Why do martial players hate magic players?

they should play a system where martials and magic users are the same thing

Stop playing with Poles.

Have you tried suggesting a viable alternative with a similarly sized player base instead of just parroting this tired dead meme ad infinitum?

is this a meme, or something?

>a viable alternative.

Of course, almost all alternatives are more viabl...

>similarly sized player base

Dude, you want a huge recommendations list of games better than D&D, or trolling? Because D&D's popularity doesn't make it a good game. You know that. Please don't lie to yourself.

Magic players are cunts.

>tfw im a martial magic player

I hate EVERYONE!

Unfortunately, actually being able to find people to play with does matter in terms of that game's quality. A perfect tabletop game is still worse than DnD if you have nobody to play with.

So I ask again, do you have any viable alternatives with actual playerbases and name-recognition instead of just repeating the same tired old memes over and over?

Lurk moar

Mutants and Masterminds.

>actually being able to find people to play with
>he doesn't play with friends
>he plays with randos

D&D 4e or the game that only have one actual problem: not being called D&D Tactics

Out-witting the challenge is also a viable solution you know

Where's that Roll20 number of games/players chart when you need it?

D&D is worst than almost any competition. Objectively. It's a fact you know as well as me.

I don't understand what you are trying to say, but people will never experience a better game if you are staying so painfully static in your choice of games to play. You are everything that is wrong with tabletop gaming. You are a sheep. A proud sheep, one that is content to follow the others, even if that means an objectively worst experience.

Show some damn courage user. You can do it. It's easy, when you know how.

Yes, it's a meme spammed by hipster retards who hate DnD just because it's popular or because they're shilling for some indie game nobody gives a fuck about, in the desperate hope that turning people off to DnD will make them flock to their shill of choice instead.

Because 3.5
Literally, that's it

because linear warriors, quadratic wizards is a thing, and it leads to proffessional jealousy.

Especially when the players and the DM forget that while a high level spellcaster is supposed to ba a one-man army, a high level fighter is supposed to be an actual army.

>D&D is worst than almost any competition.
Which edition are we talking about here?

>a high level spellcaster is supposed to ba a one-man army, a high level fighter is supposed to be an actual army
Weren't Herakles and Cu Chulainn one-man army?

But I don't, user. My go-to is Fighter and I have great appreciation for the folks who pick up Wizard or Cleric.

Although I wish they'd pick their spells better. Who the hell prepares multiple damage-dealing cantrips at the expense of utility? Who DOESN'T prepare Command? WHY DO YOU NEVER CAST HASTE

I was talking specifically about the way classes were "balanced" in 2e. High level fighters were supposed to have hirelings and lieutenants and whatnot by the time wizards were chucking fireballs left and right, to offset the fact that they were still using swords that did 1d8 points of damage (assuming you hit in the first place).

Only many DMs forgot, and video games straight up ignored this, so at higher levels the huge disparity between magic users and fighting men became apparent

When you speak about a specific edition or game, you should say which one it is.
Because other editions/games may do it differently

The problem is they're held to different scales. In d&d martials are measured against peak humans and in many cases cannot even keep up with them while casters regularly perform actions that only mythological gods could achieve. And in certain communities PATHFINDER this is normal despite the two supposed to be on the same goddamn power scale since they level up the same.

It really doesn't matter, because unless you are playing 4e, there will be a huge gap between what martials can do and what magical characters can do.

see It's a side effect of players thinking classes should be balanced on a 1 for 1 basis (and 3e omitting that part entirely).

Even worse is a wizard who ever prepares PRESTIDIGITATION

>still using swords that did 1d8 points of damage
So you didn't have magic weapons? Also ignoring that fighters were the only class that could strike more than once in combat (until much later) and how shit like a balor only had 200hp in 2e. A 20th level fighter was not going to solo a balor, but he would give him a DAMN good run for his money.
>assuming you hit in the first place
Considering that fighters were the only ones whose thac0 bonus continued after level 10, yes, the hit was gonna land.

5e is much better balanced for caster disparity than 3.5/pf to a degree that a GM who understand heroic fantasy and is ready to make small rule alterations brings them up to par. 1e was balanced around everybody being crap and 2e was about how many dudes you could bring along with you. Only 3.pf has such a huge disparity between them that even a DM cannot fix without large overhauls or books outside of standard.

>fighters were the only ones whose thac0 bonus continued after level 10
You might want to check that THAC0 table again.

>WHY DO YOU NEVER CAST HASTE
I can't even comprehend this, haste is the best fucking spell.

>1e was balanced around everybody being crap and 2e was about how many dudes you could bring along with you.
Both editions of AD&D were balanced around the non-wizards ending up with a bunch of dudes.

magic weapons notwithstanding, even doing max damage on a 1d8+5 roll pales in comparison to wizards routinely rolling 6d6 for damage.

And that's talking about damage only, not the gamebreaking potential of crowd control spells.

Not him, but you just tried to rebuke him and didn't provide any suggestions like he asked. Burden of Proof is on you kiddo.

Well I wish I was playing with you.

So far I've made a lore master wizard with a focus on utility and support, only bringing with me the classic damage spell.

I figured if I make myself a boon to them rather than a self sufficient party member it would be better.

I asked the DM if I could play a wizard and he said yes buy I could tell from his tone he didn't like it.

>How do you think I will go?

Why do the poor hate the rich? Because they have something that I don't and it gives them power I don't have.

More like 1d8+9 three times a round. Also there are plenty of situations where fireball isn't as useful as just bashing the thing.

>Golems with magic immunity
>Spell Resistance
>High Reflex save creatures
>Multiple allies within that 20ft circle
>Creature has fire resistance (most common resistance)
>You might not have Line of Sight.
>You may be within the AoE.
>You might have already used up all of your lvl 3 slots today. Fly and Haste are priorities before fireball in some cases.

Compared to assuming that there isn't more than one way to achieve balance between the capabilities of different classes?
Do note that Gygax later admitted that after years of seeing it in play, his method of achieving balance was not good enough to cover the power gap between classes.

Fighter at level 20 with +5 weapon and three extra attacks per round with 20 strength using a greatsword:

Attack Roll 1d20+5+6
Damage Roll 2d6+5+5

Meaning you cant hit AC 32, and deal 0 damage. Or always hit AC 12, dealing minimum of 2+2+2+2+10+10+10+10 = 48 damage, maximum of 24+24+24+24+10+10+10+10 = 136 damage with ordinary crits.

Yeah, but that relies on players' intelligence.

>mage casts maze and moonwalks away

You posted an apt picture for your autism.
He didn't bother because any suggestion given would be shot down because it isn't X enough or some other banal reason.
user, the run of the conversation you are in is about AD&D, not 3.PF, so why are you mixing mechanics?

>Attack Roll 1d20+5+6
You forgot their +20/+15/+10/+5 BAB.

Are fighters stronger in 5e?

>you cant hit AC 32
20 on an attack roll always hits. Also, 20 STR in 2e is +3 to-hit, +8 damage, and a 2H sword is 1d10 vs. S-M targets, 3d6 vs. L or higher.

Their profieciency bonus +6 at level 20. in dnd 5e which is what i pulled mechanics from.

>20 always hits
Seriously? That sounds dumb. So I can hit something no matter what? Absolutely no matter what?

I just find them to be useless in prolonged combat and multiple encounter. Mostly because the magic user, I adventure with waste spell every turn or get one shot by my dm multi natural 20.

Natural 20 yes
Or maybe you houseruled critical strikes out

Fighters have ridiculous burst damage in 5e (assuming you are using feats). But very little versatility or tools aside from that.

5e is fucking dumb. The book literally tells you "You can only build your fighter this particular way and all your equipment is pre-selected for you. Also we had to make everything weaker so the players' fee fees don't get hurt."

5e may be dumb, but you are fucking retarded.

No.
Baseline 2e fighters are still really the best it has gotten for them in comparison to both other classes and challenging the world, disregarding 4e.
Call me when your 5e fighter can just say Nope to Disintegrate and continue on like fuckall happened.

>He doesn't know what a Gish is
Quit pretending you can do magic, martial man, probably just because you got some racial SLAs

>Routinely
Well good thing that wizards at that level regularly face enemies that have way more than 6d6 HP and often have resistances. Also they get a easy save for half damage so it's often actually 3d6 -resistances. Plus how many fireballs did you prepare this morning?

Bounded Accuracy? It actually means you have 5% chance of being a good fighter even if you are shit.

Yes, unless it's insubstantial or something. Just like a 1 always misses.

>and all your equipment is pre-selected for you.

Are you a r-retard, senpai? You can still use gold for starting chars, its just a way to speed things up.

Fighters are also one of the better classes in general.

Well... they kinda have good CON saves and high HP. A disintegrate wouldn't do much more against a 5e fighter.

Which was and is their problem since 3.0
No one doubts that fighers or other martials can do good damage, but if they can't do anything else, they still suck

He cant? Why not

You have a shitty mage, user, it doesn't reflect on what the class can bring.

>a 1 always misses
Is this official?

and the discussion was not about 5e.

You could go as far back as 0e, and it doesn't make much difference.

The end result is still that the fighter is limited to bashing stuff with other stuff, which works great at low levels compared to the very limited magic repertoire of wizards, while a high level caster has access to literal magic.

And seeing as how 0e was based on chainmail, this "whole squad of pikemen" approach is not unusual when trying to balance fighters ahainst wizards.

Yes. It balances because a 20 always hits. Well more actually a 20 always does damage. You might hit its touch AC but it's armor bonuses mean your hit did no damage.

I agree with you, I just explained the situation.

Although, it's worth noting that 5e creatures and casters are significantly less crazy than 3.5 counterparts. Still crazy, still hard to deal with as a fighter, but not downright impossible to the same degree.

So what makes it so hard to just cast a spell on that sword or on that armor then

>often have resistances
In 2e, spell resistance was a flat chance for your spell, no matter what it was, to just not work, period, on a percentile roll.
Creatures that matter had upwards of 90% spell immunity. This included all outsiders, vampires, lycanthropes iirc and most intelligent undead.
A high level 2e fighter literally had a Nope ability where they could ignore debilitating effects and magic. It was highly restricted, and had a considerable trade off in a narrative sense, but telling the lich to go fuck himself was priceless.

There doesn't seem to be any intication that he'd just shoot it down. All it looks like is that you are dodging the question. Who cares anyways if he dismisses you, there are other people here in the thread that are watching, I honestly want to hear a suggestion from you user.

>Both editions of AD&D were balanced around the non-wizards ending up with a bunch of dudes.

That's not even remotely true and I don't know how this meme got started. They're balanced around spellcasting in a fight being insanely difficult and leaving you insanely vulnerable *on top of you having low hp and poor defenses*.

The absolute garbage that fighters got at the equivalent of level 20 (it takes a LONG DAMN TIME to clear the land for a stronghold -- significantly longer than it takes to get to level 9 in the first place) is obsolete on arrival, and is a big nothingburger compared to the mercenaries the PCs can hire at around level 2 and the henchmen the PCs have been getting since, probably, level 4-5 or so.

The games that don't have AD&D style spell interruption have some balance concerns since instead of casters being disruptable *and* flimsy, they're just flimsy. Usually not remotely flimsy, in the case of the cleric.

Tell me more about this nope ability. What is its name

I wasn't talking about 2e.

...

yes. not sure about 1e, and I see no mention of it in LBBs, but i'm pretty sure 2e had critical hits (a natural - ie, rolled, 20 always hits, and for double damage), and fumbles (a natural 1 is always a miss, and something adverse may happen).

I posted it a couple of days ago, but I basically wrote a whole new combat system that takes half a page and covers all the bullshit with a single line of text.

>A high level 2e fighter literally had a Nope ability where they could ignore debilitating effects and magic.
Is that one of the things from DMO: High-level Campaigns?

The double damage/adverse effect on crit hits/misses is an optional rule.

The entirety of the catalog of World of Darkness/White Wolf.
Shadowrun.
Star Wars, which has 4 distinct runs, from Westside to FFG's new outing.
The 40k rpgs, albeit they are a dead line.
Shadowrun.
Fantasycraft, Legend of the Four Rings, the many, many OSR/Retroclone games out there such as Lament of the Flame Princess.
You should have put up a genre to work with first, and don't assume that only one person exists who calls out fucknuggets when they post.

>Creatures that matter had upwards of 90% spell immunity. This included all outsiders, vampires, lycanthropes iirc and most intelligent undead.

Pit Fiend: MR 50%
Balor: MR 70% (youch)
Great Wyrm Red Dragon: 65%
Werewolf: Nil
Wolfwere: 10%
Lich: Nil
Vampire: Nil

So you're not that far off, but thankfully wizards could fireball etc. liches and vampires into oblivion (takes about two fireballs). As vampires and most undead can basically reproduce uncontrollably it makes sense that you'd want casters to deal with them, and rarer, more legendary monsters like mighty fiends and dragons are for the fighter to deal with.

Also, I think it fits that things that have Bad Touch tend to be vulnerable to magic, and the things invulnerable to magic usually just do damage (and some stuff that can be trivialized at that point like poison).

>a Nope ability
Hardiness is the shit. Note however that the delay can be fairly short.

try a drow with 90% spell resistance, and that's BEFORE he gets to make a saving throw.

still, wizards had access to insane defensive abilities, even with automatic, no concentration roll interrupts.

And while the wizard was summoning demons left and right, the fighter was still" just" swinging his sword. Tanky fighters notwithstanding.
That's how the linear warriors, quadratic wizards trope came to be, after all.

Name a single rule which isnt.

No, this was gained in the lvl 11-20 range, whereas DMO addressed epic/god level adventures (badly).
Everyone else was, save yourself and perhaps 2 others. The conversation has been about AD&D for some time.
Fortitude or Guts, iirc, it's been a fair while since I cracked those books open.
This guy has it.
Also,
>wizards could fireball etc. liches and vampires into oblivion (takes about two fireballs)
Yes, let's see those 2 fireballs come out, with 2e vampires NO SAVE DOMINATION. Vamps were something you just fucking avoided if you could, dealing with them was not a winning fight. There is a reason Strahd was a legendary figure.

Not him. Hardiness. At level 15 they can delay for 5 rounds, all the way up to delaying for 20 rounds at level 30, NON DAMAGING SPECIAL EFFECTS.

At the end of the duration they can choose to let it hit, or they can choose to "sleep it off" (1 day if its a minor effect like sleep or charm, 1 week if its an instant kill type effect like death or petrification, and 1 month if its a 'destroy your character' effect like aging and energy drain).

Don't be a cunt.

>You can only build your fighter this particular way
>HURR DURR

Having at least one player?

Hardiness is resistancr to physical damage, what is the name of the nope ability that allows you to ignore all spells?

I know. They always go for damage even though I need a healer or someone to help peel some of the damage from the mobs.

Nice name calling. What your point again?

That you are strawmanning like a right cunt for no reason other than to edition war.
If you want a healer, get a cleric, but user, realize there is a difference between a team player and your bitch.

>this was gained in the lvl 11-20 range
Are you talking about something from some odd supplement, or the fact that the warrior block's saves dive over that range?