D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Chaosmancer]

I don't buy the supernatural blood explanation.

Soooo... you don't buy the existence of Sorcerers, Tielfings, Aasimar, Genasi or Hexblood? Oh, or Shifters.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Make humans supernaturally strong, explicitly, and you'll have an argument. I still don't like it, but you'll have an argument. Vague assumptions based partially on compared game numbers and mostly on how you personally want things to work in your vision of a fantasy world aren't going to cut it for me.

So Vampires are not supernaturally strong? Weird, I've certainly consumed a lot of Vampire media and "super strong" and "super fast" tend to be really high up there. And, in fact, instead of a "vague assumption" let's stop and think of some facts. IF turning into a vampire gave someone super strength and inhuman reflexes, it would be reflected in the game rules... right?

Oh look, the game rules state that if you become a vampire, your STR DEX and CON become 18 if they are not already higher. So the rules, are following through on the myths.

And on the otherside we have you going... nuh uh, because humans are not explicitly stated to be supernaturally strong. Well.... neither are warforged, but you are going to have a really hard time convincing me that literal magical robots are not capable of being stronger than a flesh and blood human from earth. Considering we have NON-magical robots on this planet too.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Not for me, no. For me that's way into superhero territory. Not unless the character has magic, an item, or some other supernatural gift. Gamma radiation. Born on Krypton. Radioactive spider.

I don't know what to tell you. For me, things like that would turn non-supernatural characters into something I don't like in my fantasy RPG. It would totally wreck immersion for me. I strongly suspect that I am in the large majority here.

For me, the cool thing about some classes is that they can do amazing things without magic. A champion fighter kicks all kind of butt, a battle master is more often then not the MVP in the combat pillar, and so on. Have you seen what the updated berserker barbarian does? And, of course, there are supernatural options for those players who want to add supernatural elements. Eldritch knights are a thing. Psi warriors. Echo knights. Rune knights. Arcane archers (I mean, the last one sucks, but that's an implementation issue). And that's before multi-classing.

The underlying issue is that you are pitching a class fantasy that seems to be very much in the minority. That doesn't make you wrong, but you keep trying to argue as if your subjective opinion is the logically correct one. It's not. It's just your taste.

It's also not going to happen anytime soon. We already know what the 2024 fighter looks like. Most folks think it's pretty good! If it still isn't what you need, then that's fine. Time to home-brew up something better. But telling everyone over and over that they are wrong to like what they like isn't going anywhere, IMO.

Did you need an explanation for why Dire animals exist? What about Ghosts, did you need an explanation for why ghosts exist before you allowed them in your game? Or what about about Rocs, did you need someone to tell you that Rocs are all hit by gamma radiation and that's why they can grow larger than elephants?

See, because to me, you are conflating two things as the same thing. You want characters who can do amazing things without magic? I agree, because I like not having to be a spellcaster for every character. For me, magic and spells are the same thing.

You want them to be non-supernatural? What are you talking about? My champion fighter could be a tiefling, meaning they are a supernatural character. My Battlemaster can be a magical training robot. My Thief Rogue can literally be a deadman come back to life. These characters ARE supernatural. You mention the new berserker barbarian, I agree, the damage it can do in combat is great. Even better is the Primal Knowledge ability where they can channel the primal power coursing through them to improve their agility and senses. Because it lets all barbarians be more competent at skill checks. It is also, completely supernatural.

I'm not trying to tell people what to like or what not to like. I was never going to sit here and say "you can jump 100 feet because your fighter learned the Jump Good spell." but I am going to point out that there is plenty of media where jumping large distances is something that normal, non-magical humans do. You can say it is "superhero territory" and I'll tell you, so is dueling the Lord of Hell on a planetoid flying towards the mouth of a god-eating star monster. Every spellcaster gives reality and physics the middle-finger constantly, by high levels they can start on the process of making their own dimensions (Demiplane used to LITERALLY make another dimension) but we can't have fighters get too much like figures of myth and legend, they need to stay grounded through all 20 levels.... because we just ignore the places where that already isn't true, because the game never explicitly says "you are supernatural" even by level 20.

 

[Chaosmancer]

i don't know if i want to spin this off into it's own thread, especially given how little i know about the specifics of 4e class structure, but i think it would be really interesting to try see and convert the four 5e martial class's abilites into AEDU structures for better resource sustainability, maybe pull down some of the higher level abilities for the Daily abilities.

I think you would struggle with that, mostly because they don't really have a lot of high level abilities to be dailies.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Because you have very low damage and only slow him if you hit and not by much, not anything any other character can do at this level and generally do more effectively. You aren't winning any fight with Ray of Frost, even if you do hit, which is not likely. You reduce movement 10 feet this round only, if you hit. Any character has a good chace of doing that just by throwing caltrops on the ground. Honestly you will usually be better off doing something else to assist your allies.

Meanwhile someone with a 10 Charisma has a 30% chance of "winning" a medium difficulty Charisma check and a 5% even at a "hard" difficulty check. They are more effective at Charisma checks than your character is at combat.

Just face it, the straw man character you built is not GOOD at combat. Can you take actions in combat, sure, but you are not good at it and you are worse comparatively than someone with no bonus or no proficiency is at the social pillar.

They have both a ranged attack and a confusion effect.

Gibbering mouthers ranged attack 15 ft. Their confusion effect 20 ft. Ray of Frost 60 ft.

And suddenly I'm not likely to hit with ray of frost. And a character spending their entire action tossing caltrops and causing a visible 5 ft square of terrain that can cause 1 pt of damage is more effective than hitting someone 60 ft away? I don't even think you are trying to take this seriously anymore.

Taking an AOO is not suicide. As you noted spell casters have "encounter enders" and letting them cast those at will is suicide.

And so my point is proven. You have spent all this time and energy trying to convince me that casters are not one of the biggest threats in combat, yet your own default tactic is "gank the mage". Ignore what the martials are doing, take out the mage first.

Again, what more do I need to say in my defense, except to point to your own argument?

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think you would struggle with that, mostly because they don't really have a lot of high level abilities to be dailies.

oh for sure, but i think it would be an interesting theorycraft, maybe poach some abilities from one of the classic subclasses or tune a few existing ones up, say upgrade rogue's stroke of luck to be an auto-crit rather than just auto-hit, that sort of thing.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes, I think at 17th level a fighter will generally take down more Skeletons than a Wizard will.

It is going to be very rare that a Wizard will be able to get 8 skeletons in a single AOE, let alone an AOE that will eliminate more than 3 or 4 (the number a fighter can reliably destroy at this level in a single turn).

Well, you would be wrong.

He will probably die before he runs out and at that point you will have contributed nothing to the encounter. Really the most likely outcome is you lose some hit points (to drain your allies healing resources) and you lose some spell slots.

Since it was a CR 16 vs a full Level 18 party, yeah. But then I'm just saving my better spells for an actual threat. Also, find it hilarous that you are going to lay draining the allies healing resources on the back-line wizard, and not the fighter charging into melee with the dragon, who is going to be taking in the neighborhood of 15 attacks

No most of them take a legendary action or a bonus action. Some take an action but not most at this level.

Citation needed. I only found 4 creatures of CR 15 or higher in the Monster Manual with teleport. While the Androsphinx and Solar could teleport with legendaries, the MArilith and Balor could only do it as an action. None of them could bonus action teleport.

You don;t play ggames with Dragons much do you.

It is 40 feet flying and he can fly right off the ground, but that is not what he is going to do most likely, he also has a burrowing speed of 30 feet (15 using a Legendary) ..... burrowing which gives him full cover against your allies unless they go in your web to get him.

Did you note that the burrowing speed does not close the hole behind it? Oh sure, the dragon can play mole man with the party, but between the guy tossing out ranged attacks, or the fighter with a sword, one of them is going to be more effective than the other at actually hitting him. And since the fighter needs to hit him in melee to grapple... isn't he kind of reliant on someone to lock the dragon in place first?

Legendary actions recharge every round. It is not like he runs out of them. If there was no one in range to hit, then there was no one to use them on anyway.

Using a Legendary action does not take a reacion, so it does not take away his ability to respond to anything.

You mean if he uses his two legendary actions to move, then after the next persons turn he can use them again? No? Oh, so he can't move like that again if someone else is doing something to put him in a dangerous area, limiting his ability to respond to threats by fleeing again?

His beath weapon (and Dragonfear) are his most effective abilities even if he is only targeting one person. And you can't scatter because he has not made his save until his turn and you don't know if he will be able to move (unless he has already taken his legendary action and left, in which case you do know.

Yeah, dragonfear, I wondered if you would bring up his ability to just no sell someone getting into range to grapple him.

And, um, no. His breath weapon is absolutely not the most effective, what are you talking about? Unless the target has no one to make the save and no way to resist lightning damage, which I'll buy the save, but if you know you are facing against a dragon, you prepare for the elemental damage.

Oh, wait... the fighter as a baseline can't do that, can they? Not without MAGIC items or MAGIC potions or MAGIC from their allies.

to be clear - here is the scenario you are talking about:

IF he has already used 2 legendary actions this turn when you cast
AND
IF he fails his save
AND
IF he does not use Legendary Resistance
AND
IF he gets back his Lightning Breath
AND
IF an average of 65 points of Lightning damage does not break your concentration (because he is going to target the guy who has him webbed)
AND
IF you hang on to concentration until the end of the next turn through the Lair action which will also target you
AND
IF he does not get back his Lightning breath on the next turn

Yes if all those things happen he will be restrained at the start of his next turn and would need to use an action to try and break free to get into range to damage anyone. That is a corner case indeed!


It is never going to happen in play. It is never going to land and restrain him. It is a wasted spell slot.

No, I am not banking on all of those things. If I use a measely 2nd level spell slot to make the dragon waste 2 legendary actions solely to move... that's a good trade.

If I use a measely 2nd level spell slot, and he doesn't move and he uses his legendary resistance... that's a good trade.

And if I'm stupid enough to stand where I can get hit by the lightning breath, and didn't prepare to reduce lightning damage, and I'm the ONLY person who gets hit, allowing my allies to keep using their abilities... not a great trade, but I stood in the open like an idiot, so it must have been part of the plan.

IS it the absolule most optimal thing I could have possibly done? No, but then again, I'm not the one who saw me talking about the web spell and was like "AHA! But against an Adult Blue Dragon that spell is worthless!"

Look you said something that was not true.

If he is grappling with a shield he will not be using a one-handed or two-handed weapon. If he is grappling with a 2 handed weapon he will not be using a two handed weapon. That is obvious, but in both of those cases he will still be attacking every round and will usually be effective at it.

You claimed he could not attack, that is just factually false.

No. I said he was limited to one hand, meaning that he could hold a shield (lower AC) and he couldn't be using a 2-handed weapon (lower damage). Maybe you need to stop responding to every individual sentence I write, so you can actually follow what I am saying.

It is a DC 15 Dex save or be knocked prone, and if he fails after using indomitable he is knocked prone and restrained. This does not break the grapple though and it is a DC 10 strength check as an action to try to stand up .... which he makes with advantage.

It was never supposed to break the grapple

Oh I have a good grasp of tactics and Dragons. You are the one who pretty much wasted an entire spell slot throwing out web.

Yeah, the spell that you insisted I use. Seriously, you set-up these scenarios, then act all smug that the scenario isn't perfectly optimal, while I just try and deal with the scenario you chose to present.

Look it is a team game, just because someone else is the "Default Choice" doesn;t mean you aren['t playing.

Do you often split the party? Is that why you think that this is a good argument? Because I really struggle with "just because you aren't the person making the checks or taking the actions, doesn't mean you aren't playing the game"... because... yeah, it kind of does mean that.

And again, this group is good, I'm having fun, I like and trust them all. But that doesn't make it sting any less when we decide to discuss tactics and the other characters are always the superior choice for any decision.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

I think giving more uses to skills is a good idea, although bounded accuracy doesn't play too well with the epic uses. With higher numbers you can just go, "Yeah, you can walk through a stone wall with a DC 45 Athletics check, go nuts", while in 5e I think that'd be more on the realm of a specific ability or feat (that characters don't get too many of either).

A martial-type with as many maneuvers, stances, etc, as a Wizard has spells could be cool for 5e. Our Fighter in 3.5 took one level in Warblade and suddenly had a lot more buttons to push every fight, something like that.

 

[ECMO3]

And suddenly I'm not likely to hit with ray of frost. And a character spending their entire action tossing caltrops and causing a visible 5 ft square of terrain that can cause 1 pt of damage is more effective than hitting someone 60 ft away? I don't even think you are trying to take this seriously anymore.

No it slows enemies down effectively.

You are comeing up with these strawman arguments but at the end of the day you are bad at combat.

And so my point is proven. You have spent all this time and energy trying to convince me that casters are not one of the biggest threats in combat, yet your own default tactic is "gank the mage". Ignore what the martials are doing, take out the mage first.

I never said casters were not the biggest threat in combat. I said the caster you built with a 10 dexterity, no defensive spells, who uses a bunch of spells to prop up his social pillar isn't and regardless even he still has some encounter enders.

Again, what more do I need to say in my defense, except to point to your own argument?

You can provide a quote or reference, because you are not using my argument.

 

[ezo]

Okay, pendantry. Cool. So I can roll strength for that, since breaking things is covered under "other strength rolls"?

It's actually pedantry... only one "n".

Yes, you can roll Strength to break thens. "Breaking bonds" is an example in the PHB, page 176, first column, second bullet point.

So, if Ogres can do it, then humans can do it, and it isn't even super-strength or supernatural? Great! Then let's stop pretending fighter's can't bend steel with their bare hands or shatter rocks.

Well, ogres can try to do it. If you actually use the rules of AC/HP for objects, the chance of an Ogre doing it (in a single action) would be pretty low, around 0.85% or 1 in 117 attemps or so.

If you want to go the Strength check route, it still isn't great. I mean, again, it depends on the DC you want to give it. I'd go at least DC 17 (using the AC value), which means the DM would have to roll 13+, or just 40% chance of success. Like I said, not great, but decent.

Weird, one of the most common things I've seen from them in cinematic scenes.

Perhaps you simply enjoy more violent entertainment than I do?

Hey, I'd love to have rules for it. Something that could be used for monsters and PCs. Instead, I'm busying dealing with people demanding to know why I think my Fighter in a fantasy world could possibly be capable of things people in the real-world aren't.

Yeah, I can agree I would love to have better rules for it, myself. FWIW, personally I have no issue with a fantasy fighter doing such things, but it would be around tier 3 for me (if you are talking about breaking through stone walls, etc.).

Being a large creature does not increase your ability to deal damage or destroy items, does it? If I need to destroy a wooden wall, nothing about the creature's size is calculated into those rules, are they?

Well, it sort of does. I mean, Ogres do 2d8 with their Greatclub instead of 1d8 because it is a "Large" greatclub suitable for a Large creature. Likewise, a Huge Fire Giant does 6d6 with its "Huge" greatsword, not 2d6.

Otherwise, mentioning the desire for rules above, I would grant advantage to creatures based on size, etc. compared to the size of the object they are trying to break, etc. I know it isn't currently a rule, but it would be cool if it was IMO.

So... the rules for monsters in the game world don't apply to PCs?

No, they do apply to PCs, but a PC would have to deal 27 points of damage to the stone wall to break through/destroy? it.

A high-enough level PC could deal that much damage on their turn, but it would probably be via multiple attacks, such as a Fighter with Extra Attack (2) and/or Action Surge, or a Monk via Flurry of Blows and Extra Attack maybe? Or perhaps a Paladin with a good Divine Smite?

Fighter 11th-level, STR 20, 2d6+5 (maul), 3 attacks via Extra Attack (2) at +9 vs. AC 17 has average damage 8.15 per attack, or 24.45 in the round, close(ish) to 27. It's nearly a 42% chance. Of course, if you Action Surge for another 3 attacks, it jumps up to over 91% (dealing an average of 48.9 dmg in the round).

Monk 11th-level, DEX 20, d8+5 unarmed damage, Flurry for 4 attacks at +9 vs. AC 17 has average damage 6.4 per attack, or 25.6 in the round, which is close to the 27 needed. It's roughly about 47% likely actually.

Of course, all this really just depends on the DM and the weapon. After all...

For myself, breaking through a stone wall would require bludgeoning damage (i.e. the maul or unarmed strikes), piercing or slashing just wouldn't cut it.