Thread 96782588

It just feels like spellcasters get so much more DPS than martials.
Even when putting a lot of effort into a max damage build with +5 STR, a maul and making use of the Great Weapon Master talent against low AC enemies, it just feels like you are doing no damage. Meanwhile, spellcasters get bullshit like 32(8d8) damage Blight or fucking 24(8d6) fireballs against MULTIPLE targets. Not to mention all the bullshit counters like Hellish Rebuke with 10(2d10) damage as a reaction.
To add insult to injury, I can only hit a single enemy at a time, which is a maximum of 3-4 enemies with one attack each, as if a strong warrior couldn't hit 3 Kobolds or zombies in one swing and most powerful bosses, where single target damage actually matters and AOEs are irrelevant, have the annoying tendency to resist physical damage or, in a few very ugly cases, even outright ignore it.
Doesn't help that stuff like Alchemist's Fire only does a pitiful 1d4 damage and costs fucking 50G a pop or a hunting trap does 1d4 damage and has a DC 13 throw to avoid or escape and ball bearings are an absolute meme with a DC 10 saving throw, so trying to be tactical and work around your weaknesses using gadgets is useless.

Was this game just designed by fucking sadists? Did the devs of the game just fucking hate me personally? It almost feels like a troll/meme game.
Are the older editions better? Does just 5e suck? Or are Fallout, Pathfinder or Gurps just better games than D&D if you like not having a miserable time?
/rant

>>96782588 (OP)
The game was designed with the idea that your party would face a ton of encounters a day. So spellcasters would have to carefully manage resources, only using big nuke spells when absolutely necessary. While martial classes get to fight at 100% output nonstop.
Meaning that martials do consistent good damage, while caster mostly do poor damage, but occasionally drop massive bombs.

The problem is that nobody plays this way, because it's basically unworkable in many campaign situations, and most people just don't have time for that much combat.

In a game where the party is exploring a dungeon, you could reasonably have a single in-game day span multiple sessions and a dozen encounters.

But in almost any other situation, that just doesn't make sense.

>>96782588 (OP)
HP bloat

>>96782588 (OP)
Spellcasters are supposed to have to conserve spells. The game is based around 6-8 encounters a day. Nobody plays it like this, not even in a dungeon. You probably have 3-4 at most sometimes more like 1-2. In this situation the caster is at a huge advantage, throwing around spells as much as he wants. This is a design flaw but one that can be fixed in a few ways
>Several encounters and make them very difficult to really strain resources
>Give martials something extra to help, like magic weapons, armor etc
>Short rests take 8 hours and long rests take 1 week
There are many ways to contribute to the party dynamic. It sounds like your game isn’t very deadly if dps is all you care about. Often the survivability of martials is another strength. There are also skill monkeys, party face (which is often taken by a full caster) etc.

>>96782588 (OP)
Earlier editions were generally better, though in different ways.
AD&D gave Fighters better saving throws in general, and they leveled up faster. Monsters also had less HP bloat, so simply hitting things with a sword was fairly effective.
3.5 removed a lot of limits on spellcasters, but with the right frats and splatbooks you can get a character who does enough damage with a charge to basically kill anything in the monster manual in a single round. It's everywhere else that a Fighter falls short though.
4e heavily evened things out, to the extent that people didn't like it.

During the 5e play test the Fighter actually had a brief period of dominance where you had an extra pool of d6s to add to whatever you were doing each round. So rather than just doing 2d6 it'd be more like 5d6 by the time a Wizard was tossing Fireballs.
Why that got scrapped, who knows.

in my experience with 5e, giving out a +3 weapon for melee characters by mid levels is really what's needed to have them actually dish out enough damage to not feel completely outclassed by blasting spells. Though that was also often in the context of running numerous deadly encounters at mid levels, so it's not even close to what the system recommends for treasure or encounter difficulty.

>>96782588 (OP)
>5E just fucking sucks
True
>Spellcasters just gets more dps
Entirely your DM being retarded with giving too many long rests, outside of EB which is purposefully designed to compete with martials as Warlocks have limited spell slots, cantrips have a hard limit of a d10 (long sword) + up to 5/6 from int with a specific subclass bonus, meanwhile martials can get weapons with multiple dice or +3 for a total of +8/9 damage per swing or other damage bonus.
If you should complain about anyone being cancer in 5E you should complain about rogue sneak attack having no rules and dealing a bajillion damage

>>96782588 (OP)
>spellcasters get so much more
1. remove all recovery from rests other than actually resting 8 hours and studying 1 hour. No short rests and massages at some parlor bullshit.
2. stop playing 5e

>>96782777
>rogue sneak attack having no rules and dealing a bajillion damage
which makes no sense as if the rogue/thief does sneak attack for lots of damage, how much would a warrior do, 10d20? sneak attack is just flank attack damage.

>>96782588 (OP)
I feel like my level 12 fighter battlenaster does pretty well. +5 STR, Great Weapon fighting, Great Weapon master. Precision attack, just in case. Toppling attack as one of the maneuvers. Great sword +1 as weapon.
3 attacks per turn, you get +5 to hit with great weapon attack and you use a precision attack if you roll low. Can dish out 60-100 damage per turn

>>96782588 (OP)
I feel like my level 12 fighter battlenaster does pretty well. +5 STR, Great Weapon fighting, Great Weapon master. Precision attack, just in case. Toppling attack as one of the maneuvers. Great sword +1 as weapon.
3 attacks per turn, you get +5 to hit with great weapon attack and you use a precision attack if you roll low. Can dish out 60-100 damage per turn

>>96783631
>>96783656
Fighter certainly feels better than Barbarian because you get +5 strength easily and can pick lots of feats like heavy weapon master, the -3 physical damage on heavy armor, the +2 HP per level, etc.
But it stilll feels underpowered.

>>96783681
Barbarians are just shit. They are decent at early levels, but become meme class by level 10

I was going to write a comment but

>>96782732
/thread
Give the martials magic items, run a lot of encounters, or pick up the 3.5e core trio and play that.

>>96783713
My barb was cooked. GWM + polearm master + rage damage gives me three attacks per turn doing a minimum of 45 or so damage if they all hit, and somewhere around 70 if you roll high. Sure the stats are a bit lower but bear barbarian straight up doubles your health pool and a glaive gives you abuseable reach so you can just choose to not get hit a lot of the time. Then around level 8 you multiclass into echo knight and start freely teleporting around and making even more attacks. Pull up with a moontouched weapon and you have magic damage at level 1, and you can pretty much just cruise from there

>>96782588 (OP)
>Posts wojaks
>Has to ask if he fucking sucks
DnD is bad, but nowhere near as bad as wojak posters. You are below a DnDrone, and that's an achievement.

>dps
>fucking EVOCATION

lmao are you new to the hobby or something?

>>96783905
I know that it is ACKTSCHUALLY DPR and not DPS in a turn base game, but I just prefere to say DPS.

>>96784013
Is that what you got out of my post? lol

You should try out a game with interesting melee combat. In 5e, I always played casters because martials were so boring. In GURPS, I always play martials because the combat systems is awesome, making fighters way more interesting than casters.

>>96782588 (OP)
It's you

>>96783713
Most games don't get past level 10, so this would be a non issue, If it were true.

Whatever you do, don't think about how badly a game has to be designed for most of the material in it to serve no purpose to actual play.

>>96782588 (OP)
>Do I such or does D&D 5e just fucking suck?
Yes, yes it does. You need to homerule it to solve the main problems, such as the caster/martial disparity. DMG 2014 already had a couple of rules for that like cleave, special moves, and killing an enemy by making a lot of damage at once.

>>96782732
>During the 5e play test the Fighter actually had a brief period of dominance where you had an extra pool of d6s to add to whatever you were doing each round. So rather than just doing 2d6 it'd be more like 5d6 by the time a Wizard was tossing Fireballs.
Why that got scrapped, who knows.
Its because one of 5e's design goals was to have the fighter be the beginner friendly class which made them turn away from making it more complex than "I attack" at baseline.
Then when people complained about losing all the cool stuff they compressed the whole system into the Battlemaster subclass.

So when your looking at the 5e Fighter its better to think of Battlemaster as the Real Fighter Class and the basic fighter/Champion as the tutorial class. Which sadly gimps all other Fighter Subclasses thanks to being shackled to the tutorial class, but if you pick Battlemaster you can have fun.

>>96782588 (OP)
It's worse than that op.
5e sucks.
Your gm sucks.
You also suck.
Hope this helps clear that up, have a good afternoon.

>>96782588 (OP)
Here, I've got some help for you, OP

>>96782588 (OP)
>game is designed to be played in a highly specific way
>theoretically all of the mechanics, powers, and spells are balanced to shine in this highly specific and carefully constructed, borderline competitive playstyle
>specifically balanced encounters, so many times per adventuring day, with a limited number of rests, with resource management and bookkeeping required to make this all truly shine
>but actually WotC fucked up the math for CR calculation, chose purposeful HP bloat, and did nothing to teach or properly incentivize this highly specific style of play and in fact most of their modules and adventures actively ignore the way things are supposed to be done because they want players to feel powerful and never real face genuine danger or feel that the game is unfair or boring
This has actually been a problem for a long, long time. That nagging feeling that you are playing wrong or that you need to make some minmaxed gish build with homebrew feats and other shit comes from the stupid way that D&D presupposes that it will be run like some kind of impartial tournament play competitive game, but at the same time being officially dictated that the game should be safe and fun and prioritize the players' enjoyment over anything else, which means actively ignoring and removing rules and mechanics and restrictions. So you end up with the shit other people have already said: Long rest between every fight, so instead of working the way it was designed, the wizard gets to fireball his way through every problem with zero concern for resource management, because he's just gonna take a long rest after the fight anyways.

>>96784518
Which house rule lets a martial duplicate effects like Force Cage, Plane Shift, Shapechange, Planar Ally, and Disjunction?

>>96784680
The game doesn't work even when you play it how you're supposed to. It doesn't matter if a wizard can break the game ten times a day or once per day, the game is broken either way.

>>96784680
Even in the contexts where you run longer days, if you follow the encounter guidelines and do 6-8 medium encounters, that still fails to be enough at a certain point.
Say you have a level 6 party with a Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric. That party has 6 3rd-level spell slots. Assuming the Cleric is a Light Domain Cleric, that means potentially 6 Fireballs. That's one per encounter if you run 6 combats. But it could also be a combat-solving spells like Hypnotic Pattern. If you get at least one short rest, the Wizard can recover a Fireball. And if you fight any Undead, the Cleric probably solves that fight just by Channel Divinity.

The resource management becomes trivialized, because as long as you're not blowing multiple of your highest-level slots on a non-deadly fight, you're ahead on resources.
And that's without even really trying to optimize the party composition. 6-8 encounters feels like it was slapped on at the last minute to try to cover up that the math didn't work.

>>96784777
>>96784986
Hence the part about WotC fucking up the math. Even if you try it as intended (as best as you can sus that out from the seemingly completely different game the DMG is written for) it doesn't work and it feels wrong.

Yes it does. There is literally no reason to not take certain spells as a caster, like true polymorph which gives you access to most other spells in the game - even wish.
Also since this is a thread about complaining I'm tired of people saying "I want a hard campaign" but then losing their shit when anything remotely hard actually happens.

Alpha Strike is always the most powerful strat in any turned based combat. Making martials who spend no resources as strong in alpha strike conditions as classes who do would be pointless.

Also, white room encounters with neatly positioned enemies conveniently waiting to get fireballed doesn't help either. If your DM can only come up with encounters like that, of course casters are going to shine. If your DM actually ran interesting combats with reinforcements, ambushes, interesting positioning or tactics like enemies trying to snipe your casters so martials have to treat them like the carry of a MOBA game, you'd see it differently. It's really not you.

If you're casting fireball you're a fucking retard, you're wasting spell slots, and you don't understand the game.

>>96785605
Explain.

3.5 avg damage per caster level capped at 10th, against one of the easiest saves for monsters, and allows spell resistance, and deals the most commonly resisted damage type in the game, and doesn't impose any penalties, and doesn't impair targets, and only deals hitpoint damage, the worst, slowest, least reliable, and least effective method of removing enemies from the fight. GEE DUHHHHH I WONDER WHY IT'S BAD?????????????????????????????????

>>96785774
>all this appears at lvl 5
Yeah no I guess you're right for lvl 20 parties which obviously make for what most people play, you fucking sperg.

>>96785774
Yeah, Fireball sucks in 3.5. Any more brilliant insights?

The only edition that matters, yeah. Any other cocks in your mouth, retard?

>>96785774
Reflex is the hardest save for monsters to make.

One of the easiest, you mean.

If you're casting spells that care about what save the enemy is making, you've already failed

>>96785821
>thread is about 5e
Well I heard building HP is good against mixed damage teams in Dota 2.

Yeah, that was my point. Fucking retard.

>>96785871
Sorry you're playing the wrong edition for stupid babies. Come back when you have something relevant to say. Faggot.

>>96785854
No.

Yes.

>>96785879
>babies
Then go to your grog 3.5e thread you pedo

cry about it bitch :)

>>96785879
>"no, you don't understand, prebuffing is such a fun way to play an RPG"

lol furious

>>96785854
Reflex is the worst save for CRs 10 and 13 through 27. On CRs 6, 7, 8, and 11 it's basically the same as Will.

Swing and a miss.

>>96782653
The game was designed with the idea that you would face AT MOST six encounters a day with one or two encounters being the norm per day.

5e isn't quite as retarded as PF2e, that game assumes you are at full health and have all your spells and such ready for EVERY encounter, but 5e isn't very far behind that design philosophy at all.

>>96782588 (OP)
>Mages do AoE better
No shit. That's their function. YOUR function is clogging a bottle neck and smacking the soul out of enemies trying to push through with your +3 murder hammer and tripping the bastards so they can't do shit but get pummeled more each time they survive.

>>96783656
>battlenaster
Yikes, is that a core feature? ...D&D is a little more lewd than I remember.

>>96784609
I think it's just the nature of these types of games that you have to have at least one class or subclass for people who aren't really interested in the turn-based strategy aspect of the game and just want to chill with their friends and kill goblins or whatever.

Champion is clearly meant for someone who just wants to toss dice with the bros on his day off and doesn't want to spend too much mental energy strategizing. And I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing for a game to have a class like that.

>>96786943
Oh definitely, the issue is that in the way you get subclasses at later levels causes means that instead of just having the Champion as the beginner friendly variant filling its purpose, one of the 12(13) classes has 9 of its 10 subclasses shackled to a subpar base kit.

>>96786943
Yeah, this is me, played a warlock last campaign, I wanted something dead simple this one. It's fun, I hit stuff really, really good.

>>96785774
>>96785821
>OP is quite explicitly talking about 5e
>SI BUT IN 3.5 MI FAVORITA SPELL ES BETTER ESE

Browno clowno spic named Paco.
Shut your trap and eat your taco.
Your pigmentation makes me sick.
Expected of a smelly spic.
Upon your face I'd like to spit.
Your skin is brown just like my shit.
When you filch those tangerines
Make sure you get away unseen.
Lest Mama Tia have your head
And cartel dogs kill you in bed.
They'll bury you beneath the ground.
The only good place for a brown.

>>96782693
He completely reversed that opinion recently, didn't he?

>>96782653
>The game was designed with the idea that your party would face a ton of encounters a day.
no proof of this

evidence against it is that running six encounters a day is an unbearable slog and there's no actual realistic way to force the players to go through it

>>96782588 (OP)
Would suggest ditching 5e for another system like ACKS or DC20. Though if you want to play 5e still, get some 3rd party content that buff martials.

>>96787727

DnD was definitely about managing your resources, pre-5E. In the 90's or 00's if someone wanted to set a camp for 8 hours after every skirmish to make sure they had all their spells available, we would would have thought they were nuts.

It also goes without saying people had more attention span back in the day. So you'd see 5+ hour sessions and multi-level dungeons people can't even imagine today. The summer after graduating HS we'd play weekly for 8+ hours.

This is why the OG DnD had random encounter tables. Totally unnecessary for a modern group meeting for 3 hours but if you were trying to kill as much time as possible on a boring Midwestern winter day in the 80's, you needed filler. (it's not a coincidence DnD came out of Wisconsin and not California)

>>96788234
none of that is true

bump

>>96782588 (OP)
5e was made by gender activists which is why the system doesnt work at all and why there is no logic with the rest system, spell slot system, or player action economy.

>>96788234
>if someone wanted to set a camp for 8 hours after every skirmish to make sure they had all their spells available, we would would have thought they were nuts.
the rest system sucks so much ass.
>life or death struggle
>*meditate for 4 hours*
>heh back to full
yeah this system is dog shit.

>>96782588 (OP)
Martials absolutely beat casters in DPR, you just have to multiclass a bit. I'm sorry, but straight barbarian is actually very bad. Casters are more about battlefield control.

>>96782588 (OP)
>I don't do the most damage at the table
>This game sucks
Honestly? Just because you don't do that much damage doesn't mean the game isn't fun. Martials are fun as hell to play, I'd argue a better time than most casters. I think you may such.

>>96789163
Older editions of the game did actually have slower HP healing over a long rest, where it'd probably take you a week to get back to full if you were near death.
In practice though that just meant that the Cleric prepared a bunch of healing spells with all their slots, healed everyone near full, and so you just needed two nights of rest in order to get everyone combat ready again.

Modern editions of D&D are defined by stripping away existing rules in an effort to make things easier, but ultimately breaking any semblance of a gameplay loop in the process.

>>96789163
>For hardcore campaigns, you're right. For a fun ttrpg with friends, let them eat cake.

>>96789281
There were so many gimmicky ways to heal in older generations that this is kind of a moot point. I agree 5.5e is being dumbed down, but that's why I homebrew a lot of things like slower healing when it makes sense or permanent damage like broken bones until properly healed in towns.

>>96789167
I would also like more if it was more about battlefield tactics and using the envoirement, but as it is the game seems to be a battle of big numbers and even actively punishes doing things like setting up traps with their 2(1d4) damage hunting traps.

>>96789342
Would D&D be better with detailed battle tactics across the board? Probably.
Would it be nearly impossible without years of trial and error? Yes, unless you like 4e.
When my players have unique ideas or battle tactics, I reward them. Most martials I don't even charge them an action to like topple a shelf during their attacks or anything.
Environment is a great addition too, but that's a DM's job, not the core rules.

>>96789166
damage is the worst mechanic in the game

>>96788234
>D&D sucked on purpose because it didn't have to compete with anything

Embarrassing.

>>96782588 (OP)
>Do I such or does D&D 5e just fucking suck?
D&D has been a bad joke since 3.5

>>96787727

True. It was designed with the idea that you would have 20 rounds of combat per long rest.

Which, at 3-4 rounds per combat, is about 6 encounters per day.

>boss monsters
Grim.

>>96790288
>off by factor of 5
Does this mean 15 turns or 4 turns?

>>96790404
100

>>96782588 (OP)
>It just feels like spellcasters get so much more DPS than martials.
They do, but more importantly, spellcasters get to do much more when they level up. For every nonmagical character, you make your last level up choice at 3 and never again. Shit game. Leveling up sucks.
>Was this game just designed by fucking sadists?
No. It was designed by fucking morons, the most retarded of which is named Mike Mearls.
>Are the older editions better?
Yes, but probably not in the ways you might think.
>Does just 5e suck?
It does.
>Or are Fallout, Pathfinder or Gurps just better games than D&D if you like not having a miserable time?
Fallout no, Pathfinder yes, Gurps it depends.

>>96789166
>martials are great!
>you just have to jump through some extra hoops and bend the rules and accept that none of the martial classes are actually functional out of the box
>compared to casters who can just mono-class and still out-compete martials

>>96790404
What do you think "factor" means?

>>96789166
Then why is "single class barbarian" presented as a viable character concept in the rulebook?

>>96791305
Because the designers don't know what they're doing. Getting into 5e as a new player sucks because the rulebooks just don't teach you what you need to know, and in some cases just outright lie.

bump

>>96789167
I have no idea how you can think DnD martials are fun to play at all. Battlemaster fighter has something going for them, I'll concede that; but literally every other pure martial is so limited in what you can do and what's actually a viable option you'd fall asleep at the table.

bump

>>96782588 (OP)
5e is just shit man. Just play 3.0 or 3.5. Follow a guide as a newbie. Look at the class tiers. Tier 4 is good at combat and that's about it. Tier 5 is shit, tier 3 is versatile, 2 is full casters who can't easily swap their spells. 1 is full casters who can swap their spells.

Or you can play AD&D2e for the martial focused edition.

Eclipse is alright for point buy. Its not very well organized though, IMO.

If you're not afraid to branch out of d20 a bit - Dungeon Fantasy RPG is fun and D&D adjacent.

Pendragon is a fun King Arthur game. You really want to play it with the grand campaign going on in the background though.

>>96782588 (OP)
Check out OSRG. It might interest you.
Personally I'd recommend ACKS.

>>96795050
I like black coffee, I like the skin on pudding, and I like D&D in most forms. (Except 4e)
I could go into a long rant, but you don't need that opinion repeated over and over.
>>96800203
>3.5e
Fun.

>>96800203
>just play caster edition
how about playing a game that doesn't fucking suck ass

>>96782588 (OP)
High level martial
>Oh wow I get to try to hit something 4 times per attack

High level casters
>Can create their own impenetrable domains, give themselves immortality, and summon hordes of minions to both make more attacks and have more hp in a round

It's not you, it's the game. Martials were made around the idea of "what could a real person do?" to which the answer is not all that far while casters were made around the idea of "how far can magic go?" which, being made up, has no limits. At least that's what it seems like must have happened.

>But 6-8 encounters
Martials get blown out of the water by 6-8 encounters because they don't have the tanking capability(read hp) or multiattacking potential to last that long. Meanwhile, casters are given more modes to kite, control, and deny monster damage than would be practical to list here.
Optimizers have long since proven that the tankiest party should have 0 full martials, as well as the party with the highest dps, and best support.
If you want to play a martial that is any good you have to either play extremely specialized "moon knight" builds that require a constant pressuring of ordinary DMing boundaries to get the contained exploits to work, or giveup and go play a better game system.
To answer the title directly: You had a good idea but 5e sucks

>>96790929
>building a character is jumping through extra hoops and bending the rules

>>96782588 (OP)
>Or are Fallout, Pathfinder or Gurps just better games than D&D
Yes.
Play Dungeon Fantasy RPG [powered by gurps] if you want to play a medideval-ish fantasy game about going into dungeons and fighting dragons.
The people who complain about gurps all play D&D5e btw.

>>96802891
His goal was DPR. 3e may be Caster Edition in many ways (the 3.Y houserule document has some caster-specific fixes that improve that, IMO), but Martials are generally better at killing things than casters, (except maybe Druids), which matches the OP's stated goal. It also offer Bo9S if he wants weaboo martial powers. I said if he wants a D&D that favors more mundane martials beyond just in DPS, he wants 2e; and listed two other game systems that are less "caster edition" than either 3e or 5e; as well as a 3e supplement for point buy characters which can support building over the top martials to keep up with 3e casters. Assblasted as you may be, I covered OP's situation with several actionable responses. So - what's your point? Just showcasing a lack of reading comprehension on your part?

No, martials definitely aren't better at anything. Druids and clerics are both better at being fighters than fighters. Maybe learn anything about the game at all before you open your dumb fuckin mouth retard

>>96803481
>It's not you, it's the game. Martials were made around the idea of "what could a real person do?"
The funny part is, DnD martials can't even do half the shit a real person can do.

>>96808326
>t. white room nogames

Yes, you've never actually played a game past level 3, which is why you think martials matter.

>>96803481
also, the developers don't even understand their own fucking game.

weapon cords monkey lunge prone shooter

>>96808365
>t. never been in a game with high level martials because nogames

>>96808400
Yes, you haven't, clearly.

>>96803481
>Martials get blown out of the water by 6-8 encounters because they don't have the tanking capability(read hp)
See, what I don't understand is how the fuck did WotC not catch this during play testing? Okay, casters are limited by their spellslots each adventuring day, that makes sense. But fighters are limited by their HP every adventuring day; and the difference is if a caster run out of spellslots, he still has acceptable damage and utility in the form of his cantrips along with the ability to get out of dodge. If a fighter runs out of HP he's just fucking dead, roll up a new character fucko. This only gets worse when they made a core feature of the system bounded accuracy, meaning that you can't even rely on stupid amounts of AC to avoid that damage.

Did they really just base the "6-8 encounters" expectation on the GM throwing monsters that are like a fraction of the expected CR at the party so they have no chance of dealing significant damage? At that point, you might as well not throw an encounter at them. Even if you use the more charitable "Encounters also mean environmental hazards like a broken bridge" then martials are even worse! They're notorious for having few ways of interacting with the world outside of dealing damage to it and failing the challenge still means losing HP or even outright immediate death.

>>96808402
I accept your concession nogames

And of course, wizards have access to scrolls and wands, both of which they can make themselves. In most encounters a caster can cast a spell every round without ever using a slot.

>>96808669
Nope I accept yours

>>96808694
>no u
I accept your concession nogames

>>96808698
Nope I accept yours

>>96808733
You concessions have been and will be accepted nogames

>>96808326
I already listed druid as an overtuned exception.

>clerics are better at being fighters.
Depends on what splat options are allowed. You cannot assume every option from 3.0 and 3.5 is okay. Few DMs are that stupid. So - tell me how a core only cleric is better than a fighter. Usually 3e Cleric cheese is nightsticks and DMM Persist nonsense.

>>96808860
Even Druid can be reined in somewhat if the GM bans or nerfs Natural Spell.

>>96808791
nah

>>96808860
No splats needed, just planar ally. Fucking scrub.

>>96808860
>So - tell me how a core only cleric is better than a fighter.
Limited amounts of good combat feats means the Fighter hits diminishing returns, fast.
Good Will save.
Gap between 3/4 BAB and full BAB matters a lot less in core than it does outside of it, where it qualifies you for good feats faster.
This was even more pronounced in core 3.0. A lot of hour/lvl buffs existed, GMW/Magic Vestment scaled faster, Divine Favor's cap was +6 and not +3, the Weapon Focus tree ended at Weapon Specialization.

>>96809024
Okay I can see how you interpreted my post that way. I don't mean a core only campaign. I mean beyond core, everything is often to be negotiated with the DM. The stuff that buffs Cleric is more likely to be disallowed (because Cleric is Tier 1 while fighter is 4-5), while the stuff that buffs Fighter is likely to be allowed. I don't mean core Cleric vs core Fighter, I mean core Cleric vs Fighter with whatever splat content the GM might approve to make a one-trick-pony class more competitive. (And that's before we start considering Bo9S martials, or the 3.Y caster nerfs I mentioned (no casting defensively, spells take 10 min / slv to prep 5/slv to restore slots for spontaneous casters), (I wouldn't use the whole document as DM, but those specific changes I'd go for) - a lot of the caster dominance can be decently addressed to reduce their dominance with just a handful of targeted houserules and not giving casters splat cheese.

- but again, I mentioned three other systems that favor martial gameplay than 3e or 5e. 2e, Dungeon Fantasy RPG, Pendragon. Plus Eclipse for 3.5 for poimt buy Build-A-Class.

>>96809020
> Planar ally
You won't get lesser planar ally until L7, but alright, I'll bite. Are you going to hire new planar allies every time it wears off, and pay 1000gp×HD every CL days to follow you around (plus the small XP cost). I think it's a pretty specific type of campaign (a dungeon crawl) where you can expect the new loot to pay for continuing to hire new allies. Either way though, that's not you doing it, that's you paying to hire an NPC. Jeff the fighter can hire a big strong NPC Paladin in town to protect him too, if he wants to pay for it.

>first thing you talk about is DPS, builds
5E sucks but you suck also. Play a video game, TRPG is not for you and should never be.

>>96809318
>doesn't know
I assume that's about the planar ally? What is this planar ally cheese, and why would any real world DM (not white room theorycrafting "technically" rules legal whatever) allow it?

lol

>>96808657
My man, casters can run out of hp too. Even faster than a fighter! And they recover less of them.
I swear people who bitch about this martials vs casters in such combat oriented way are the white room warriors who simply must pick bladesinger, fireball, shield and every other absolute meta feat/race/class combo and think of enemies as meatbags that somehow never get to target the caster! The precious wizard who used 60% of his spells to have the ”mandatory” bells and whistles and most meta magic items to have ac even somewhat comparable to a fighter.

The real caster problem are rituals and utility spells that invalidate some skills.

N..no you don’t get it I HAVE to pick wall of force and hypnotic pattern!!

>>96809458
Casters have far more ability to avoid damage, or to simply be untargetable.

>>96809458
YOU THINK FIREBALL IS META HOLY SHIT LMAOOOOOO

Oldest forms of DND had the right idea.

Now, they needed a lot of touching up, and not in the direction of the arms race DND became. However, characters being less insanely tricked out with random stuff but still capable of trucking on worked. Wizard had a single digit number of spells per ADVENTURE but wasn't shackled by his dick to vancian casting either. Which is really where the equation broke down, I think. Too much emphasis on vancian casting slots and not on OTHER resources.

I know people don't like it, but some basic competence outside vancian slots, and the DM being forced to give the party consumables for the magic users to use, goes a long way to stopping the party from resting for ten weeks after every short 5 minute jog. Once again, the thing gamers did not like is what made the game good at all.

No.

>>96809458
>and think of enemies as meatbags that somehow never get to target the caster!
This is correct. Casters have a multitude of spells that mitigate, avoid or outright kill or disable attackers before they can suffer HP damage. A person playing a caster correctly minimizes the number of attack rolls (much less damage rolls) made against them. Fighters do not have that luxury inherently by design of the class.

>>96784680
I find a lot of games, TTRPG or video game, have a problem with this. Where in actuality, the game is meant to be played in a highly specific faction that is simply not discoverable unless the developer released a guide taking you through the steps. There's a few open world RPGs that shine more when you play the Intended Way and feel more cohesive. While you can brute force your way around, something's 'off' about what's going on. Like you know something's wrong but don't know what. Taking you out of the experience.

It really should shock no one that DnD suffers heavily from this disease.

>>96785184
Fightfags suffer this a lot.

They say they want a tough fight, but anyone capable of an equal challenge tilts them. What they mean, but don't realize they mean, is they want to FEEL threatened but have a sure victory. Just look at how many people can't handle actual competitive environments where they aren't smurfing or pubstomping.

>>96809458
But they literally don't run out of hp faster than a fighter in practice, that's the problem.
>Muh white room and over hyped trash that was never the meta in the first place
Meaningless strawmanning and dodging the point of what I said entirely.
The trouble is that casters get to pick both the utility/ritual spells that trivialize non-combat encounters AS WELL AS overpowered combat spell combos that invalidate the point of any enemies that were balanced against martials. Sure, sometimes an enemy may occasionally break through endless control spells to get to target the caster, but it happens so rarely that the caster can most often just tank the hit and still have more hp left than the fighter.
On your point of AC, one singular level in cleric or a couple in artificer (both full casters on their own by the way, so you are still getting full spell progression) allows the "frail" old man wizard to wear the same tier of armour as the fighter does.

When a max level "superhuman" barbarian with nothing to burden him would lose in a footrace every time to a level 1 wizard with longstrider and ROBES on then you start to question the game design. You answered me like my criticism of the game was somehow a personal attack (by the way, how would you feel if you didn't have breakfast yesterday?) but it was in no way so. I have wanted to play a good and effective martial for a long time, which forces me to criticize this system I poured so much time into that restricts me from doing so, because I want it to be better.

>>96810333
>Just look at how many people can't handle actual competitive environments where they aren't smurfing or pubstomping.
This sounds like League of Lesbians or worse, DOTA talk.

>>96810485
It's an everything talk. Everything but stuff like the environment of a casual TF2 random server where half the players are in a congaline anyway. Pick any shooter. Any MOBA. Any fighter. Any anything with PVP focus or even a PVP mode included by chance.

What people perceive is an equal/fair challenge is much different to what is actually fair.

>>96810472
Even worse, if we somehow assume perfect balance; casters sill have 2 resources to burn before losing combat effectiveness; while martials only have one large pool of resource.

one tiny insufficient pool*