In what RPG are combat-oriented casters the most powerful and/or the most fun to play?

Who the fuck actually plays necromancers in campaigns? Like... sure they're powerful on paper and such, but they're also a class you can't really play in any kind of campaign that actually has dealing with civilized society and such... considering Necromancy is considered an unnatural illegal abomination in 99% of settings.

Reminds me of Budding Heroes

>think M&M
If it's anything like M&M, I'm already interested.

The rulebook is extremely disorganized though, so a lot of people say it's more complex than it is.

Once you know it though it's great as another universal system to run weird stuff you can't normally run with a more specialized system.

pdf: sendspace.com/file/2fuwd4

>If it's anything like M&M, I'm already interested.

Only in that respect (effects-based/refluffability). Classes are still very much a thing, so you probably won't be able to build exactly what you want (unless it falls squarely into one of the archetypes). In exchange, the classes are balanced so that combat is varied and fun.

Some people, especially salty pure melee faggots, will always hate on the casters unless they're a glass cannon shooting confetti. See Dark Souls 3 for an example of what happens when you listen to these shitheads.

5e casters are boring as all hell. Magic missile is more fun but the rest of the spells are shit, if we're talking pure fun. Slay Living is literially straight damage. it is no different than fireball.

Thanks m8

No truer a statement has ever been said.

> redpill me on it

1d6 roll, it's cancer, it has basically no mechanics and reads like one of those one-page RPGs that everyone creates and posts but no one plays.

>I've never experienced that

Therefore it doesn't exist! Oh wait, that's the exact argument you used against 3.5. The cognitive dissonance has come full circle.

> literally the git gud argument

So why didn't this apply in Shitfinder?

See

>so you probably won't be able to build exactly what you want

Okay, let me elaborate on this.

What I mean here, is that you have to condition your expectations. The classes are set up so that it's a fun tactical game first and foremost. You could for example try to make the Flash, but you'd have to make it so you think about what abilities the Flash would have in a game instead of just pumping up your movespeed into the heavens (like how you could do in a pointbuy system like M&M). In exchange, Flash in Strike! would have "creates tornado to throw enemies around" and "punch 6 enemies at once" style powers.

>1d6 roll, it's cancer, it has basically no mechanics and reads like one of those one-page RPGs that everyone creates and posts but no one plays.

I actually played Lasers and feelings and it was fun.

Also, the mechanics start at like page 90.

Ok, guy, what the fuck is your problem? I said I personally haven't experienced that within 5e, and then went on to explain exactly how I understood that Necromancers and Druids could be used brokenly in the system.

I never went directly against you, and was expecting some sort of logical explanation on why you believed 5e casters to be broken. Instead I got this.

Admit it, you're one of those faggots that thought that Virt was hot shit, and this entire thread is just you setting off another Martials vs. Casters thread.

>literally the git gud argument
Not really, no. Dark Souls 3 nerfed casters into the ground my making their spells cost way too much mana and do shit damage. It's not that using magic was harder, it's that the magic didn't do enough.

I play necromancers. Why? They're fun, and they break up the monotony. I also don't play them as over-the-top annoying edgelord so they are actually fun. Not to mention commanding undead in the dungeon against other undead is incredibly fun.

So it's the same as 5e, then?

Magic is so bland it feels like 4e all over again.

Whitemages, because suffering from euphorically perfect health withdraw is a devastating attack.

The only thing 5e magic does bad is single target damage, and you can STILL be godly at that with quickened eldritch blasts.

White or dark?
>Do take your necromancer with milk or without?

What about Rogue Sniper Assassin?

5e casters aren't broken. They are boring as fuck. Merals and his dev team solved nothing. It's like how the new Star Wars RPGs "solved" Jedi being overpowered, by removing them from the game. Except instead of removing casters, he made them do the same boring-ass straight damage as 4e. Slay Living is just straight damage now. None of the control spells do anything good. And the shitty spell matrix disaster of 3.5 is kept in, giving wizards way too many spells and making for unnecessary bookkeeping.

Whereas 4e basically solved the issues of Vancian magic, or at least was onto the right track, but since the rest of the system sucked, they threw the baby out with the bathwater instead of thinking critically about the system.

Wizards of the Coast literally cannot design games. They have the easiest job on the planet, but they are either so beholden to the legions of autistics who can't stand a single sacred cow being slaughtered, or they are complete mongoloids who would rather ruin their game than actually improve it.

All they give a damn about is sales figures, which will always be increasing due to the increasing prominence of "nerd culture", and plebian garbage like Critical Role.

In short, D&D magic will always be shit, because the dev team refuses to consider any actual solutions.

>The only thing 5e magic does bad is single target damage

THE ONLY THING 5E MAGIC DOES IS DAMAGE YOU FUCKING IDIOT

In the middle. I like them to be a bit dark but not necessarily evil people. But sometimes I like to play edgy necromancers that hunt down commoners to kill and make into zombies.

My favorite character was in a non-serious Savage Worlds game where I took all the necromancer edges so i could raise zombies at starting rank, and played a fat virgin neckbeard whose spells were raise dead, detect magic, and an acid spray spell that used his 2 liter of Mtn Dew as a focus. Also savage worlds is built for characters to command minions so it worked well.

Necromancers are the best class at spamming minions, which works too well because 5e's bounded accuracy ensures that a buffed up minion can still hit a high level enemy, and high level enemies still have a decent chance to miss against pleb skellingtons. Other full casters can do it too with animate object etc.

Well, the DPR comparison charts I looked at didn't even have sniper assassin on them so... But then, those were used with "average damage over 4 rounds" the sniper assassin would probably have higher first turn damage, but less damage for later turns.
>what's hypnotic pattern
>what's leomund's tiny hut
>what's wish, simulacra, create undead, polymorph spells, etc...

Only one of those are offensive spells. It, and sleep, are also weak as fuck. Sleep is literally hit point based so it is effectively straight damage. It could have been "deal 5d8 nonlethal damage" and it would have been effectively the same spell.

So 5e's shitty design ruins another character archetype. Thanks a lot, Merals!

Honestly, at this point, it's become pretty obvious that OP is a troll who's obsessed with virtposting disparaging comments about 5e.

Feels like Virt too, but he's stated that he's responsible for about 10% of the bullshit associated with him, so it's more likely that he's some sorry cretin who idolizes trolls.

Oh, and what, pray tell, is the real necromancer archetype if not controlling undead?

>It, and sleep, are also weak as fuck.

Are you retarded? Sleep is the most efficient spell for its level (it gets worse later on, admittedly), and Hypnotic Pattern is essentially an AoE SoD. I a party with a single casting of it.

Which reminds me; 5e is STILL a caster's game. Non-caster enemies that aren't stupidly overleveled compared to the players (or undercosted like dragons) are way to predictable and pose way too little threat. Similarly, players who aren't casters have a very hard time handling caster enemies (in no small part because spells are now impossible to stop from firing off; the best you can get is a single attack in exchange for a feat).

I play a white necromancer Jonah hex.
>Use speak with dead.
>Slap undead to focus.

For the sort you should be playing in a heroic adventure? Someone using their mastery of Necromancy to hunt and destroy undead

In Legends of the Wulin, Kung-fu priests and daoist sorcerors are awesome. And even other archetypes can do ridiculous pseudo-magical bullshit.

I think overall it's better, but still not perfectly fixed.

Casters get better out of combat utility than martials by a long shot, but their control and damage options are less dominating. That said, they do still have a few game-breaking spells like summoning hordes of undead or a handful of the 9th level spells.

Casters are still quite strong in 5e, but it's to the point where them and a monk or a fighter can be in the same party and actually both feel like they're contributing.

>Oh, and what, pray tell, is the real necromancer archetype if not controlling undead?

There really isn't one. Like I said, 5e ruined necromancers. I mean they can do energy draining shit, but in 5e that is ZERO difference from a fire mage except for the fact that it's called "necrotic" damage instead of "fire" damage.

That's soooo different.

Have you even played the game?
Magic damage is perfectly fine, it's the speed that got fucked over. Even with the Farron ring and 60 dex, other players can easily dodge every single spell in the game.

That and poise was replaced with hyperarmor, which only really applies to 2-handed melee. This means that a single throwing knife is all it takes to interrupt your most powerful spell, soul stream, which takes a full six seconds to cast.

>Which reminds me; 5e is STILL a caster's game. Non-caster enemies that aren't stupidly overleveled compared to the players (or undercosted like dragons) are way to predictable and pose way too little threat. Similarly, players who aren't casters have a very hard time handling caster enemies (in no small part because spells are now impossible to stop from firing off; the best you can get is a single attack in exchange for a feat).

So in that case it's actually even worse than 3.5 because at least in 3.5 a party of four fighters could easily beat a wizard of the same level if they were vaguely intelligent about it.

>I think overall it's better, but still not perfectly fixed.

5e fixes a ton of D&D's issues but creates new ones. Two steps forward, two steps back. Maybe two and a half, because at least 3.5 was interseting.

>So in that case it's actually even worse than 3.5 because at least in 3.5 a party of four fighters could easily beat a wizard of the same level if they were vaguely intelligent about it.

This is bait, isn't it?

Half the fucking thread is bait

Pretty much. OP has only selectively attacked the arguments he can easily Shitpost more from.

Also most of his arguments feel like half-truths gleaned from reading the manual and not from actually playing the game for any extended period of time.

Only if the wizard is run by a moron or has all sorts of in character restrictions that have nothing to do with class.

This is true. A party of four level 1 Fighters has to simply attack two at a time from two different sides to prevent being Color Sprayed or Slept or Greased on the way to him, and they might have a shot at defeating Level 1 Wizard.

>or a handful of the 9th level spells.
Given that almost no campaign ever reaches that point unless designed for from the get-go ("Roll up a lvl 20 character..."), massive power at that stage isn't really a problem. It's almost impossible to stack buffs or make magic permanent now, so casters are in desperate need of teammates anyway.

>Only if the wizard is run by a moron or has all sorts of in character restrictions that have nothing to do with class.

No.

Optimize a level 1 wizard with Color Spray and Sleep and he can easily be taken out. Unless all four fighters fail their will save, the Wizard is basically fucked by return fire from shortbows.

Optimize a level 10 Wizard and he can maybe take out one or two fighters per round, before the wizard gets utterly buttfucked.

There may be some broken wizard build that can overcome this, but I doubt it. Wizard only "wins" if he dimension-doors away.

I understand the intent of this post and have found it vaguely amusing.

I also understand the intent of this post, but you went full retard. A good bait has to have at least a little subtlety to it.

> greased
> just fail reflex save automatically because who cares
> stand up as move action, shoot wizard dead with longbow
> or just fire from prone with a crossbow
> also three other fighters are attacking him

Or...

> color spray
> just stay more than 15 feet away from him and shoot him with bows

Or...

> sleep
> and somehow ALL of these fighters fail a DC 13 - 15 will save.

> they might have a shot at defeating Level 1 Wizard.

You are such a fucking retard it's unbelievable. You act like a wizard can cast sleep infinite times per day, four times per round, all while being invincible to every possible attack. I don't know where you dumb fucks get this. I seriously want to play out this scenario in an actual face to face game so I can laugh at how retarded you are when my group of four fighters beats your level 1 wizard over and over and over.

Caster supremacy certainly exists but you dumbfucks take it so far it's like you're trying to create a strawman of yourselves.

I regret making this thread

No, it was a good idea, OP, because these "wizards in 3.5 can literally do everything all day with 100% chance of success and fighters literally are literally irrelevant" dumbfucks are finally getting blown the fuck out.

They took a legitimate argument and blew it so far out of proportion they outed themselves as meme-spouting dumbfucks.

The fact that no one has replied to my analysis of a 1st level wizard versus fighters, just goes to show that.

This pretty much. A starting wizard's HP is 6+con. That's a max of 11 if they put everything into Con. Even if the wizard specced into defense with Shield and managed to simultaneously max Dex and Con, the max AC they could have is 18 +5 If they're casting Shield once per round, eliminating their reaction and a spell slot. Even doing all that it would still only take one lucky hit from a single fighter to instantly send the wizard to death saves.

We could go back talking about Strike!, M&M Budding Heroes, and LotW (if I left any suggestions out, sorry).

I'm telling you, you are going in too hard. Take a deep breath, settle down, and try a different approach.

GURPS with Ritual Magic. It really makes magic, well, magical rather than keeping everything codified and gamey like in D&D.

Devineing the future via communicating with the dead, or talking to the dead in general.

Clerics can do that. Necromancer wizard is the evil life-sapping archetype.

He's referencing the fact that the word "Necromancy" literally means gathering information using dead things. The -mancy suffix historically means divination, though at this point the meaning has probably shifted enough to get a different definition.

Everybody forgets that in 3.5 and Pathfinder, Sleep has a 1 round casting time. It can be an encounter winner, but not when the wizard is by himself, because he has to do nothing but concentrate for the entire round and it doesn't actually come into effect until his next turn.

Any wizard worth the name is never going to cast Sleep in the circumstances described, even in a 1v1. Really, one of the easier ways to build an encounter around a wizard is to spread out opponents so a single AoE can't catch them all, or to group up and bait the AoE before going into the real encounter as "reinforcements."

Just assume the wizard is going to make a certain number of enemies irrelevant, and then add more enemies.

>Casters are still quite strong in 5e, but it's to the point where them and a monk or a fighter can be in the same party and actually both feel like they're contributing.
I feel like this is true for monks seeing how they could just spam stun on fucking everything, but fighters are simply damage dealers, and if they aren't great weapon fighters they're a goddamn waste of a PC

Because you suck at ROLEplaying. ROLEplaying places the casters,usually, in the social rear of the group. They don't get to make decisions because noone trusts them. Martials are trusted and become leaders because they can't literally cast a spell and control your mind. Or send demons to eat your family. Or spit fire and roast your village.

In ROLEplaying, people rightfully fear what they don't understand and therefore casters have to be either obviously helpful, like healers, or socially banished from leadership. Except in their own small clique communities. And among them, they are just one of many and therefore not very important either.

In ROLLplaying, though your argument applies. Too bad you suck at ROLEplaying. You might be invited to a group that does such.

We're talking about 3.5, dummy. But yes, that is true. And death saves wouldn't matter if the wizard is out of the fight. Coupe-de-grace time.

> devineing

This can't be real.

What you said is half true but has nothing to do with what I said. I think you meant to reply to someone else.

And in a high magic setting commoners would not automatically fear wizards, that's AD&D shit, 3.5 suggests each village have an adept that cares for the commoners and shit.

>Implying that everyone has to hate wizards

>Implying that the murderous asshole with a sword will be loved by random peasants who get murdered and raped by guys like him all the time

>Implying that adventurers shouldn't be seen as barely sane transient murderers for hire who will do acts of good only for self benefit and will just as likely slit your throat or harass you if you don't give them money, sell them things at a discount while buying for full price, or sent them a room and not complain about them trashing it.

>Implying that they wouldn't recognize how useful magic is vs potent supernatural threats

>Implying everyone has to be a wizard hating cunt like you.

God forbid that some places and people dislike warriors while liking wizards. God forbid we have some variety up in this fucking generic ass high fantasy garbage.

Blasting/Combat Casting in 3.PF is actually REALLY REALLY fucking terrible in 1pp bar ONE archetype combo.

In 3.PF it's pretty trivial to turn a blaster into an encounter raper that makes level 1 Sleep look tame, but that's only because you can turn any damage spell into a SoL that nothing has resistance to with two feats. In 3.5, it's a little less true.

>In 3.PF it's pretty trivial to turn a blaster into an encounter raper that makes level 1 Sleep look tame, but that's only because you can turn any damage spell into a SoL that nothing has resistance to with two feats.
Yeah, Dazing spell but that's more battle field control as opposed to raw damage/combat ability.

That's the irony of it. You don't make a good blaster by blowing enemies into oblivion, you make a good blaster by doing the same thing poncing Glitterdust spammers are doing.

Glitterdust is just annoying though. Web is usually better.

I've had fun playing combat casters in GURPS. Not the most powerful though.