I am curious to see how folks give martials an edge up against spellcasting.

How do you balance your martials against your spellcasters? Not what is the best way -- nonesuch. Just how you do it -- if you do it at all

For my players, the solution is shockingly simple: casting times for spells.

I say that from playtesting results over about a year. We tried a ton of stuff.  Everything I have seen here so far in some variant or directly was tried. What did work, what made them not just stronger without giving them more abilities and what balanced them against the spell casters was two rules: Concentration and Casting Time.

We settled on a number of actions equal to spell complexity. So that 3rd level fireball takes either two actions to cast, during which the caster has to concentrate.

The actions option allows you to take advantage of changes in the battle, and such, and means you have to pan and prepare more effectively. We apply it to casters as well, but not to innate spell-like abilities of monsters.

Now, I will point out that every single caster that I have ever told this to outside our group (who are the ones that came up with it, lol) absolutely hates the idea. Hates it. They like being able to hurl a fireball at the start. They don't like being a stationary target for the evil dm's crossbow bearing Goblins, lol. And yet...

It isn't a nerf. It doesn't add anything to any class, doesn't alter any large-scale features of a class, and it achieves the goal while requiring more creative use of spell casting. Minmaxing still gets you a minmax killer nightmare character.

It doesn't mean they still can't hurl magic missile or fireball or whatever on their turn to start, either.  Spells can be "precast" and held at the ready.

It also means that there is an actual mechanic for getting out material components, engaging in somatic actions, and muttering verbal components. Those things take time to do, and they are handwaved under the current rules in favor of walking tank rules that don't require reloading or any weapon better than a dagger, staff and rock.

Lastly, it is an easy to set up rule. The impact is minimal and execution is easy.

Edited: Clarified the ask, shifted for more clarity on how it actually works in my games, and even added a link in my signature to the alternative magic system basics we use so you can see the stuff around it about how it works.

Balance or make useless?

Taking three rounds to cast a fireball would usually mean that the combat is over or close to it by the time the fireball is cast. In addition, since creatures can typically move 30'/rd, 60' if they dash and much more in other cases, the odds of fireball actually being useful 3 rounds later are very small unless the caster happens to be an evoker wizard. Assuming that there are any bad guys left to affect.

Dimension door becomes useless in combat. Casters will never be able to use it to escape. It will take four rounds in combat with concentration to cast it. Pretty much any higher level spell is useless since it can never be used when most needed.

Banishment is useless since the caster wouldn't even know whether the targets would even be alive still four rounds later.

Upcasting spells would never happen. Healing is already a bad option except at zero hit points and this just makes it less usable since by the time an upcast healing spell is cast, the character will either be dead or stabilized.

Let me emphasize that you COULD play it this way, casters then have basically only cantrips and first level spells for use in combat. It would just turn most spell casters into out of combat specialists where the combat round doesn't limit the spellcasting. It would just be a different game world with magic-lite usable mostly only out of combat. It would not be much different from a game in which full casting classes are banned. Which can still be a fun game world to play in but it isn't the usual one.

This would make casters less effective in combat (though the warlock with agonizing blast starts to shine) but they still have a wide selection of spells for different out of combat circumstances. They just need to use them out of combat though with the length of time they require to cast, there are very few they would be able to cast at a possibly hostile target. Mass Suggestion? The wizard starts casting, the intended targets attack, wizard is dead or loses concentration before the 6 or 7 rounds needed to cast the spell finish.

----

In addition, making adjustments like this is based on the assumption that such adjustments are necessary, that high level martial classes are useless and casters need to be nerfed to give them a chance. However, I see quite a few folks playing high level non-caster classes because they are fun and the players feel like they are making significant contributions.

So - what is the traditional way to balance high level casters with high level martial classes - typically it was through powerful magic items with spell like effects. Holy Avenger swords, special magical armor etc. Improved saving throws and similar defences for martials are also good - paladin aura, monk proficiency with all saves, fighter indomitable feature.

The other way to challenge casters in combat is to be sure not to leave them alone. Casters that can stand at the back choosing to cast whatever option they can come up with should be a primary target for intelligent opponents. Enemy monks should try to stun the casters (most don't come with con saves). Enemy spell casters should be targeting the opposing spell casters. Paladins should also be a popular target since their auras boost anyone nearby. Monks should be popular targets because of their stun ability - having DMed a character with stun for a few years now it is incredibly effective since very few creatures have immunity to the stunned condition and even with a decent con save, most will fail at some point making them an easy target. 

Anyway, if I find any "balancing" needed for casters vs martials it usually comes into play in terms of magic items found and encounter design. I haven't yet found it necessary to introduce blanket nerfs.

Interestingly enough, magic items are not always a solution for balancing. There is only so much a +3 sword can do, lol.

My group has 27 to 34 players, and they find that this doesn't make the casters useless at all.  But I was also giving the point as a suggestion of how we handle it. It works, and it fits the lore and it creates opportunities.

But as I noted, those who play spellcasters hate it, even though it isn't a nerf, it is part of the structure as it is, just enforced more overtly.

And if your combat sessions are ending in under 18 seconds, then your aren't fighting challenging critters. I'm not certain I would let my players into a fight that would last less than a minute, let alone less than 30 seconds. no drama in it.

ALl of that said, sorry for feeling a bit protective of my players -- it was their idea and came from the books, and it works great for us.

Magic items is how you solve it for your folks -- do you give magical items to spellcasters as well?  Because that would undermine the whole balancing aspect you speak of.

I gotta admit, a casting time of actions matching spell level feels like a pretty big nerf.  If I were hit with that I'd probably be sticking to warlock for a caster and maybe sorcerer dip for extra cantrips then invocations to max the Eldritch Blast so I can spam that out at first level.  The major issue I'd hit is as I progressed with Warlock, any level spells I do want to cast will be cast from increasingly higher level slots, even if they don't benefit from higher levels.

Personally I think magic items can make the difference but it all depends on the character builds and how I see them doing in the sessions or encounters.  I might have one player optimising a fighter and proving more able than another player who is using a Wizard in a more thematic way, or even playstyles that optimise over playing thematically.

With magic items there's a lot of flexibility and it's not all about weapons.  A fighter can get a magic weapon, magic armor, magic shield and many other items.  If you see a fighter constantly struggling with a low AC and taking hits too easily you could give them something as simple as a +1AC ring, or an archer who can't get positions for shots might get spider climbing slippers to run up walls and avoid both melee engagement and achieve a clearer shot.  Maybe there's a wizard who has taken more supportive spells that help outside of combat but limit them in it and could use a staff with firebolt charges or a wand of magic missiles.

Magic items are just the easiest, built-in game option for a DM to really customise what needs to be done to make sure all the players are enjoying the game and feeling like they're contributing to the party.  Beyond that, its about taking note of the PCs who have taken feats or options for work out of combat and giving useful opportunities for them to use those abilities.

However, I have seen other things such as completely banning the "Shield" spell and a home rule that caster's can't cast in armor that isn't afforded to their class or sub-class.  This works to prevent casters taking a dip that gives them heavy armor and walking around in the safety of full plate with a shield, launching fireballs, or protecting their squishy backsides with a +5AC in their reaction.  It not only makes the casters more mindful of their hit points and keeping distance from combat but gives the martials more purpose to protect them so they can lay down the pain on the enemy.

So in your case you have seen folks do the magic item thing (and, again, I presume that they are not giving magic items to casters, since that erases the point of balance), but also you have seen folks who knock out particular spells or limit multi-classing options (which I suppose works given the god-awful multiclass rules of 5e -- I am an old crone, so I dislike them on principle, lol).

Interesting so far. I would call the multi-classing rules a nerf for minmaxers, myself, and as I noted the only way I can see to balance using magic items is to not give them to magic users, which is kinda meh, in my mind.

Another thing I have heard of is to make those who don't use magic "resistant" to it -- they have advantage and damage reductions, so a fighter could just up and dust off a fireball from a 15th level mage is the rolls are right and she's lucky.

That, however, means that non magic using bad guys could get it as well, and I dread the thought of a horde of goblins standing up after a mage's fireball inan enclosed space and giggling at the party.

Also, one I have suggested previously, which is the addition of sword skills - though that one was also beaten upon by claiming that the current abilities of fighters -- say a champion or a samurai -- are already totally on par with a wizard of equal level (which, honestly, I laughed my ass off at).

And that is kinda the point of balancing the martials against the spell casters -- to make sure that an average martial can have the same overall value at large as a spell user of equal level, from 1st level to 20th level (and remember, those high level folks have Wish).

Thank you!

Hopefully there will be more responses.

A big benefit the casters get, which can also make their gameplay feel more enjoyable, is versatility in tactics and responses.  Martials are often restricted to making an attack roll against something with their weapon, rolling damage if it hits and not much more.  Maybe they have a class ability here or there which does something fancy but a caster can spot a situation, consider their spell lists and slots and apply a unique solution to it.

I've seen some suggestions from people on the ONE DnD rules being developed that they should allow the Battlemaster tactics across all the fighter classes and possibly other martials, giving many more options for tactical weapon strikes. It sounds similar to your Sword skills idea.

Note that I didn't suggest excluding casters from magic items.  For me its more about looking for the players who might be struggling to feel like they're useful, regardless of if they're a caster or not.  Even the useful ones can be given less combat oriented magic items or "sophisticated adventuring tools" like the anymug, so they don't feel like they're being shunned.

Just another note that a relatively easy way to curtail magic users is to really look hard into the rules around spellcasting.  There are a surprising number of rules that get overlooked such as a spell with a Somatic component but no Material one requiring a hand free of even a focus or not knowing what spell the enemy is actually about to cast when it comes to the option of counterspell.

You can also be much more restrictive about what spells the casters get, forcing them to roll randomly for spells they're granted, conduct extensive research rather than simply gain it at a next level or find it in game from a library, enemy caster spellbook or scrolls.  This can allow the DM to prevent access to certain spells until certain levels or any access at all if they're running a "low magic" setting.

One simple change is to rule out the use of spell focuses, force use of components and note that all components are consumed unless ruled otherwise by the DM.  Then rule that they must find, purchase and track the components, not unlike an archer must keep track of their arrows.

Finally, the DMG has suggestions around magic in the world and gives options that magic could be illegal which would force magic users to be circumspect about casting in view of public or walking around with items such as an arcane focus in full view.  Even Clerics might find themselves among a population that hates the gods in general or just their particular god. DMG also has the Rest variant rule for Gritty Realism, that could see characters only getting a short rest once per day and a long rest once per week, which can REALLY cause the casters to take stock of their levelled spells and use them sparingly.

Yeah, the problem is the Battlemaster stuff won't match it after about 12th level -- but that's a possibility.

Note that I am just interested in getting ideas of what others do, not saying something is good or bad.

Some of these are interesting ideas about how to control casting, but few of them actually balance the class -- and require a higher level of record keeping or -- as you noted -- a "low magic" world.

But it doesn't balance the Martials against the Casters.  It puts more weight on the casters and the DM for record keeping, but doesn't balance them against the martials.

The sword skills I mention are something far more than anything a battlemaster can do. think like the anime stuff where someone splits person in half from 60 feet away, lol.

Nor is balancing about how a player uses a character -- it is a general basis, not specific.

You clearly have very different combats than most people. For the majority of games, implementing a rule like what you have would make every spell of 5th level or higher 100% useless in combat. Warlocks would actually become less powerful as their spell slots go up, since they could no longer cast spells at the (more desirable) lower levels.

Quote from Quar1on >>

You clearly have very different combats than most people. For the majority of games, implementing a rule like what you have would make every spell of 5th level or higher 100% useless in combat. Warlocks would actually become less powerful as their spell slots go up, since they could no longer cast spells at the (more desirable) lower levels.

 
Not really. My encounters take longer because they involve bigger challenges than can be beaten in under 5 rounds (and did everyone miss the whole “actions” thing?). I would argue that if the combat is less than that, it is too easy. And I know the encounter builder and cr system make it that way.

that, however, doesn’t tell me much about how other people balance casters versus martials. 

 I want to see how people fix it. So far, I am hearing a lot of “they don’t”. 

so why do people just not think martials are important? Why do the classes even exist in the game? There needs to be something that gives them value and purpose beyond role playing them; something mechanical that either aids them to a degree so great casters become a hard choice, or that makes casters less potent so that martials become truly viable.

I said at the outset folks hated my rules if they didn’t play in my games. I knew that already. I *did* make it up in several other ways, but the point wasn’t to have the system I use torn up, it was to draw out the systems other people use because this is why the encounter stuff and CR are so whack (not counting the way magic items other than a sword or armor screw with it as well).

if you are offended by that system, keep in mind I am not saying others should use it. I don’t care how people feel about my system, I want to know what they do themselves to balance it.

Any combat spells above 5th level would be completely useless. Furthermore, its just not a very fun mechanic; nobody wants to not do anything for an entire combat so that they deal a bit of damage at the end. It's simply not a fun mechanic. Thirdly, this is probably too much of a nerf. A fireball does 8d6 damage. A subclassless fighter at level five with a greatsword and and a +7 bonus (18 strength, 3 proficiency bonus) is dealing an average of 12.95 Damage per round against 16 AC. That fireball has an average damage of 28 damage and deal AOE. this is WAY higher than the fighter, but it is limited in use. but it now takes three rounds to cast, meaning 28/3 is 9.33 damage per round. This is lower than the fighter, but it does deal AOE damage. which may appear balanced, but at 4th level, a wizard only gets two 3rd level spells, and if they take any damage in the three rounds the are concentrating before casting, they risk wasting one of those slots. and it only gets worse a you level up; past 8th level, your lucky if a combat last long enough for you to get a high-level spell slot, let alone keep your concentration enough to cast it. 

The way I usually balance casters vs martials is giving them each different chances to shine. That might come in the form of multiple large combats with no rest in between, combined with out of combat utility challenges - this ensures casters can use their spells and be important, but by the final fight of the day they're usually hiding behind their martial friends who can still swing their sword and raise their shield. 

My main game right now just leveled up to 14, and is a relatively large (against the standard 4) party of 8; with a decent mix of martial and caster. They're high enough level that casters definitely have The Big Spells, but I wouldn't say anyone feels particularly weak or strong, save for the warlock (and she only feels weak because she was cursed with chronic Bad Rolls).

Of course, my games / combats all have skewed perception because of the party size. I can't have anything *other* than large scale combat, because random encounters with a group of 8 PCs would take an entire session+.  

Quote from KthunkTheBarbarian >>

Any combat spells above 5th level would be completely useless. Furthermore, its just not a very fun mechanic; nobody wants to not do anything for an entire combat so that they deal a bit of damage at the end. It's simply not a fun mechanic. Thirdly, this is probably too much of a nerf. A fireball does 8d6 damage. A subclassless fighter at level five with a greatsword and and a +7 bonus (18 strength, 3 proficiency bonus) is dealing an average of 12.95 Damage per round against 16 AC. That fireball has an average damage of 28 damage and deal AOE. this is WAY higher than the fighter, but it is limited in use. but it now takes three rounds to cast, meaning 28/3 is 9.33 damage per round. This is lower than the fighter, but it does deal AOE damage. which may appear balanced, but at 4th level, a wizard only gets two 3rd level spells, and if they take any damage in the three rounds the are concentrating before casting, they risk wasting one of those slots. and it only gets worse a you level up; past 8th level, your lucky if a combat last long enough for you to get a high-level spell slot, let alone keep your concentration enough to cast it. 

I suggest waiting for the Warrior packet to drop for 1dnd. They announced a complete overhaul of the weapons system, and it is expect that there will be some significant buffs to martial classes.

 

See previous. :)

Waiting for the packet for what reason?  I mean, yes, I am interested to see what they do, but that doesn't change anything now or answer the question I have asked, which is not for a critique of the system I use that my players created, but rather what others do for balancing.

I mean, I am of the opinion that all the classes need nerfs like farm needs fertilizer, but this isn't even about that.

Quote from VanZoeren >>

The way I usually balance casters vs martials is giving them each different chances to shine. That might come in the form of multiple large combats with no rest in between, combined with out of combat utility challenges - this ensures casters can use their spells and be important, but by the final fight of the day they're usually hiding behind their martial friends who can still swing their sword and raise their shield. 

My main game right now just leveled up to 14, and is a relatively large (against the standard 4) party of 8; with a decent mix of martial and caster. They're high enough level that casters definitely have The Big Spells, but I wouldn't say anyone feels particularly weak or strong, save for the warlock (and she only feels weak because she was cursed with chronic Bad Rolls).

Of course, my games / combats all have skewed perception because of the party size. I can't have anything *other* than large scale combat, because random encounters with a group of 8 PCs would take an entire session+.  

Yeah, my group -- which is over 27 players in size -- is divided into chunks of 7 to 10 each session. A regular encounter takes about three minutes game time (30 rounds) and around 2 hours per session (four to six hours) to play. So perhaps a lot of the previous stuff is player side thinking, not DM, and based on small parties of 2 to 3.

They fought one of my dragons a few months back and that took like an hour in game time, lol. Would have been worse if the dragon could have flown.

So you balance by use of specific encounter types. Second person who has done that. It balances play and opportunity, but not so much the classes as a whole, but it still answers the questions.

Thank you!

My initial post was not clear enough and so I fixed it a bit and refocused it on what I am wondering.

Why do people say that spellcasters do so much more damage than martial characters?  A 3rd level Fireball is average 28 hp (reduced to 14hp on saves), but take a 5th level Paladin/Barbarian/Fighter and they'll consistently dish out way more single target damage.  Spellcasters seem pretty weak by comparison other than AOE situations or if you frequently make enemies outside melee range. 

Introducing cast times for spells seems like you're tweaking things in the wrong direction.  I've seen one DM use a homebrew that spellcasters can use cantrips as bonus actions to try to close the DPS gap and bring them back up closer to the damage per turn that martial characters can do. 

Quote from DrJawaPhD >>

Why do people say that spellcasters do so much more damage than martial characters?  A 3rd level Fireball is average 28 hp (reduced to 14hp on saves), but take a 5th level Paladin/Barbarian/Fighter and they'll consistently dish out way more single target damage.  Spellcasters seem pretty weak by comparison other than AOE situations or if you frequently make enemies outside melee range. 

Introducing cast times for spells seems like you're tweaking things in the wrong direction.  I've seen one DM use a homebrew that spellcasters can use cantrips as bonus actions to try to close the DPS gap and bring them back up closer to the damage per turn that martial characters can do. 

In that aspect, it has to do with the difference between Area of effect spells (which strike multiple targets) and single target attackers, who cannot affect as many people.  THis is, in part, a function of the design of the system -- spellcasters are meant to be the area of effect sorts. That is their role.

I can't speak to why it is that folks focus on damage per round -- that's kind of a minmaxer outlook to me, and I have issues with those who minmax. But then, I am also not a Player, I am a DM.

As a Designer, the damage output is fairly even overall between most spell casters and most martials on a single target -- but this is skewed a bit by the nature of clerics, paladins, rangers, and other classes that mix and match martial capabilities with spell casting. Previously they were impacted by limits on the kinds and power levels of spells, which was an effective balancing tool.

The difference is that the damage of a spellcaster is spread out over a greater number of targets, if you use the Aoe effect, which ultimately ups their damage per round rating and results in the same unbalancing issue we are talking about here because then the systemic dpr increases by number of targets, and overwhelms the martial from a design standpoint -- hence why there is "no right answer" and "no wrong direction or right direction" to go in doing this. There is simply a direction that works best for those in that game. In my case, the example is one that is broadly misunderstood in operation (my own fault since I explained it poorly the first time around) and is not based at all in "normal" system magic.

However, it isn't merely about the damage for me, and I strongly feel that reducing it to just dpr is doing all the parties a disservice since it basically says "who cares about martials".

All of that said, how is it that you balance the martials and the spell casters in your game?

I see you mention how someone else does it: they increase the capability of spell casters to use low level spells. An interesting choice, as it actually reduces the value of martials in systems other than low magic ones -- but for some people, that is balance in their games.

How about you, though? What do you do?

For me I don't implement any homebrew rule changes to balance martial vs spellcasters.  If I did it would be something to buff spellcasters because imo they are underpowered and martial characters are just far better at combat.  I'm ok with that though since spellcaster classes generally shine more in the RP outside of combat and then martial classes shine more during combat. 

More specifically though part of why I say the above is that I rarely have combats where the enemies are out of range and unattackable by martial characters, and rarely have combat against 3+ foes that can easily be AOE'd down without some amount of friendly fire to other party members, harming innocent NPCs, angering NPCs by destroying buildings, etc.  Also to further help out martial classes I tend to have enemies attack the tanky near-invulnerable guy up in their face more than they probably ought to if they were being smart, that's another way to let martial characters feel like they're contributing more than just pure damage.

It sounds mathematically impossible for you to run a 10 player, 30 round combat in the span of 2 hours. That implies that you can get your players to complete 300 player turns in 120 minutes, to say nothing of the amount of time it takes to run the monsters. That maths out to the players taking each turn in less than 30 seconds, including all rolls, and that they are completely locked in the entire time with no breaks, delays or rules clarifications.

If you're able to accomplish this incredible feat, then congratulations, you and your players have my sincere respect.

I suppose it's possible to run a combat that fast when you have a (likely) minimal number of spellcasters who are now also restricted to casting about 1 spell every 3 combat rounds. Turns can go pretty quick if they are as uninteresting as "I attack twice, roll damage and move on" without any roleplay mid combat.

Wow, that is an old post but...

Yes, it is common, even with a spell heavy game like ours, to have everything resolved in 30 seconds per player per round. With role playing and narrative description, as well,.

but on the other hand, we are an outlier -- the oldest players have been playing together since 1980, and the younger ones have been with us for most of their lives, and we do have an official "30 second" per turn house rule.

Right now, the collective number of years of playing the game in my four main groups is 32, 21, 17, 19 (four groups of 9, 9, 7, 6). We don't "clarify rules" in play -- I make a call, and given that any call we make is also written down and put into the house rules, after 45 years of calls, we have pretty much everything figured out, lol.

breaks and delays do happen -- but oddly enough when combat hits, it is rather intense since while you are waiting for your turn to come around you are focused on what you will be doing and how that interacts with what others are doing.

A lot of what I do to keep the pace going stems from things I learned to do in the early 80's, when I ran an open game in a public space that often had between 15 and 22 people (22 was the maximum occupancy of the space).

The shift to an actions per spell basis didn't really impact the speed of play to make it faster or slower. It made it more tactical, by far, and certainly more "cinematic" in many ways -- but time wasn't impacted at all: what did happen was a shift to lower level spells that can be cast quickly and easily.

That said, I can see how this might be shocking to you in terms of time; it is rare for players who are less experienced to be able to get their choice of action down to under 3 minutes per turn, as they look things up on their turn. I do disagree that it is an "incredible feat": I learned it from trial, error, and dozens of other DMs who had similar challenges over the last four and half decades.

The MvS issue isn't in combat though, it's outside of it.

Casters have a whole toolbox of utility in their spell lists and martials have no equivalent. Anyone who has played a high level martial character knows the feeling of just sitting around picking their nose sharpening their weapons as the casters are communing with gods and enchanting guards and fabricating bridges and creating portals. Maybe the DM occasionally places a "pity boulder" in your path to make Athletics relevant - but even then you have to hustle before the spellcasters can utter Stone to Mud or Passwall or Telekinesis or any of the other spells that make your physical abilities and skills irrelevant.

Combat is actually the only place that martials can hold their own. Nerfing combat casting seems like its just going to make both groups dissatisfied.