and bacteria on the fantasy world, the four elements are real and disease is caused by evil spirits. The 'physical limitations of the human body' in this world INCLUDE throwing boulders around, because this world isn't the real world and doesn't play by the same rules. If everyone has magic, then nobody has it.

>>54969688
>If everyone has magic, then nobody has it.
That's incredibly fucking stupid. Just because everyone has a quirk in "My Hero Academia" or furies in "Codex Alera" doesn't mean that they stop being fantastical abilities.

>>54969163
WUT?

>>54969728

Imagine an alternate world like ours but everyone can shoot eye lasers. It's well understood and common in human history, people often write books about the great eye laser wars of 1647 and scientists disect eyes to demonstrate to their students how the eye laser organ works.

Are shooting eye lasers in this world "magic"?

>>54969684
>misunderstood
Maybe you should write better.
>How long does it take
Dunno, don't care. If you refuse the concept, you will refuse any number.
>That doesn't really work though since anyone could feasibly gain proficiency with any skill they want, thanks to feats and backgrounds.
? That's completely off topic.
>I hope you realize the irony of citing realism while talking about someone throwing boulders around.
Don't be anal. Call it coherent simulationism. If you have problem with throwing bards, it's your fault. I'm just trying to give you option.
>Coming from someone whose too "busy" to give me a DC, it wouldn't surprise me if you couldn't be arsed to check your spelling.
Can you just admit that you got this one wrong?
If it makes you feel better, I can call you stupid. Not really important to me.

>>54969770
>Are shooting eye lasers in this world "magic"?
Yes. Was that supposed to be a trick question?

>>54969688
I like playing martial classes because they're non magic. I want to triumph over obstacles through human ingenuity and might, and I think non magic options in rpgs, like the champion archetype as opposed to the eldritch knight archetype, exist to satisfy this desire. I wouldn't want to be in a campaign like you are describing, where everyone has magic abilities.

>>54969803

No, it's not a trick question. It's just to highlight your stupidity is all. Either you ate literally autistic and can't understand a different frame of reference or you're just "trolling" me by playing dumb. Either way, you can stew in your shit taste. Ciao.

>>54969782
>Maybe you should write better.
Maybe you should demonstrate some of that reading comprehension next time.
>Dunno, don't care.
Then why bring it up?
>That's completely off topic.
It really isn't, what's the point of restricting prof. bonus to "martial stunts" when anyone can gain access to those martial stunts by default?
>Call it coherent simulationism.
Or you can not be a pretentious bellend and just call it "internal consistency."
>If you have problem with throwing bards, it's your fault.
I don't have a problem with throwing Bards, I'm just saying that arbitrarily restricting shit to martials only doesn't really fix the problem when STR is already a dump stat by default.
>Can you just admit that you got this one wrong?
Can you? Also, I thought you were busy and didn't care.
>If it makes you feel better, I can call you stupid.
You could, it wouldn't be true, but you could.

File: 1500141757784.jpg (84KB, 582x380px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 582x380px

>>54969831
>Ciao
Kk, see you later.

>>54969748
Conceptions of the divine cultivated by traditional (i.e. non-heretical) Christian thought are predominantly non-personalistic and rooted either in Aristotelian-Thomist teleology (refer to SEP for a quick rundown on this one) or some weird Orthodox panentheistic mysticism mojo bullshit, or whatever those schismatic savages want to believe in their Siberian mud huts.

>>54969256
>it wouldn't make sense to give you rules for reach weapons
So no character can use reach weapons?
Do the weapons simply not exist?
Or do the characters just not know how to use them, no matter how poorly, like a vidya character too low on level to operate a hat?

>Yes, because it means that the game is not meant to account for that specific circumstances because it doesn't align with the premise being set by the game.
I get what you're going for here, but "No, your action fantasy hero character can't jump over the table and swing from the chandelier because there's nothing in the rules for it." is always going to be stupid and defeatest.

>>54970017
>So no character can use reach weapons?
They can damage someone with it but there's no inherent rules for, say, keeping something at length with a spear.
>Do the weapons simply not exist?
They exist, they just wouldn't grant any inherent perks like they would in a more combat oriented system like D&D.
>Or do the characters just not know how to use them, no matter how poorly, like a vidya character too low on level to operate a hat?
See above.
>I get what you're going for here, but "No, your action fantasy hero character can't jump over the table and swing from the chandelier because there's nothing in the rules for it." is always going to be stupid and defeatest.
If there aren't rules in your action fantasy hero system for a) moving through combat, b) jumping to reach high areas, and c) how much time a turn takes to resolve then you have bigger issues.

As I said before, this is assuming that there's NOTHING in the rules to give a vague sense of how it happens.

>>54965856
The caster-martial disparity is not about PVP, it's about roleplaying options. Giving the fighter an ability to deflect spells makes him better at dealing with spells. It doesn't let him fly, use telepathy, summon creatures, conjure items out of thin air etc. A prepared wizard can do all that an solve any roleplaying situation or puzzle while the fighter sits around polishing his sword and wishing he could swing his +5 beatstick of hitting at some orcs, which is the only thing he's capable of doing.

Why not just play Exalted?

>>54969815
Players like you are why I worked out the three non-magical character types that can operate on the same level as magic users, without using magic.
1. The Elite Skilled: He's just that good.
2. Captain Diplomancer: He fights with allies, not magic.
3. Utilitarian Knowledge Keeper: He's more knowledgeable than anyone and has the equipment to use it.

and

4. Magic Warrior: He's not magic, but his sword is.

>>54970138
>there's no inherent rules for, say, keeping something at length with a spear.
So nobody in that world can keep something at length with a spear?

And the chandelier jumping was an example.

>>54968914
>after save-or-suck theory has being disproved mathematically for years?
It hasn't though. The vast majority of enemies have a weak save, with Outsiders being the main exception, and those saves can still be overpowered with sufficient focus. Haste is nice but Glitterdusting orcs/golems for an all but guaranteed blind is an instant win.

>>54970321
why cant the fighter just leap high enough to "fly", punch holes through solid rock, and use sheer heroic willpower to disspell illusions

>>54969523
Oh good, you have a pocket. You can put things YOU FIND VIA ROLE PLAYING in it.

Otherwise, fuck off to whatever Korean MMO whose mechanics you love so much. You won't need your imagination there.

>>54970395
Wouldn't that just be a DEX contest? One person trying to get inside the spear's point and the spear user maneuvering their weapon to prevent that? Seems straightforward as far as ruling goes.

As for the main topic, I'm new to GM'ing and I am a bit worried about some spells. Is it a good idea to just ban some of the worse offenders or does that not work out usually?

There's a tendency for players and DMs alike to believe that without magic a character shouldn't be able to achieve the unrealistic
good examples of just from 5e of martials accomplishing the impossible without magic is totem barbarian achieving limited flight and monk deflecting projectiles (I had to argue with a DM before he let me use that one because it was "unrealistic" despite us having wizards in the party)
Barbarians should be able to pull trees out of the ground, Fighters should be able to cleave through the fabric of reality and monks should be able to walk on raindrops

>>54968745
>we deserve solid crunch and fluff as to why and HOW.
Considering that most systems don't even do this for one power source, I think having it for everything is a pretty high bar.

>>54968900
Christian here. If the FTL power is based on reflecting God's nature as beyond space and time, then I would consider that to be hard sci-fi.

>>54970774
...and Divination Wizard can throw his portent BS around even in an antimagic field

>>54969064
That happened

Everyone complained, called all martials casters, and now wotc can't use anything from 4e despite it having a ton of good design elements because it causes the 3.5fags to go into fits of autistic screeching

The thing that really roasts my nuts about vanilla 3.5 and 5e is the dumbfuck player base assumption that anything superhuman has to be magic, and that resistance to magic is a magical property.

>>54970395
>So nobody in that world can keep something at length with a spear?
They could, but you gotta remember, the example was from CoC which is not a system built around combat.

Even if you did rule something that gave people an edge for using a spear, it wouldn't matter because 95% of the shit you find in CoC is built around either killing sanity or killing investigators (as in, XdY player characters die).

>>54965856
Because that's weeaboo nonsense

>>54970768
Most of the truly broken things are fine if you follow all rules and use some common sense. The problem is, almost no one does that.

Take Wish for example. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned that a one of the spell components is a flawless diamond worth at least 10,000 gold pieces. This item should be so rare that most kingdoms will not have one and if they do it is considered a priceless artifact as it is a flawless diamond the size of a baseball.

Going down to simpler spells lets look at Fireball. In 5E it requires a bit of bat guano and some sulfer (the reagents are two of the three basic ingredients in gunpowder). If the wizard is forced to buy and track their ammo it becomes a tool instead of an "I win combat" button. Now add on that both of those ingredients are damaged by water and the wizard has to actually think about what they are doing.

>>54970654
If you own a component pouch, you can basically eschew the material cost of the spell unless it states that the material component is consumed by the spell.

So for most spells, you don't have to go searching high and low for shit as long as you have a component pouch on hand.

Also, It's called an Role-Playing Game for a fucking reason fucknugget. If you're not going to respect the "Game" then you don't really deserve any "RolePlay."

>>54971965
>DM's
>Accounting for environmental effects
>When martials get shat on the worst for it.
Funny guy, oi I'm LAFFIN!

>>54971646
Considering AMF is a spell...they aren't wrong.

File: Alan_Moore.jpg (86KB, 605x598px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 605x598px

>>54971828
Bitch, who are the ancient greek heroes?

>>54971965
In 5e material components are not expended unless the spell explicitly states a) their price in gold pieces and b) that they are, in fact, consumed in the process of casting. Also, any nonconsumable components can be substitued for with a spellcasting focus of certain value.

>>54969624
>That is to say, true non magic classes, by definition, cannot have abilities beyond the capacity of the human body.

that's the result of a confused definition of magic. nobody would have called beowulf a magician but he's certainly beyond realistic human limits. in general, the idea of magic is vague enough that it only has clearly defined meaning in the context of a particular setting or belief system.

not that it would bother me if you decided that, in your own setting, martials are tapping into some kind of magical power. that's up to the DM. the important thing is the system gives martials the mechanical tools they need to stay relevant and the DM and the player can choose how to interpret that in fluff terms.

>>54968203
In effective gameplay, things like what Hercules did would be "epic" checks, not simply "almost impossible", which are things like scaling a rock wall with no gear in the rain, pinning an angry Auroch to the ground, talking down an assassin, etc.

Compare it to the check to balance on a cloud, which is DC 80. Keep in mind also that if you wanted to use Athletics to reroute a river, you need to put a ton of points into it, and fighters only get 2+int skill points per level. To hit the DC required, they probably also need feats and other specializations.

It would be possible to make a character who is super focused around Athletics to make them move a river, but a mage could just spend one of their level 4(?) spells on Move Earth with no other investment.

>>54969256
>>Do you simply say "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it?"
>Yes, because it means that the game is not meant to account for that specific circumstances
>>54971826
>they could
I thought we were supposed to say, "No you can't keep something at length with a spear because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it?"

>>54971965
Fireball hasn't been an I-Win button since 2E unless you count Dazing Spell from PF.

Spell component pouches also specifically state that you're always assumed to have the spell components/focuses needed to cast a spell unless they have a material cost.

>>54968912
Actually, weapons are less effective against gelatinous cubes, who have resistances, while a mage has a higher chance of damaging it effectively with elemental weaknesses. Also, most mundane long range weapons like arrows are especially useless against gelatinous cubes (peltasts or gunslingers might have a slightly better time) compared to the nice and easy AoE and ranged touch spells mages get.

Unless you're trying to say low level martials are stronger than low level mages, in which case you should adjust your example, because a gelatinous cube would stomp on either.

>>54965824
The biggest issue is tying magic use to mental stats, so every wizard is going to be smarter than every fighter. That's dumb, Odysseus was a martial with 18 int, if you treat magic like any other learned skill you can start having casters and martials on an even playing field. A grizzled military commander with decades of combat experience is going to be smarter than some 18 year old apprentice who locks himself in a tower making finger motions and muttering nonsense words that let him cast Color Spray.

You can go even further and make magic a physical ability tied directly to the caster's body, where using it physically exhausts them the same way fighting normally would, and they need to train just as much as the barbarian or rogue do to avoid passing out after one fireball.

Once everyone is on a level playing field you can give everyone cool shit and let them do fun stuff. Casters and martials have been balanced in mythology for fucking thousands of years, let alone examples in comics, movies, videogames, books, whatever. Literally the only medium that has this issue is tabletop D&D 3rd edition.

>>54972212
>"No you can't keep something at length with a spear because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it?"
My response to this is basically "sure you can ready an action to stab if he approaches closer" and just say it as something like "you raise your spear and take a few steps back, keeping your point trained on the enemy"

Depending on the opponent, maybe the enemy does stay at a point where a spearman can't hit him, maybe not.

The way a full health hobgoblin captain reacts to this is different than a 2 health goblin, which is different to a mindless rabid beast. This kind of thing is all up to your DM, but there's a reason that advice given to new DM's is usually something like "most of the time, don't say no. Say 'yes, and' or 'yes, but' and try to reward players for thinking of things like that"

To top it off, 5e is very much so about Not having 50 billion rules about every situation, it encourages DM's to come up with their own ruling for niche things like that and keep the game flowing, rather than having the person go "ok let me look through one of my 50 rule books because I know there's a rule about this somewhere"

>>54965856
>that pic
Animemes have nothing on this.

>>54972390
>5e is very much so about Not having 50 billion rules about every situation
But without rules for it, we're supposed to say "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it."
Aren't we?

>>54969206
What if your favored enemy mechanic operated on a per-adventure basis, working kinda like smites that refresh at the start of the adventure. This would help balance the main issue of not being sure how often you'll encounter the enemy (making the ability either too good or useless), as for frequent encounters you'd spread out this resource, while you could dump it in one right if you only rarely get to use it.

>>54972488
There are specific rules for using spears in combat though. Are you being deliberately obtuse for (you)'s or something?

>>54972823
My point is that "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it." is always stupid.

The spear example was for CoC.
Your post about 5e illustrated my point well.
I was just being deliberate because this anon >>54969256
Thinks it's great to only be able to do things there are specific rules for.

>>54973029
>My point is that "No you can't do that thing you want to do because there isn't a rule saying how you can do it." is always stupid.
Not really. Y'know what's actually fucking stupid? Stopping game because THAT GUY wants to make a mecha in a Shadowrun campaign and he keeps saying "Well, there's no rule that says I CAN'T do it :^)" whenever we tell him no or to shut the fuck up.

You can't do everything in every game ever and if the game doesn't have rules for it, you can't FUCKING DO IT!

Sorry snowflake, but if you can't stand it then go back to playing in quest threads.

>>54969421
But then your game turns into "Wizard's Grocery List: The Adventure"

In the standard magic system for GURPS, what ends up happening is that casters have to spend a lot of energy and have high skill in order to have the same output as a martial with an advantage such as Weapon Masters.

On average, a well-built martial character can do 4d6 worth of damage per turn, give or take and not counting aiming for vital spots are attempting multiple attacks per turn. A caster has to spend at least two turns and 4 energy to throw a fireball of equal damage. The first turn for casting the fireball, and the second to throw it. Each point of energy spent gives 1d6 worth of damage.

>>54973214
Anon, you're better than this.
Accept the simple fact that both are stupid.
Expecting to do actions beyond the setting and genre of the game is stupid.
Disallowingactions well within the setting and genre of the game because the rules don't say you can is also stupid.

>>54971828
Since when is Popeye weeaboo?

>>54973308
>Disallowingactions well within the setting and genre of the game because the rules don't say you can is also stupid.
Give me an example of this happening at all. Because usually, it's some snowflake wondering why you don't forsake the premise of the game in order to allow them to play [insert shitty anime protagonist flavor of the month here] for your low magic fantasy campaign.

Oh look, it's eternally triggered bitch anon.

>>54973465
>Give me an example of this happening at all
I don't have a personal ine, because I don't play with dumbasses like in your example.
It was in response to this:
>>54968771
>The DM shouldn't be required to make a ruling every time a player wants to do something more interesting than attacking for hit point damage

>>54973234
In 3.PF martials can also outdamage casters, fairly easily in fact. The problem is utility magic, not necessarily in combat situations either. Admittedly I don't know how GURPS deals with the problem of mages having a Batman belt of solutions to roleplaying scenarios that mundane characters don't have an easy access to.

>>54973465
"I want to weaken the wooden bridge so when the full-plate ogre army crosses it, it collapses"
Assuming the players have the right tools and some combination of Know: Engineering and Craft: Woodworking, it seems like a reasonable thing to try, but no rules for sabotaging structures are present in the game.

So we've reached the stage of bitching about the content of the threads rather than the games now? Okay, I guess that's a step.

>>54973776
There are rules for disabling devices and sundering materials though anon. Between that and the skills you brought up, you probably could do something like that.

If you don't want OP reality warping wizards, play in a setting or system that doesn't have them

>ENFORCE SPELL COMPONENTS
After nearly twenty years, are we really still at this level of discourse? It's almost as if conversation keeps going around in circles.

>>54968745
>and I think that everything should have a source of power

*Coughs* 4e *Coughs*

>Give me an example of this happening at all.
Sure

My player wanted to build a ship, attach wheels to it, and Polymorph some creatures (I can't remember what) into elephants and have a mobile stronghold of sorts. There's no explicit ruling on doing This, but I let it happen.

When he finally did get the ship done and brought made all the elephants, he took it out and had some fun with it for a few sessions, then sadly for him I rolled my 1% of 25% chance of something way beyond their strength to show up, in that region it was a pair of black dragons. They destroyed the ship with acid breath, devoured the elephants, and being content with that (and not liking getting blasted by spells and such) they flew off after that

>>54973867
Right, but disable device specifically refers to traps and locks, and sundering is just destroying objects. There's no rules for damage dealt to objects by standing on them. It's a perfectly reasonable thing to try, and is close to existing skills, but still not explicitly allowed under the rules.

>>54974114
>Right, but disable device specifically refers to traps and locks
It can also refer to disabling mechanisms, and bridges are basically comprised of simple machines.
>sundering is just destroying objects.
Well, if you destroy an important part of the bridge that's meant to support weight...
>It's a perfectly reasonable thing to try, and is close to existing skills, but still not explicitly allowed under the rules.
It does exist within the rules, it just requires a bit of manipulation of wording, which for D&D is par for course all things considered.

>>54973997
>There's no explicit ruling on doing This, but I let it happen.
Well I mean, if we're being honest, it just sounds like the player made a larger scale horse carriage, which does have rules within the book. There are also rules for how scaling up a size category would affect aspects on your character as well.

Overall, everything that you said is still possible to perform within the book, even if it requires a bit of RAW manipulation to do it.

>>54973936
See, I always wondered why spells always had to be infallible. Why are walls of force immovable, instead of "dc 25+ to move the wall 5 feet"?

Why are spells like blur not foiled by actively grappling the blurred target?

Why can't you interrupt or make it harder to cast a spell if you're standing next to a wizard?

>>54974247
>Everything is possible, just needs some manipulating of present rules
Sure but you can say that about almost anything.

Given the proper equipment, players can make a spaceship using some magic items, doesn't mean it was intentional. And I'm sure you're going to throw your DM off when you start leaving the planet

>>54974283
sorry, quoted the wrong post

>>54974194
>It does exist within the rules, it just requires a bit of manipulation of wording, which for D&D is par for course all things considered.

>>54968771
>The DM shouldn't be required to make a ruling every time a player wants to do something more interesting than attacking for hit point damage
Not that reasonable anon, just once again pointing this silliness out.

>>54968719
>can always trade push-ups for pull-up at 1:1
nah man, a press-up is way easier than a pull-up

>>54974289
>Given the proper equipment, players can make a spaceship using some magic items, doesn't mean it was intentional.
If it exists somewhere in the game, and they interact in a way that would make such a thing possible, then it was intentional, even if it wasn't.

I mean, it's part of the reason why shit like modded Skyrim and Minecraft are so popular, because the game gives you so many rules to work with and smart players (or those with too much time on their hands) are able to come up with weird interactions that end up working to great effect later.
>>54974313
That's not the DM making a ruling though, it's the players pointing out similarities within the rules that would allow you to reach a specific conclusion, much like how a smart player can use a minor illusion to make a horde of rats flee by "summoning" a cat demon to intimidate them.

The illusion allows you to create anything, there are rules for circumstantial modifiers, and intimidation does make enemies run away.

>>54966938
Just kill the magic

File: 4e.jpg (212KB, 589x278px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 589x278px

>>54965824

If only there was edition that solved this problem...

>>54969624
For all of its flaws, I feel like 3.5 pretty well put this shit to rest.

Some things are Supernatural. They are powered or draw upon magic in some way.
Some things are Extraordinary. There is no more magic here than general badassery.

>>54974443
Then to use an example of a much more strict game example

In a 4e campaign, my ranger has a set of hide armor that allows me to create an aura of icy wind to cause the space around me to be difficult terrain. That's all it does (and this is the edition where you need the mercenary theme just to have the ability to trip someone in a fight)

I fell into a burning tower at some point, and I thought "hey this is fire, my armor creates ice."
>Hey DM I want to use my armor's daily power to create a field of ice around me to help with the intense heat
And he ruled it to work somewhat, I took reduced fire damage and didn't burn to death inside the building

There's no rule about that interaction anywhere, but any decent DM understands the player's idea and it makes perfect sense for that to work to some effect. I've done this a few times now, and it's made me hang on to a set of armor I'd have otherwise replaced by now, because it's such a useful thing to be able to do

>>54974664
I'd be surprised if a game like 4e that values focus on the battlefield wouldn't have rules in place for extinguishing fire.

Even if it doesn't, ice is basically frozen water and anything that can instantly convert a burning area into ice has to have some serious firepower (pun unintended) behind it in order to suck all the heat from an area.

>>54970519
What are...

>Aberrations
>Constructs being immune to most save or sucks
>Dragons
>Fey
> Some types of NPC
>Oozes being immune to most save or sucks
>Plant being immune to most save or sucks
>Undead, of which the mindless one are immune to most save or sucks
>Vermin being immune to most save or sucks

Over at Giant in the play ground they did disprove save-or-suck theory for 3.5 a few years back.

>>54974892
Sure they did. Keep in mind, a lot of spells don't even give you the option to save against it as well.

>>54974892
Constructs get stomped on by Conjurations. What are you on?

>>54974873
There's actually no explicit rules about extinguishing fire

Sure there may be powers about the manipulation of fire, but those are probably limited to certain classes or races. It's like the tripping thing. They focused so much on giving classes, races, themes, backgrounds, equipment, etc all these cool powers they kind of forgot to include things that anyone can do

>>54968435
Wouldn't that be a grapple check

>>54966174
You sure showed him

>>54970534
>not disregarding magic because you're too manly for that pussy bullshit.

Why so many of you let yourselves get cucked by nerd games I'll never understand.

File: file.png (549KB, 3555x2198px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 3555x2198px

>>54969482
>Cancellation
>Not needles

Frankly, Martials should be able to have abilities and exploits based on the exact same Vancian economy as Wizards. Except that instead of reading a magic book all night, the fighter trains under a waterfall with giant rocks strapped to his back and chops trees in half with his broadsword until he can do it in one swing.

Heck it even makes more sense than Vancian casting, which is really just a conceit to avoid a spellpoint system. It makes sense for a Fighter to only be able to Salmon Leap over a fortress wall a set number of times per day because that crap's hard, yo.

To add to this:

Irish Mythology had a clan of unlanded warriors called the Fianna. To just get in with them, you had to be able to stuff like leap over a treebranch at head height while standing flatfooted and be able to remove a thorn from your foot while running at full speed from a pack of angry dogs without breaking your stride. That's, like, Level 1 for these guys.

>>54979632
B-but anon, haven't you h-heard? Irish mythology is weeaboo now

Magic means nothing if real-world physics don't apply otherwise. If anything most games are too generous to martials. That's not caster supremacy, it's feeling patronized when playing a martial because games feel the need to pay you on the head and tell you you're a superman too.

File: ishygddt.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>their DM doesnt have a 1 caster limit (excluding clerics)

Wizards are fuckin rad

>>54975081
To be fair, that's one of the things that shouldn't need explicit rules. Although it probably would've helped if they at least put some guidelines in.

>>54979483
It does end with the weirdness where certain skills exclude others.

>>54981682
They did. If you need rules for things like that, it's under skill challenges, which are described in the DMG.

>>54981714
Not sure what you mean by this

File: WHFRP.png (266KB, 700x240px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 700x240px

>>54965824
Why, hello elegan/tg/entlemen!

>>54969431

Fucking this.

All the good spellcasters in myth in fiction are wise men/women, advisors, and manipulators who mostly support others. And all of them are either of full or partial god/demon/angel/whatever origin.

They aren't just smart mortals that fling fireballs and raise armies of the dead. Unless they're Conan or pulp fantasy villains who sold their souls to demons.

File: 1424307877254.jpg (110KB, 349x379px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 349x379px

>>54986094
>was having a great 2nd ed game last year
>ruin it by asking for to many pictures of the female players belly button

>>54969624
having 100hp is pretty magical already desu senpai

>>54969624
No offense but this comes off as a failure of imagination and understanding of the source material. Fantasy and mythology has always had fluid definitions of magical, and the idea of Magic as a measurable force that can be learned vs a nebulous explanation for extraordinary things is an invention of 20th Century fantasy literature, a lot of which derives itself from DnD in the first place.

In actual myths and folklore, a character being able to swing a sword so hard that it cuts a river in half or who can jump up a waterfall is "magical" but it isn't because they're infused with some fundamental force. They just *can*, and the explanation of why is "because magic." Beowulf doesn't use X mana per hour to hold his breath underwater for half a day, he just does it. Why? Probably magic.

I think it ultimately boils down to the nerd psychology of wanting to be able to categorize and quantify things. Tabletop RPGs allow them to do it with magic with spell memorization or mana points or whatever. But the idea that physical exploits could be similarly measured, and thus built made into a power scale comparable to what a wizard can do, seems to be anathema to most players. At least most bad players.

Many good games put magic and martial ability on the same footing. The fact that DnD doesn't makes it kind of a bad game.

>>54968874
>I could be a magic user and cast a spell that shoots a lightning bolt that bounes off solid objects, potentially one-shotting anything in one hit if you manage to angle it correctly.
And said components for a lightning bolt cost almost as much as you got from the encounter, more if you were unlucky.

File: jonghwan-lee-jonghwan-warden-crusader.jpg (335KB, 1200x1997px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1200x1997px

>>54987306
I wonder why major systems don't use some kind of "fatique/energy points" for martial tricks the same way "mana points" are used for mages.

>>54987538
A piece of metal and a piece of wool is not expensive anon.

>>54987538
And you can only get that spell if your GM decided to give you that scroll in the dungeon, and you successfully rolled to actually read it.

In the earliest editions of DnD, the ones that Gary actually wrote, spell-casters had 0 control over their spell list, and could very easily fail to learn the scrolls they actually acquired. Each subsequent edition removed restrictions until you got to 3.5 where there were effectively no restrictions. Even the ones that were written into the book like spell components are widely ignored by many players.

File: d856b550461b28d17d24ba7360635f6f.jpg (439KB, 1600x2199px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 1600x2199px

>>54987538
Component managing minigame seems to be very tedious in my experience (or forcing the whole party to act as a side characters most of the game while the mage goes on sidequests to collect ingredients), i wonder if there are ways to make it more fun.
Warhammer's magic system is a WAAAAY more fun way to balance the power level of casters (even though they are still overpowered there).

>>54987582
>In the earliest editions of DnD, the ones that Gary actually wrote, spell-casters had 0 control over their spell list, and could very easily fail to learn the scrolls they actually acquired.
This sounds cool too, forces the mage to improvise instead of having answers to everything.

>>54965824
how about we make magic
>hard to control, as it can and will act on its own, chaotic whims
>leave the caster more vulnerable, like give him debuffs for channeling reality-bending powers through his body
>have a unique tactical niche, such as being the primary weapon against spiritual beings and use the elements to make advantage of resistences and weaknesses

>>54987558
Generally speaking, bookkeeping like that is tedious in tabletop games so many avoid this, but you can still find it often enough. Some games do have fatigue points (or whatever), and many unify Martial/Magical ability into a single resource or system.

Vancian is a weird system but it works for what it's goal is. But saying that only magic can work that way is silly. Even DnD recognized that by 4e and folded everything under the AWED system, which did exactly what it was supposed to do: bring martials and magic users to the same level. Not unsurprisingly, a large number of fans revolved (if not for that than for other changes made to the system) so 5e is pretty much a repudiation of that design.

>>54987727
There are plenty of games that work like that (Legend of the 5 Rings comes to mind), but that kind of magic isn't what people play DnD for. For like 15 years, DnD has been associated with magic that works reliably, predictably and wrecks encounters. Changing that would be akin to making a new game for many people.

>>54987582

On the one hand, I like the idea of magic being a rare, expensive thing.

On the other, I would hate to decide to play a wizard, just to have my spell list be full of shit which is useless, or not in keeping with the theme of the character I wanted to play.

In many ways this mirrors my views on rolling stats: it could be cool, but it could suck royally if you want to play something particular

>>54987917
Rolling stats is for people who want to roll a nat 20 to intimidate the ground into not killing them after a fall at terminal velocity

>>54987917
The thing about rolling Stats is that Gary actually had the right idea, because in Basic, your stats didn't really mean anything. They determined what class you could be and modified somewhat how much XP you needed for levels, but that's about it. And even with complete garbage stats, you could still be a Fighter, and in Basic DnD the fighter was probably the best class.

Much like how each sequential edition made casters more powerful by removing their restrictions, each edition put more and more mechanical weight onto Stats. In Basic having bad stats meant you were probably a fighter and that was about it. By the time of 3.5, having bad stats meant you were a millstone around the rest of the party.

>>54969624

So your fighter can only do the reality warping shit that D&D normally allows with no issues due to screwy ruled, but the second that turns into the kinds of feat actual mythological heroes, it's just too much?

>>54987306
>No offense but this comes off as a failure of imagination and understanding of the source material.

Which is understandable because most people get their understanding of fantasy from D&D or D&D derived games/fiction.

And the general Western religion vs science attitude.

When they encounter mythological magic or magical systems in various religions/cultures, it all seems so blurry and random because it's not what they're used to.

Their only exposure to anything of the sort tends to be anime and Wuxia so anything they reduce everything to Western vs East Asia.

The easiest way to help with the balance is to make spellcasting take multiple rounds. Yeah, you can cast a level 9 spell and end an encounter, but that'll take 5 rounds and hoping nobody hits you and forces you to make concentration checks.

Then throw the Tome of Battle at the martials. Make a new style called 'whistling wind' or whatever for ranged maneuvers.

>>54988788
Not sure the best way to make one class better is to make it so that another class spends an entire combat encounter preparing a single action.

Sure it makes sense, but it's not fun, which is the main concern.

>>54988882

4e tried that with rituals and 3e players hated it because they were used to Prettt much all spells being instantaneous.

>>54988882
Well, there's actually a bit more to it than that.

Depending on the spell's level, it takes longer or shorter to cast, and metamagic tweaks that, with both 'positive' metamagic making the spell take longer and 'negative' metamagic cutting corners so the spell is shorter. But while casting, a wizard can still be throwing out cantrips or minor effects at people- since he is, after all, channeling a great deal of magical energy.

Sorcerers would specialize in these 'channeling' effects, doing more damage, being more effective, or even being able to 'channel' nothing and deal damage to people without having to spend a spell.

>>54988930

Not muh DnD

>>54988905
That was not nearly the problem with rituals. The problem was not with the system, it was that the provided rituals categorically sucked. So you were investing character resources into an option that you could solve (in many cases) quicker and cheaper by just doing it the mundane way.

>>54988930
Problem with delayed effect powers is that that if the fight ends before they go off it means the Wizard wasted his action. Like if your Pismatic Spray takes four turns to go off, but the fight ends after 3 rounds, then your wizard basically contributed very little to the encounter.

A well designed game should allow every member of the party to contribute in some way to the encounter. This kind of design makes it so that one player might contribute little or nothing to the fight before it ends.

As I said before, it makes sense but I doubt anyone who really enjoys playing a magic character would enjoy it.

>>54989511

Which I'd how most spells with casting times end up. It's stuff that could generally be done given enough time and effort.

The strength of D&D spells is they allow you to do those things in an instant with just a single predictable saving throw instead of multiple arbitrary checks.

>>54989543
Which is where the channeling effects come in. Slight cantrips like moving someone in a certain direction one turn, or creating a single 10x10 ft. block of magic forcefield, dealing a bit of minor damage to an enemy the next. Some stuff that would be extremely helpful if you knew how to use it.

Plus, it'd only be the high level spells that have longer cast times- only anything level 5 spells or higher... and there would probably be certain outliers that can be cast more quickly despite spell level. But the instant encounter enders would be a lot harder to get off.

Ideally, it would turn an encounter into 'hold on until the wizard blows his load'. Gives the martials a good goal they can achieve without being overshadowed, and lets the wizard have their spells. And in the long run, for casting spells outside of combat environments, 6 seconds for a spell is no different than 30 seconds.

It reminds me of Shadowrun, when we're all surrounding a decker. Every four rounds he spent in cyberspace, we'd have to fight a round in reality and save his ass.

>>54989511
>it was that the provided rituals categorically sucked. So you were investing character resources into an option that you could solve (in many cases) quicker and cheaper by just doing it the mundane way.

Of course some rituals were better than others, but most rituals were just spells from previous editions: Comprehend Language, Gentle Repose, Magic Mouth, Make Whole, etc.

The difference is that they took over a minute to cast and required material components that actually cost gold. They weren't just something you could do in an instant for free.

The "it's stuff anyone could do" was generally used to criticize the Knock ritual because it took 10 minutes to cast instead of a standard action. Basically, they were crying that Knock was useless because a Rogue with the appropriate skills and equipment could do the same thing more quickly.

Which is exactly how it should be. The knock spell shouldn't allow the caster to supplant a key Rogue feature.

But people want casters to be able to supplant non-casters in anything other than single target DPS (but not by too much) because apparently anything less than that makes casters weak and useless.

>>54968874
You didn't get to choose your spells as wizard, had to roll for it. They were less popular with us at least.

>>54990736
I think rolling for spells was optional.

File: chainmail_game_3rd_edition_tsr_cover.jpg (46KB, 374x585px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 374x585px

>>54987727
What if we made spells go last in the initiative order, after ranged and melee attacks? And if the caster gets hit, the spell fizzles?

>Oh wait

>>54987558
It leads directly to you spamming your single most effective ability ad infinitum until you run out. ToB and 4E both disallowed that at the system level for a reason and 5E battlemasters are the proof that they were right to do so.

>>54987558
The issue with the concept is that the ability that you perform as a martial is rarely proportionate to the amount of resources that you're spending in order to utilize that effect.

Take Battlemasters for example, you have some abilities that are useful, like the one that grants a bonus to your AC as long as you're moving or stacking extra damage on top of an attack, and then you have abilities that more or less boil down to "I trip a dude" and you're left wondering "why does this absorb resources?" while also making people believe that such abilities are unique to the Battlemasteer specifically.

i like how in baldur's gate maxed detect illusion is essentially unblockable true sight

>>54965824
Another D&D-exclusive problem. Play something else - anything else.

>>54993229
Frankly, I feel like if you took 4e's AWED system and applied it exclusive to martial classes, but kept everyone else more or less the same in 5e you'd probably be golden. Some moves can be pulled off at-will, others are tricky and will only work once per encounter (because afterwards the enemy is wise to your antics), and still others are so exhausting that they can only be executed once per day.

Then you apply that to out-of-combat abilities. The Wizard can use Knock to open a door? The Fighter can use Dynamic Entry to smash through a wall, no roll needed. Or slice an object in half so perfectly and cleanly that it remains fully intact until something touches it, at which point it breaks apart. Or strike a body of water so fiercely that it forms a path of dry land to walk across.

Some players could argue "but magic can do those things easier", but that's missing the point. The issue isn't whether something can be done with a minimum of in-universe effort, the issue is do the players have equal agency?

Magic grants narrative control in subtle, esoteric ways. Physical prowess grants narrative control in showy, bombastic ways. Neither one is inherently better, it's all about what the player wants. Some players want to be sagacious masters of inscrutable forces. Other players want to be warriors so legendarily fearocious that the poems written about them are studied by high school students 1600 years later.

>>54965824
How would a rogue in a traditional fantasy setting fight an alchemist? The alchemist's magic works like it does in fma for Ed, as in he can basically cast it on the spot. Do I need more details?

>>54997268
Umm, he wouldn't, because a rogue in a traditional fantasy setting would fight an alchemist in a traditional fantasy setting, i.e. a wizened scholar who uses potions and other pre-ordained alchemical compounds as weapons. Or if you want to go more historically accurate, a foppish scholar with more money than sense whose brain is melting out of his head from inhaling too many mercury fumes.

Ed from FMA is basically a warrior mage closer to Gray Mouser than anything a "traditional" rogue would encounter. Not only is he a powerful martial artist but he can alter the physical structure of matter at will with virtually no limits, instantly. A "rogue" dealing with him would do so within the framework of that universe's rules and style, i.e. someone like Lan Fan, who was basically a Ninja and was an extremely effective warrior, even against Alchemists.

>>54966111

Mana systems don't mean no use per day limits.

It always depends on the recharge mechanic.

>>54967462

I agree with you.

Caster-nerfing, non-caster buffing shouldn't cause more of the game to focus on the casters.

>>54974336
>nah man, a press-up is way easier than a pull-up
Duh, you gotta get a favorable trade.

>>54997268
>Trying to use FMA in your caster vs martial bullshit

It's one of the few settings that's actually balanced in that shit.

>>54970654

...the existence of the pouch says that basically most spell components are intended to be flavor text at most.

>>54966104
How long can you sprint for you cockgobbling whore?

>>54997701
And that's the problem. One of the major limiting factors of magic is just ignored as flavor.

>>54972109

Seconded.

I don't care if your frontline tank character does laser shows as he goes nuts (I.e. Solar Exalted), or is a low level D&D fighter who is tough as nails (and works with minor hedge mage level magic)

>>54997770

When it's just for throwing around encounter/daily abilities?

Does the caster really need to be the carry and have everyone feed them resources?

>>54996688

Given that 5e ported in at-wills to casters... Actually never mind, that's a great idea.

>>54997981
For shit like firebolt, nah shoot that thing from a wand.

But fireball? Wall of force? Spells that can end encounters? Absolutely.

>>54998015

Why wouldn't there be wands for everything?

... Also, generally fireballs don't do encounter ending levels of damage.

>>54998054
>8d6 damage in a 20 foot radius isn't encounter ending
nigga

And it's not a "Wand of firebolt" the wand is merely a focus to channel raw magical energy, IE a cantrip. A wizard could make a staff focus, or a ring focus, and do the same thing.

"Wand of X" was a stupid magic item idea to begin with.

>>54998196

24 damage is nice, but not good in al encounters, particularly if the enemies are bulky or spread out.

>>54998346
First, average damage is 28.

Second, of course it's not good on all encounters. Sleep doesn't work on elves, doesn't make Sleep less powerful.

Doesn't change the fact that spells like that are what break the caster/martial balance. Not all at once, but a little bit at a time.

>>54998467
That's the thing- an average 8th-level wizard can throw out a fireball what, three times an entire day? Maybe 4 with a high intelligence stat. An average of 112 damage, and consuming all of his 3rd-level slots.

A fighter, on the other hand, at the same level, gets two attacks per full attack. Assuming Weapon Focus, Specialization, and Power Attack (On let's say... a greatsword, simply because it has the highest damage.)

He's dealing 2d6+3 an attack, 4d6+6 per turn. That means that yes, he's only doing 20 damage or so per turn on average, but after five turns he can keep going. Forever. And that's not even optimized. a completely optimized, pounce/charging warrior could easily surpass the damage of a fireball, even considering the whole multiple target thing.

The martial/caster imbalance isn't because the wizard can do more damage. That's stupid. The major, main reason for the imbalance is because the wizard can do more than just damage. He can summon a wall around the enemy, sealing them away. He can force a door to close and stay closed. He can literally say 'No, we're on another continent now' and make reality listen. Even if a fighter does twice as much damage as a wizard's strongest spell, full casters are imbalanced because they can do anything they have a spell for. Teleport. Fly. Turn invisible. Read minds. Control minds. Unlock doors. Send demons back to where they'd come from. Outright fuck with time.

A fighter is just a guy with a big stick that does HP damage.

>>54998636
You misunderstand my issue. I don't think that fireballs render martials obsolete (they don't), it's that a wizard can use this incredibly useful tool with absolutely no investment.

>>54998636
I get what you're saying, but a lot of those things the caster can do aren't without risk of failure, which DESU is part of why I don't really subscribe to the whole "breaking the game" mentality people sometimes have. An invisible wizard still probably doesn't have a high enough spot/perception check to see the mundane trap on the door that will alert the guards someone's there, Teleport runs a major risk of making you have a very bad day if you don't know exactly where you're going (and it's difficult to set up in emergencies since it's a touch range spell), and almost every mind-affecting spell out there is either way less powerful than people make them out to be or is so high level that by the time you can cast it you probably aren't even fighting things that it will be effective on.

>>54998782
I was kind of leery on the whole 'casters break the game' thing until I went out to actively make a broken wizard. With contingent spells, abrupt jaunts and flight, nothing could hurt me. With Enervate, curses of various kinds, and debuff spells, I turned entire bosses into piles of drooling uselessness. Scrying everything, with Arcane eyes and spontaneous divination let us know that we'd never run into a trap or a problem.

Eventually GM came to talk with me about not using those specific spells- adding to the list of spells I could 'please not use' every time I ended an encounter. I didn't use them, most of the time, unless we were in real risk of death, which the GM was okay with. Eventually, I had a bunch of invisible, heavily-enchanted fiendish T-rexes stored inside of bottles (via smoky confinement, halting time for the T-rexes inside). I'd just throw out the T-rexes, make an out-of-game pokemon joke and then, watch them tear things apart.

It got so bad that I worked together with the GM so that I could phase my wizard out. It was when we'd finally hit level 17, meaning I got 9th level spells. I picked Shapechange and Time Stop, picking Time Stop as my archmage SLA, and got to sing my wizard's final swan song.

It was outrageous, how broken a wizard can get. And it wasn't even a sevenfold veil wizard.

>>54998782

> but a lot of those things the caster can do aren't without risk of failure

But they don't? At least not in the text. When a spell fails it tends to just send the wizard back to where he was. At worst a spell slot/scroll is wasted.

>An invisible wizard still probably doesn't have a high enough spot/perception check to see the mundane trap on the door that will alert the guards someone's there

Why wouldn't he? He's invested heavily in Intelligence which means he has more skill points than your average fighter. Also the only thing that could really counter or alert someone that an INVISIBLE GUY was there would be another spell like Glitterdust which just furthers the idea that only another Caster can oppose a Caster.

>Teleport runs a major risk of making you have a very bad day if you don't know exactly where you're going

'very bad day' is 1d10 points of damage. By the time you're able to cast teleport you're level 9. Furthermore you have a 76% chance to go to a place you've "seen once". One scry spell and you can teleport with pretty fair accuracy.

Also it's not even the fact that these things can HAVE slight repercussions it's that the fighter has absolutely no ability or chance at doing anything as meaningful narratively as getting the party back to their headquarters near instantly from a crumbling castle.

>>54998782
Holy shit, the mage apologism is real.

>>54998901

The thing is: A super optamized fighter CAN end a good chunk of encounters fast. A super optamized fighter CAN dish out a tremendous amount of damage and kill things left and right. The problem is: building such a class has the double edged sword of both needing very acute understanding of the options available to you (complicated building) while also a very basic implementation of that feat (simplistic playstyle).

You need heavy investment and a lot of fiddling to get a fighter to be really fucking powerful and even then you're only good in a very narrow and specific field. Charging and full attacking.

And if by chance you encounter an enemy who can just say "no" to your charging and full attacking? Like you specialize in swords and the enemy can fly? Or it's invisible/incorporeal? Or it's behind a wall? Then you better hope your GM was gracious enough to give you a magic item that'll let you do that specific action or else you're fucked/useless.

>>54998782
>a lot of those things the caster can do aren't without risk of failure
Isn't this just "dies to removal?" Yes, enemies can make their save and the world can be set up exactly right to counter the precise thing the wizard is trying to do. That doesn't mean the thing isn't stupidly powerful, unless the GM is going out of his way to shit on the player every time he uses it.

>>54998879
What this tells me is that certain game-breaking spells should have been made into Rituals instead so you can't just whip 'em out willy nilly.

It also tells me that your DM should have had his antagonists wisen up at some point and get some protection against your most common tricks.

>>54999043
There's a fine line between "the DM is intentionally dicking you out of your plan" and "the enemy has gotten wise to your shenanigans and thus has developed a plan to counter it", unfortunately there exists a not-insignificant portion of DMs who have a hard time making that distinction known (even worse is when they don't try at all), but it's an important distinction to make nonetheless.

>>54999069

>certain game-breaking spells should have been made into Rituals instead so you can't just whip 'em out willy nilly.

That fixes SOME problems but also just changes the pace of the game from "act until the wizard conjurs up a solution" to "wait around for the wizard to make a solution".

>It also tells me that your DM should have had his antagonists wisen up at some point and get some protection against your most common tricks.

Which again: only another wizard can really oppose in any capacity. A bit telling, no?

>>54999108

The thing is the wizard is still versatile enough that they can adapt around the enemy's adaption.

The meta with them is kinda bonkers like that. And it still just means you're looking at "two wizards jackoff with ridiculous spells while the rest of the party watches from the sidelines".

>>54999043
>Yes, enemies can make their save and the world can be set up exactly right to counter the precise thing the wizard is trying to do.

The thing is, though... wizards don't just have one tool. They get two entirely separate tools every single level, and can get more just by looking at scrolls or peeking at another wizard's spellbook. They have so many tools that everything is weak to something. There's spell resistance, will saves, fort saves, reflex saves, touch AC, all of that kind of stuff to prevent a wizard from just winning... but there are spells that simply automatically succeed.

Such as, say, Passwall directly underneath their feet. They fall into a pit... Then you Wall of Stone above them.

>>54999069
Most of the antagonists ended up dead, usually, and we made efforts to make sure to kill, turn, or alter the memories of anybody who'd seen us in action. and once we got to the point where we were being scried upon, I'd gotten Mind Blank.

I've stopped playing full martial characters in DnD simply because 4e is the only version that lets martials contribute to the game as well as casters, because 4e did a lot more freeform shit with it's non-combat designs.

In 5e, if you aren't a caster then you really can't do much unless the DM is setting it up specifically so your character is more useful than the wizard at that exact moment.

It's a shame because I really wanted to play a full Paladin in my current game, but Paladin falls off so hard after level 6 compared to casters. Gonna multiclass into Warlock or Bard to keep him relevant.

>>54999069
>It also tells me that your DM should have had his antagonists wisen up at some point and get some protection against your most common tricks.
>>54999108
>There's a fine line between "the DM is intentionally dicking you out of your plan" and "the enemy has gotten wise to your shenanigans and thus has developed a plan to counter it", unfortunately there exists a not-insignificant portion of DMs who have a hard time making that distinction known (even worse is when they don't try at all), but it's an important distinction to make nonetheless.
Sure, but how much does it help in this case? Acknowledging that they're worth countering specifically seems like a pretty clear confession of power, and as I recall very few high-tier spells have clear, reasonable counters.

>>54965824
If martials have hercules level strength, they're straight up magical at that point. If your martials are just magic users with swords, what's the fucking point of a distinction between the two in the first place?

I much prefer a setting where casters are straight up better at high levels, and I'll play the martial every time. Faggots without any creativity who can't enjoy a relatively low-power character are the worst.

>>54999294
This is pretty low effort bait.

>>54999294
Weak bait.

File: yawn.jpg (5KB, 306x203px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 306x203px

>>54999294

>>55003465
>>54999579
>>54999334
Why do people think that playing an intentionally bad option makes them better? That guy's post is only bait because there are actual idiots that feel that way.

>>54998782
so "either mages can do whatever or the DM shits on the player" is your argument for mages beeing balanced.

Wew lad.
You people are even more retarded than i thought.

>>54965824
>Martials vs. Casters
>Theory:
>Casters can warp reality and do all these amazing powerful shit that shouldn't be.
>Martials are stuck with a sword and suck the suck
>Reality:
>Casters can do a lot of shit, but most of it is either worthless, tends to be destroyed within the first few rounds of combat, or their combatants are either immune, resistant, or have good saves to stop it
>Martial can do ungodly and absurd amounts of damage to the point where damage reduction doesn't even matter.
>casters are stuck with whatever they prepared before hand, leaving them with a great disadvantage and all their spells that can be useful in any situation is too weak to do anything actually useful.
>Martials have a plethora of weaponry and sometimes their weaponry are a big combination of other weaponry to be useful in ANY situation.
>Casters could try and get an iron door open with their spells, but the door somehow resists it.
>Martials just kick the door down.
>Casters have to keep talking to the GM about how something works
>Martials just do it without being questioned.
>Casters are five minute warriors
>Martials fight all fucking day.

Being a martial is godly.

>>54997679
Ok i guess I'll look over the manga
>>54997435
>blah blah blah anon is a faggot
All I did was explain how alchemy would work in this setting. I told you how it would work. How would a rogue fight him? I changed the way alchemy worked because it would be easier for the story I'm writing so don't get your panties in a wad snob.

File: LaughingFantasyWhores.png (598KB, 673x680px) Image search: [Google]

598KB, 673x680px

>>54965824
>caster vs. martial thread

But what if I want to fuck both.

>>55007695
Bumping this thread faggots

>>54967358

Honestly, I think that in that case your DM shouldn't be making you roll a check. Checks are for when there is a chance at failing, and if your level 20 demigod 24 strength barb then there isn't a chance at failure.

>>55004519
>Casters can do a lot of shit, but most of it is either worthless, tends to be destroyed within the first few rounds of combat, or their combatants are either immune, resistant, or have good saves to stop it
That's assuming the spell even allows a save or spell resistance in the first place.
>Martial can do ungodly and absurd amounts of damage to the point where damage reduction doesn't even matter.
It's just too bad that HP bloat causes any attack that does less than a "OHKO" on every shot worthless during combat.
>casters are stuck with whatever they prepared before hand, leaving them with a great disadvantage and all their spells that can be useful in any situation is too weak to do anything actually useful.
Spells like Shield, Mage Armor, Mirror Image, Wind Wall, Blur, etc. are generally useful for most situations and anything that's too situational like Knock can be made into scrolls and wands.
1/?

>>55004519
cont. >>55011360
>Martials have a plethora of weaponry and sometimes their weaponry are a big combination of other weaponry to be useful in ANY situation.
It's too bad that most of these weapons won't do you any good since a martial's effectiveness begins and ends with their ability to deal as much DPR as possible. Even then, more weapons = more gold spent if you want your weapons to not be rendered moot by damage reduction or special abilities.
>Casters could try and get an iron door open with their spells, but the door somehow resists it.
Unless you're in an AMF, I don't see why the mage wouldn't be capable of using their spells to open it somehow.
>Martials just kick the door down.
Have you SEEN the rules for breaking down doors? Kicking down an iron door vs. an unarmed attack is going to be easier said than done, and you're alerting everyone in the area where you and the party is to boot.

>>55004519
cont. >>55011445
>Casters have to keep talking to the GM about how something works
Maybe if they want to take advantage of the RAW but most spells will generally have everything that you need to know already spelled out for you.
>Martials just do it without being questioned.
There's a difference between trying something and actually succeeding at it though. You can try to jump a gorge but actually succeeding at it...
>Casters are five minute warriors
>Martials fight all fucking day.
Martials tend to be five minute warriors simply because HP drains much faster than a Mage's spell list will, especially when the Mage will likely have wands, scrolls, staves, orbs, etc. all locked and loaded with spells to offset their finite spells per day.
>Being a martial is godly.
Until you actually understand the rules, then they're shit.

>>54969421
I didn't say that I had a problem with you needing components to cast high-level spells like Wish. I said "basic spells". Having to stay stocked up on Emberbug wings so you can keep casting Fireball would be fucking tedious and boring.

>>55010503
The thing is, there's always a chance for failure because of how bounded accuracy works.

24 STR (+7), with proficiency (+6) will give you a bonus of +13.

DC 15: 2+ on the die is a success.
DC 20: 7+ on the die is a success.
DC 25: 12+ on the die is a success.
DC 30: 17+ on the die is a success.

Sure, you have Indomitable Might, but that's still not going to help you pass a DC 25 or DC 30 check. Sure, you can gain advantage on a Strength Check with Rage, and you have unlimited uses at level 20, but unless you're willing to punch yourself in the dick everytime you want to fly into a rage, it's just not practical.

Then to add insult to injury, a Level 20 Bard with 16 STR (+3) and Expertise (+12) would have a modifier of (+15), on top of a full spell list and the college of Valor.

File: smexy spellsword.jpg (101KB, 791x1000px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 791x1000px

>>55007750
Why not just fuck a Gish then? Gishes ARE the master class.

>>54966131
>But if you could just train like a Saiyan and keep getting stronger, wouldn't everyone do that?
>Saiyan
Bad analogy. Only a handful of Saiyans ever became Super Saiyan, and only two surpassed the gods. And before Goku, there was only one legendary Super Saiyan (if you ignore the non-canon Broly movies). You're basically asking why Raditz wasn't a Super Saiyan when he landed on earth. By Frieza Army standards, Saiyans were a joke race zenkai or not.
>B-But why did Frieza destroy them?!
Paranoia about an old legend.

Why not at certain increments begin giving martials deeds which allow them to warp reality or whatever just do to sheer tenacity and skill. Obviously make these deeds cost something such as wear out the martial or whatever but could this balance it? Gives you an edge.

File: b5077232205d9cf8e278db78010fe728.jpg (601KB, 637x850px) Image search: [Google]

601KB, 637x850px

>>55018135
So... Magic?

Calling them "deeds" or "attainments" or "disciplines" doesn't change anything,

Actually, yes, I agree with you. Do it. Give them a resource mechanic too. Make it fair, make it balanced towards the monsters, the game, and their role.

Give them ACCESS to spirit magic as a physical based system, and then give them martial arts.
Boom. Done.

Now they actually have their own magic that may cast from a different stat, and isn't necessarily more powerful, or less, but slightly more simplistic since the main focus is the energy of physical mind and body.


Have MAGIC(Be it holy, cosmic, shadow, what ever. I will call it Astral magic to differentiate it from spirit magic) be external, and pulling from sources outside the body, thus the need for physical might that can ENDURE the power of the spirit isn't necessary.


But anyway it is sliced, it doesn't need to out magic magic, then there would be no need for magic. If you need it to be separate, but equal, fine, but they should have no advantage over it that isn't afforded to a user of astral magic.

Spirit magic is tiring, Astral magic...Kind of fucks with your mind.Emotional and mental drain. headaches, etc.

>>54987727
A) Dice are cunts
B) 1d6 per level health
C) That isn't a tactical niche that is making one of the party members only useful (to varying degrees) in a portion of encounters and OP (to varying degrees) in others a tactical niche is stuff like healing and crowd control and AOE