D&D (2024) Martial vs Caster: Removing the "Magical Dependencies" of high level.

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

I usually go will lanes of Martialdom

1. Action
2. Items
3. Power/Hulk
4. Power/Speed
5. Skill/Weapons
6. Skill/Nonweapon

D&D tends to only support 3 and 5

What's action vs. speed?

And how does D&D support 3 -- power/hulk? That's surprising.

I can see 5 at low levels, but much of these threads are about how you don't get to mythic weapon skill at high levels.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The warrior is a badass.
The sword is common and can break
The badass should punch the magic over using cheap weapons.

Why must the sword break?

The fighter should be able to whup all kinds of butt with a relatively stout stick. The awesome should be in the man, not the tool unless that's the the specific point.

 

[Gammadoodler]

DMG 246-247
Objects have HP.

5e magical items have resistance to most damage. Artifacts like the Sword of Light are indestructible except in special situations.


It doesn't need to absorb the energy to reflect it. That is just how Gourry did it.

And Gourry despite being extremely skilled in weapons combat..... is a moron.

Ok. So the why is because the game designers say so.

They could just as easily, and with equal narrative justification...

Not do that

That's what I'm getting at. There is nothing inherent to the narrative that says things must work this way.

 

[Vaalingrade]

A warrior, no matter how strong, cannot pick up a twig off the ground and knock down a stone castle in one blow. The twig will break.
The same warrior could punch the castle with their fists and topple it in many settings.

In most fantasy settings, a twig is not strong enough to withstand the pressure needed to crush stone.

Setting established to be insufficiently fantasy.

 

[Minigiant]

What's action vs. speed?

Action is typical movie action hero like John Wick
Basically you are tough and get a ton of actions. Basically having 3-5 actions in one turn.

The Speedster is the Strength + Speed. They are extremely fast but their durability is very mortal. The STR/Dex Build.

Action is the "10 attacks" whereas the Speedster are Glass Cannons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean, you aren't usually casting many spells in the form of a Giant Ape. Though to be fair, when you have a 7d6+4 rock throw ability, why are you grappling?

That's the point. They can grapple, by taking a form that can't cast spells.

In your game, my rogue wants to walk up to a guard and hypnotize them to sleep in a round. What is the check? Since we can improv anything, copying a simple Sleep spell for one target should be pretty easy, right? It's single target, close range, so should be better than actually casting a sleep spell I trust.

First I'd ask why you're trying to duplicate a spell, rather than just do something based in the character you're actually playing. Why is your character narratively capable of putting someone to sleep? Are they possessed of hypnotizing charm? OF course it could be that we have already covered this, in which case you'd already know what to roll for it because we'd both already know why on earth your rogue can hypnotize people.

Now if your answer is just "you said we could improvise anything", that's a red flag wrt whether I want you in my game, because that isn't...actually a game action. That's just petty "they can do it I should be able to", when in fact no, different characters can do different things.

If your answer makes basic narrative sense, like "I've expertise in persuasion and I have established that I trap people in place with my hypnotic gaze" then sure, roll persuasion. I don't know why you think it should be better than an ability that requires a limited resource, as a skill check, though. Sleep effects mostly work the same in 5e, it will work like that.

It's also weird to me that you feel like it has to be a round. Like, you're doing improvised supernatural feats that most creatures can't do. Roll well, and we'll see how long it takes. I certainly wouldn't let the wizard change what sleep does and guarantee it won't take longer or have some other drawback, why would your rogue be special?

But the whole tone of your question is indicative that nothing I say will mean anything.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Personally, I only use disabling spells if they hit multiple targets. Sure, a well timed Hold Person could implode a major encounter, but I'm notoriously stingy with my spell slots, and throwing out a save or nothing against one target typically ends up with me down a slot with nothing to show for it. At least with an AoE, someone should fail, so I feel better about it.

I can honestly say I've never grappled or shoved anyone in 5e; but even when I played a Fighter, I was a Battlemaster, so I had better options to use. That isn't to say these options are bad or can't be effective, I've just never been in a situation where I felt that was the right option at the moment.

This is why these actions should be more readily available to martial characters.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

The problem with this is that it ends up being a matter of one of two things.

1) An intelligence roll to know the thing, then being lucky to have that thing either on you or nearby.

2) Pre-planning to fight a known threat, putting forth their weakness and guaranteeing a victory with few to no stakes but.

I've run into this with Vampires. Vampires can be incredibly tough and difficult foes, worth that CR 12... unless you have sunlight, in which case they fold like wet paper. So any group not in the "we may die even considering this fight" camp, can pretty easily wreck a vampire the moment they can expose them to sunlight for multiple rounds.

Hmmm. This sounds less like an argument that making mundane expertise work isn't feasible than like a couple of cautions to the GM or adventure designer:

1.) Make learning about monsters more interesting than just a die roll; and

2.) Make preparing countermeasures more than a matter of blind luck.

There's a well-known body of techniques for #1 because it's essentially just turning the monster into an instance of the "mystery" game structure: instead of being able to "roll Insight" to "detect the murderer" in the first scene, you need to follow leads to gather clues and consult experts and winesses until you have a answer. (Hopefully the correct one!)

Let's say you've got an adventure in which part of the scenario "requires" (for sake of Internet discussion I'll make this a bit railroadey but that's just to keep discussion simple) that the PCs neutralize the horrific mindwarper Dr. Horrible who holds the East Tower. If they either talk to the townsfolk who sell him orphaned children or interview the poor messenger boy whom Dr. Horrible uses to deliver his occasional ultimatum or take alive and interview some of the assassins whom Dr. Horrible will eventually send to test their mettle for his own amusement, they'll learn that Dr. Horrible eats brains using tentacles on his face, smells of death, and never sleeps. If they either resurrect Doctor Van Helsing from his remains in the cemetery, find Van Helsing's notes hidden in Musty Basement #3, or (forgive me if this is a poor example--I'm not saying this off-the-cuff example doesn't need workshopping) visit the wizard Merlin looking for advice, they'll learn that illithid liches eat brains from tentacles on their faces, smell like death, never sleep, and (like other mind flayers) flee in fear from the sound of a rooster crowing.

So now the players have a choice:

1.) Take a live rooster with them on their attempt to neutralize Dr. Horrible. Time their assault to happen around dawn, and/or have some way to make the rooster crow when it's not dawn (sunlight spells? Animal control spells?). Don't let monsters or traps kill the rooster before doing its job.

2.) Try to fake it with an illusionary rooster? Maybe test this out in advance first by seeking out a regular mind flayer and seeing if this works on it. Do the players have time to do this testing or will they just try it on Dr. Horrible and hope for the best?

3.) Brute force: kill Dr. Horrible and his minions using action surge/Sharpshooter/etc. as if the rooster information didn't exist. Or die trying.

If they bypass the "mystery" of seeking information and jump straight to #3, they may have a Deadly x10 fight on their hands, but they don't have to "get lucky" on an intelligence roll or in having access to a rooster. If they go the mystery route, they don't have to get lucky on an intelligence roll either. They may require some luck to keep their rooster alive if they go for #1, and it probably won't "[guarantee] a victory with few to no stakes" so much as it will change a Deadly x10 fight against Dr. Horrible + minions into a Hard or Deadly fight against minions only, but you were presenting a guaranteed victory as a bad thing anyway.

 

[Garthanos]

Yep. Of course there is likely room for all. At highest levels

You can have the skill mythic martial.

You can also have the power/hulk mythic martial.

You could also have the items mythic martial -- more action hero skill + magic items (as long as the magic items are guarunteed through the class).

That'd be great.

Sounds like epic destinies....

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

if you every round for 3 fights have your sword and board fighter say "can I knock them 5ft back and then follow and attack?" I am sure you would be called a problem in 5e. In 4e it was a normal at will (Tide of Iron).

In 5E, according to the PHB, this is just a regular Shove and then 5' of movement followed by an Extra Attack. Replace Shove with Shove Prone and it's been a standard part of the GWM PAM toolkit for... almost a decade now?

"Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them."

Source: Roll20 - Compendium and Rule Set Directory

I.e. it's not a problem.