/5eg/ Fifth Edition General

Fighter. Just attack 5 times per turn forever.

So, casters can do anything martials can do if you ignore combat and give them 20 in every stat. Yeah, that's a pretty fair assumption.

For every time you can Time Stop, the Fighter can take an Action Surge. Going off of suggested numbers of short rests per day it's more like three Action Surges.

Going by the suggested number of encounters per day and an average encounter length of three rounds (my personal experience) we're talking about 35 crossbow shots a day vs 87.

Also, that's not how Time Stop works.

The best way to phrase it is this:

Martials interact with the world through combat and skill checks.

Casters interact with the world through combat, skill checks, and spells.

2

>argument about the non-combat part of the game
>UH, ONLY IF YOU IGNORE COMBAT, DUH
That's literally the point.

enworld.org/forum/content.php?3414-Is-STORM-KING-S-THUNDER-The-Next-D-D-Storyline#.VzJucFgrKUk

>won't be officially announced until June 1st
>Forgotten Realms again
>Shakespeare with Giants

Still holding out hope that the one after this is the Eberron one Perkins talked about last summer.

Honestly, like a caster has to have a specific build and spell layout to compete with a martial, usually at the expense of his best role, AND to even do it well he has to be top, high end levels which most games don't even reach.

Hey buddy, welcome back

That's not the same guy. Fix your samefag detector.

>in physical combat
I'm beginning to sense the reason that a lot of /5eg/ doesn't grasp the basics of this argument is that they're actually too dumb to have played a caster with the barest amount of savvy and cunning that lets them style all over the martials.

One could make the ways in which martial characters interact with combat and/or skill checks powerful enough that the imbalance doesn't matter? Although, I guess that's just functionally similar to removing one of the ways casters can interact with the world - if you were to increase martial damage tenfold then a caster's contribution to combat becomes so irrelevant that it's like they don't have one.

How well does Lord's Alliance and Chaotic Good mesh?

Right. I think combat is fairly well balanced, though I'd prefer if maneuvers were baseline for most martial classes, just like fighting styles.

Giving all the martials rogue like skill abilities (though more limited than rogue abilities) would go a long way towards resolving the issue.

Sounds like you can't play a classy martial, desu.
Maybe you should just play level 20 games only, by yourself, so you can keep the dream of never having a martial outshine a caster.

That's one idea.

Personally, I don't think the solution is increasing martial damage. They're already the kings of damage, even if most of this is predicated on hurrr level 20 Fighter burning Action Surge every round somehow vs. Wizard who isn't cheesing it.

Last time someone suggested letting martials get away with "physical checks" better than casters, or let them do "crazy and interesting shit", the thread blew up on how unfair it would be that a Cleric can't jump as far or lift as much even if he has the same Strength or Dex as the Rogue or Fighter. I think it was something about tables.
>if the Barbarian wants to pick up and throw a whole table into a group of enemies and have it explode into splinters, maybe let him
>IF MY CLERIC HAS THE SAME STRENGTH HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT TOO
And that's just the in-combat side of things. It didn't even address the other pillars, though you can see exactly how the same argument applies. As long as the capabilities of martials is tied to their physical scores and not some innate quality of their class (like spellcasting is for casters), the casters, who have equal access to those physical scores, will be able to match them. It doesn't matter that it's unlikely that a Wizard would ever run around with stats like 20/16/18 (but much more probable that a Cleric or Paladin would), because they still CAN, and it doesn't exactly torpedo the effectiveness of individual spells to do that.

You want to explain how your classy martial is going to do something out of combat that my caster can't, kouhai? Give us three nice examples to start with.

What's a good way to do Transmutation Wizard?
It's Ravenloft, and the idea is he's basically just an old dude whose been stuck there for years, and just wants to get back home to see his children again, who likely have grandchildren at this point, he's been stuck for there for a while

Wait wait, but shouldn't a Wizard who sacrifices his stat in Int for max STR be able to keep up?
I mean, Fighters CAN cast spells this edition. If a fighter wants to give up 20 STR so his Hold Person has a high-ass DC, shouldn't he have that right?

Alrighty sempai
Show me the build for your caster, lets say level 10.

to be honest, the martials options homebrew fixes most of these problems and people who feel inclined should implement it. we only have these discussions because of trolls and memes.

but the threads would be pretty slow otherwise because WotC never release content.

How is this Fighter getting a second level spell? Being an Eldritch Knight? It's a little disingenuous to say that the solution to caster-martial disparity is for every martial to take the archetype that gives them straight-up spellcasting, or to multiclass into one. Well, shit, now they're just a caster (and this really doesn't help Barb, who doesn't have an archetype like Eldritch Knight/Arcane Trickster/Wot4E to fall back on).

>give me a theoretical caster that I can pick and choose around
If it's so fucking obvious that a classy, creative martial can't be trumped by casters out of a fight, you shouldn't need this enormous handicap. Apply yourself.

I agree, but right now a wizard who sacrifices INT still gains 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th level spells, and can cast them. Many of them are useful without a high spellcasting modifier.

A fighter who gives up strength can't get access to 6th - 9th level slots without devoting a majority of their levels to a casting class.

Level 10 lore bard

That your assumed disparity overlooks core achtypes, as well as assumes specific builds at high end levels. It also ignores that magic is a core aspect of the game for any class, ignores the narrative choices of the GM and the players, demands that a caster would gimp their primary focus to focus on another classes primary focus, and doesn't even work with all casters.
You, user, are being disingenuous

What chosen spells, and stats? We'll assume point buy.

No need to be butthurt broski, just go play with your dick in the corner.

Not this shit again

There jas got to be something more interesting to talk about

>Too many people say skill checks like it's one thing. There are six ability scores eightteen different skills and a number of possible tools to come into play.

>Meanwhile Wizards don't learn all the spells, they learn 44 spells for free, and can memorize up to 25 of them. And a lot of them only do what skills can already do or only interact with combat. If they don't, you're going to suck when it comes down to combat. Any spells beyond that were given by the DM.

The parts of a spell that having a high casting stat improves, like damage or DC, isn't applicable to many spells. Those are usually the spells that most effectively alter the other pillars of the game (outside of illusions, whose "disbelieve" effects, when applicable, rests on spell saves).

If you're casting Wall of Force, for instance, your spellcasting modifier is irrelevant. A 12 Int Wizard casting this does not make a wall that is smaller, less durable, or shorter-lasting than a 20 Int Wizard.

Spells can have a large variety of non-mechanical effects, and again, DMs often give preferential treatment to the success of effects achieved this way than by mundane methods, "because it's magic". Even when a class resource isn't being expended, if you're just making some kind of Arcana check to interact with an existing magical effect in an improvised, roleplay kind of way, the possibilities of magic far outstrip those of the mundane. And that makes sense, it's (unrealistically) realistic, okay. But is the average DM going to let the Barbarian make that same Arcana check, with the same level of success if his roll winds up the same as a theoretical Wizard's? Almost certainly not. And if the Barbarian wants to do something completely mundane, like hit a wall so hard it breaks, even expending resources (a use or two of Rage) to do it? Well, no, we're probably not going to let the party tunnel through a castle because we can find a few rules for how much health an inch of stone has (it's not much), and it would muck up the flow of the game. But a spell that blows up the wall or bypasses it? Oh, sure, yeah, whatever. But if we DO let the Barbarian punch through the wall, we've also got to let any Cleric or Paladin or Wizard or Druid with the same Strength do it as well, because that's only fair.

The new season 4 Adventurers League modules (6, 7, and 8) are out on DMs Guild. If anyone's willing to buy them and donate them, throw them here or on the Discord. I'll clean them and throw them in the Mega.

Still not showing us how creative and classy your martial prowess is. Come on, you can't even pluck the lowest hanging fruit here, like a martial class ability that has some applicability to non-combat situations (hint: Barbarian's got a lot!) and isn't obviously replicated by some simple spells? You really need another user to build you a target to shoot?

Are we just repeating ourselves now?

Nearly every class has equal access to the skill system. They each get the same number of proficiencies, except for the ranger (lol) and the rogue/bard (which are the designated skill monkey classes anyways).

Cantrips are usually enough damage wise, so that you only need a few supplementary damage spells. Control is far more useful in combat, and utility outside of combat is generally amazing.

If I were to make a lvl 10 caster that has to take on some of the martial roles, I would make an arcane cleric hill dwarf.

>Are we just repeating ourselves now?
You started it.

Mine clarified what someone was saying.

You repeated an already trashed response that had no merit.

No, I started it.
And if you want to beat someone's argument down, maybe you should actually refute his point instead of talking about whatever the fuck you want that isn't applicable or was explicitly already pointed out.

I do see where you are coming from.

I disagree with you about how you assume DMs interpret skill checks. Proficiency is supposed to be the gap between a wizard and a barbarian with equal stats. What irks me is that the book specifically says magic is what sets adventurers apart from the rest. A barbarian who is proficient in Arcana (or even just rolls high enough) is more then capable enough to write out a spell, or figure out an alchemical contraption. All adventurers use magic is an assumed default of D&D. Just like a high STR assumes you can punch through a wall, a high INT (or CHA or WIS) assumes you can fiddle with magic. That the narrative choices of a DM or player ignore this, doesn't change that magic is an assume key component of the game and the character, by the creators.

TL;DR
It isn't Wizards fault most people can't read the fucking book

>Nearly every class has equal access to the skill system
NO THEY DON'T

Casters and martials (not even a good distinction anyway because every class is some way between the two with Wizards at one end and probably Barbarians at the other) may have the same number of proficiencies but they have completely different primary stats.

Casters almost always have their proficiencies in knowledge or social skills. Martials have proficiencies in physical skills that let them climb around and sneak past enemies and swim raging rivers and do things while actually out adventuring, while still having enough ASIs to minor in one of the mental stats effectively.

Besides which in all of this, I think you're substantially overestimating how good most spells actually are and how many you get at lower levels, i.e. where most groups will be playing.

>backgrounds
>taking physical stats as a caster
You can talk about "the average" martial vs. "the average" caster all you want, but nothing actually prevents the caster from playing in the martials' pool if they want to. Meanwhile, the only way into the caster pool is to become a partial caster yourself.

That an user HAS to build a target for me to shoot illustrates my point. I keep seeing

>casters outshine martials

but when it comes to specifics, with real play levels (1-15) I've yet to see a caster who can outplay a martial at his own game, outplay a different martial at THEIR own game, and still function as an optimal caster.

>I disagree with you about how you assume DMs interpret skill checks.
Care to revisit this in a week or two?

Yeah, and a caster playing in the martial's pool will be doing it less effectively than a martial, while also being less effective as a caster.

To you kind sir, I shall direct you to
Cleric, so don't sweat the spells, but stats please

>Wait wait, but shouldn't a Wizard who sacrifices his stat in Int for max STR be able to keep up?

there are items that instantly give you all the strength of a fighter and more. and no, most wizards won't have a belt of giant's strength. it's just illustrative of the fact that a single item can replicate everything the fighter might be expected to do outside of dealing damage.

if casters were designed like martials, then everyone with enough INT would have access to spellcasting - by default - regardless of their class features, and wizards would just have features that make them better at it. and a fighter with 29 INT (thanks to some magic item or whatever) would in some ways be better at casting than a wizard. but no one would care obviously because a fighter isn't going to have 29 INT.

If I catch you, of course.

Should the google document the author of The Executioner released to help make it less shit be added to the mega?

The problem with this argument is that it can be turned around on Wizards as well. A reusable Wish ring (way OP to prove this point I know, but bear with me) could replicate any wizard spell, and the Fighter with high Int and Arcana prof could then go around pretending to be a wizard.
Items can replicate any class, and I feel that people should consider passing the wand of fireballs to fighters more often.

As for class features, fighters have some pretty solid ones going for them. Action Surge is a very popular dip for wizards, but Fighters also get the additional ASIs, rerolls of saves, extra attacks. Not even going into archtypes.
A wizard may be able to out-damage a fighter... but only by being a wizard. I've yet to see a wizard who can compete with melee attacks without turning into some fuckhuge monster that probably doesn't even fit where they are fighting.
Even that is only at higher levels, reg polymorph requires concentration.

I kind of hope they tap into the idea that Giants are an inherent threat to humanity (and the other sapient races as well). I'd also love to see something to evoke the hatred between Dwarves and Giants.

I would probably go with 8 str, 14 dex, 16 con, 10 int and cha, and, of course, 20 wis.

There isn't an unlimited wish ring, but there is a ring of three wishes, which is about as many as the wizard will cast if he uses it to change the rules of reality.

There's also the Crystal Ball and the Helm of Teleportation, because Scry-and-Die is an integral part of the high level game.

Updated mega trove when? New PDFs got released recently.

See .

But user, it's trivial for me to make up a situation where a caster can match or outdo the martial. We can sit here all day creating situations where the caster obviously wins, because that's what we're going for. If you want to prove this isn't the case, you need to outline the actions that a martial (and only a martial) can take. If no one can show how a caster can match or beat that example, boom, we've got one example of an area that casters can't compete in. If you can get a bunch of examples like this, then maybe you've damaged the argument.

But if you just want examples of casters being obviously superior, I can deliver those. But I know how it's going to end already. Someone will come up with a way that a martial could solve the same problem, but then someone will show how a caster could also do the same thing or come up with another, BETTER way of solving it. You're just making me do all the work first while also setting yourself up to deal with my heavily biased situations.

Situation #1:
>when travelling down a dark corridor, a hidden goblin throws a switch which opens a trap door, plunging the party down a 100' drop into a pit
>the caster casts Levitate/Fly mid-drop and floats back out

Situation #2:
>a band of orcs has destroyed the dam (out of sight), sending a massive tidal wave down the valley the party is travelling through
>the caster Levitates himself above the deluge

Situation #3:
>the party has been surrounded by a tribe of lizardmen and forced to surrender. they are captured and put into locked iron cages
>the caster Dimension Doors away

Give me your martial work-around for each of these and present three martials-are-best situations in return. I will acknowledge all "there is an ever-present antimagic field / enemy with 10 casts of Dispel" conceits if you acknowledge the conceit that the caster has whatever spell prepared (or one of the many obvious alternates).

>You repeated an already trashed response that had no merit.

Not him, but if some guys are arguing about numbers, and Guy A says, "and five is definitely bigger than two, and don't even try to say it's not bigger than three, because four is bigger than three and five is bigger than four," and Guy B responds with, "you're wrong, because five is bigger than four," Guy B hasn't really added anything to this discussion.

>they watermark the pdfs on DMSGuild with your real name
Whoops.

Except in this case, guy A literally said 3 is greater than 2 as a simplification of X > 40 and Y < 65, therefore Y > X. Does that make the objection more clear?

OK
So, three out-of-combat situations where this caster can out-perform the example martial. I'll do Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue in order, listing their relevant archtype and stat/skill prof.

Barbarian,Bear Totem, level 10, Human, STR 20, prof in Athletics.

Having rescued a bunch of commoners from a yeti in the frozen north, the character must haul a simple wooden cart full of starved, half-frozen people across an icy wasteland, during a storm where huge balls of hail slap into them, disrupting concentration.

So my first time DMing. Played with two people from a group I've been with for a few weeks. One is the our DM so he can help me out a bit if I make the enemies too weak
or strong or stuff like that.

Had an entire campaign set out. I tried to make it as railroad-less and interesting possible, I didn't hold their hand and let them figure out how to complete it with their own wits. Of course the very first thing my DM did was switch his CN character to CE midgame and murder the questgiver, burning down his home for lulz and rendering the quest completely undoable. One thing I didn't foresee was complete and utter destruction of the story line.

So now I'm pretty much playing it by the ear, using the meager world lore I established to cobble something together. As it is now, they're trying to take over a city that's essentially Australia, populated by rapists, pedos, and murderers that other countries just dumped on the shore rather than keep them in their own borders. It's run by a necromancer mafia that uses the undead as unskilled, tireless, foodless slave labor, mostly for farming and digging.

So, TL;DR it's a murder the BBEG and take his place as king of the hill episode. My question is, how do I make a necromancer king not cliche? I'd like some ideas about how to make a BBEG relateable.

As much of a mistake as it is to play on your terms

>#1
Trap doors opening usually give a dex save, which the rogue probably makes. The monk can make his save or just hit the wall and walk his way up, the fighter can reroll his dex save (which probably won't be low anyway with all his ASIs) and the barbarian, apart from having danger sense to gain advantage on jumping out the way, can rage and tank the fall with relative ease, before climbing out manually.

>#2
Punch your DM for throwing a 'rocks fall everyone dies' at you, or else curse for what can't be much less than failing the quest you're on, then curse your wizard for being a coward, then tie yourselves to some trees and start making athletics and constitution checks. Also hope that wizard doesn't get splashed too hard and lose concentration, or not float up fast enough at 20ft per round to avoid this 'massive' tidal wave, and also has something to push or pull against because otherwise in ten minutes he's floating straight back down into the water.

>#3
Bend the iron bars with your mighty barbarian rage, pick the locks, kill all the lizardmen in the first place because killing things is your jam. Also question why the wizard didn't use his dimension door spell slot to actually help while you were presumably fighting or falling into the ambush of the lizardmen, and possibly punch your DM if you've just been instantly imprisoned.

But that's ignoring the fact that all these situations aren't things that would ever happen in a game anyway. What DM throws a 100' deep pit at the party out of nowhere? Has them be in the path of a tsunami or captured by enemies without a fight without there being something the party can do about it? The only thing these situations have in common is that the ground falls away (literally in #1) from the martials in a way that negates only their powers. I therefore present you two scenarios of the same type for the caster...

Innante realized power (of will), rather than because of study.

Thinking of using this in my games. Any thoughts about the power level?

Does dimension door have material components? If so, that puts a pretty big dent in plan number 3.

In fact, I was going to give you two but
>#4
You are assailed by four goblins every six seconds for the next 24 hours. Can you survive? How about 48?

Is functionally identical to what is the main thrust of my argument
>#5
A thief steals your spell book in the night, waking you from your rest. You're then attacked by a band of orcs with a balanced mix of melee and ranged weapons, and all the martials in the party have climbed a nearby smooth, oiled wall so they can watch and jeer and throw stones at you.

Obviously this scenario is bullshit, because all it is is taking away the source of a class' power while allowing a different one free reign to exercise its speciality, exactly as your examples did - and none of these would ever happen in an actual game.

(Incidentally, in #1 the wizard wouldn't have a chance to cast Levitate as it takes an action and falls are instantaneous, so in fact he'd probably be the only one that didn't survive - if he had Feather Fall prepared instead, and why would he because if he's in a dungeon he's probably not expecting to suddenly fall 100', then he would survive but in the process he might as well save everyone else anyway, because feather fall targets up to five creatures and is DESIGNED FOR JUST SUCH A SITUATION, and because you're a PARTY THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HELP EACH OTHER)

>I can't make a build that outshines every martial, so I'm going to bitch and whine while running away from the challenge

Should I be calling you kouhai instead?
Building a character is basic D&D desu

>fighter in our party is insanely misogynistic
>went as far as to spit on a female knight for wearing armor and carrying a sword while being a female
>he found out recently the men in his family have served female commanders for centuries
>denied this but was shown proof

He had a heart attack and had to be revived by our cleric. Should we be worried of him going on a killing spree?

Things that didn't happen.

Don't forget that if the wizard has time to levitate out of the flooding valley, the Martials should have ample time to climb out as well.

We're going to switching to a new DM in a month or two, and he wants to run Rise of Tiamat (we'll be about level 9/10 when the campaign starts, so should end up at 16ish, I think. I haven't read the adventure itself). Before I knew he wanted to run it I did have a quick gander over Tiamat's stats though, since they were bandied about online somewhere.

Is there a way that a party of 5 level 16ish adventurers could actually kill Tiamat? Or is it a macguffin fight?

At least it's not another caster/martial shitpost

Stop looking at the statblock desu.

>insanely misogynistic
spotted the tumblr
props to him for playing a character that would have appropriate opinions for the setting

Depends on the setting.

>should end up at 16ish

What? My party is on the last episode and our highest character is level 12. The rest of us are like level 8-9. How fucked are we?

My best options would be to either use geas on a giant/goliath/other mountain dwelling creature of great strength and have it pull it for me, or use shape stone to carve a path into the mountain leading down the mountain and then use enhance ability to pull it myself. Feign death and healing/revival spells to keep them alive if needed.

The module is specified for levels 8-15 so it should be in your range

Having not read the module myself, but with PotA as a reference, you probably won't actually fight Tiamat, and there's no way 5 level 16 characters could do it anyway.

Make him run PotA instead, it's way better.

Any fantasy setting could accommodate it easily. Were it not for the rulebooks making gender irrelevant as far as mechanics go, no one would play a woman fighter because they just can't be as strong as men.

>#1
So "make a save"? The casters can all make Dex saves. They have equal access to the Resilient feat. The Bard also has Dex as a save. Dexterity is also an important defensive stat for unarmored casters, so it's not like the Wizard or Sorcerer is going to be an absolute slug on their feet. Putting aside the chance-based solution, climbing out of the pit is equally possible for our caster.

>#2
Hey, a giant tidal wave doesn't necessarily kill the party. This actually happened to my group in our PotA campaign when we traveled upriver by boat; one of the water cultist assholes summoned a storm and started sending Tidal Waves at us.
Leomund's Tiny Hut or Rope Trick saves everyone quite easily.

>#3
Raging doesn't make the Barbarian any stronger, it just gives him advantage on his Strength checks. In a world with a d20's worth of variance, it's entirely possible he fails, or someone with 10 Strength nonetheless rolls a 20 and beats a DC20. Enhance Ability can also give them advantage. And if the DC is higher, it's always possible for our caster to have the same Strength as the Barbarian (and not very unlikely either if we're talking Paladin or Cleric). Picking locks is also open to literally everyone.
Also, I don't mean to say the DM just surrounds you and says "you are forced to surrender," but something like you getting ambushed by literally 20 fucking lizards where the action economy is so against you that it's highly unlikely you'd actually want to pick this fight.

I didn't even think about that, but no, it's a free spell.

I still think there should be some mechanical difference between genders.

>different level characters in the same party

Not that dude, but my group will be switching to 5E soon, and I'll be DMing. It's been a while since I ran games, so I'll be using some complete adventures to start with. What are your thoughts on them?
I really liked what I saw of Curse of Strahd, but it might be bit too non-battle focused for my group, and start seems very lethal. We used to have campaigns where at least one character died each game, and nobody liked that.

Our characters die a lot except for the 12th level guy who is playing a wizard but that's because when we are close to dying he goes invisible and runs away. DM refuses to scale everyone to the adventure because muh Adventures league rulez

>DM refuses to scale everyone to the adventure because muh Adventures league rulez
Are you actually playing in AL or is this a home game?

So your caster just happened to have both really high strength to climb out of the pit, dex to avoid it, and con to survive the landing?

This word be why its important to establish your caster, becuase 'all 20s and whatever spell I can think of' isn't a very realistic representation.

You can't even settle on what class your caster is. A Paladin might bend those bars, but he isn't casting fly to get out of the pit.

That would make playing a woman hard as fuck, since there is no teaching or child-rearing class. That's just not me being edgy with the sexist shit. In the real world men are statistically better at most of the things you do in DnD. They'd be decent Clerics if they stick to healing and out-of-combat support. Same with Bards.

Rage gives resistance to bludgeoning.

>when we are close to dying he goes invisible and runs away
I'm sorry, that's hilarious. But if you're really dying all the time, I can't really blame the dude.

Next scenario
The character is part of a gladiatorial competition.
His ally is up to fight next, and is in the prefight waiting area, which has no way to see out. He wants your estimation of his opponent, who has been chosen at random a minute ago, the more accurate information the better. He fights in 2 minutes. His opponent is visible to you, he just walked into the arena.

Halfling Fighter, Battlemaster, level 10

Actually, men are better at everything. Women just gravitate towards different fields.

>our caster

You don't have 'a caster'. You never picked a single one.

Casters as a whole can potentially solve a lot of problems. 1 caster is much more limited.