Martials are also a lot more durable. Especially if you want casters to dump dex and con in favor of mental stats.
Why would they dump dex and con? As a wizard your two most important stats are INT followed closely by CON. Casters should be dumping strength, and then charisma or int depending on the type of caster.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fanδ — making a smoothie for meta ——————| EXTENDED SIG |—————— Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
Martials are also a lot more durable. Especially if you want casters to dump dex and con in favor of mental stats.
Why would they dump dex and con? As a wizard your two most important stats are INT followed closely by CON. Casters should be dumping strength, and then charisma or int depending on the type of caster.
Going based on this comment: "Casters always outperform martials in interactions (they have higher mental stats, which are used in more checks)"
Martials are also a lot more durable. Especially if you want casters to dump dex and con in favor of mental stats.
Why would they dump dex and con? As a wizard your two most important stats are INT followed closely by CON. Casters should be dumping strength, and then charisma or int depending on the type of caster.
Going based on this comment: "Casters always outperform martials in interactions (they have higher mental stats, which are used in more checks)"
Yes, if you dump charisma and you’re an INT or WIS caster, you’re going to have several INT based skills you’re very good at, as well as several WIS based skills likely. If you’re a CHA caster and you dump INT, you have very good charisma skills, as well as likely wisdom skills. If you’re a full martial, you want either dexterity and con, or strength and dexterity and con. None of these primary attributes have many skill checks.
I can’t really tell what you’re arguing. Are you saying there isn’t a martial caster divide?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fanδ — making a smoothie for meta ——————| EXTENDED SIG |—————— Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
Casters can absolutely keep melees down. Slow spell, Fly, Gaseous Form, Forcecage, Wall of Force, Hold Person, Reverse Gravity, Spike Growth, Tasha’s Hideous Laughter, and more. If a caster can’t beat a martial, it’s because the caster is doing nothing but walking backwards and spamming cantrips, which isn’t how casters should be playing. That’s like playing fighter and making one attack per turn. Casters always outperform martials in interactions (they have higher mental stats, which are used in more checks), utility, damage, and pretty much every field except for the number of attacks they can make in a turn.
I’m not saying I dislike martials - I love playing martials. I just wish they were better. Half casters deal the most damage, followed by casters, with full martials taking last place.
Well, if considered in a vacuum - that might be true.
But it's not. Not in a vacuum - and also not true.
A caster get's one chance. Cast something that a martial doesn't save against. Then, maybe. Of course in almost all cases, the martial then saves on the next round, and we're back to square one. If the caster doesn't significantly impair the martial in the first go - it's open season. I close to melee, and I do irreperable damage. And I keep doing it. Flight is the only option. As in running away. Don't try flying, it doesn't end well. My current martial is a very melee rogue who has a habit of mounting dragons as they fly over, and murdering them or their riders or both (it's dragonlance - dragons are essentially mules).
He's a .. kind of a gish, of course .. so he cheats, and has various ways of upping his mobility.
Obviously this isn't universally true all the time for everyone everywhere. But I've played since some time in the 80's. 85, I think. I've never felt - as a martial going up against casters - that 'oh noes, I'm so weak'. Never. It's always been 'let me get my mitts around the throat of this guy, we'll see how clever his spells really are!'
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Well, if considered in a vacuum - that might be true.
But it's not. Not in a vacuum - and also not true.
A caster get's one chance. Cast something that a martial doesn't save against. Then, maybe. Of course in almost all cases, the martial then saves on the next round, and we're back to square one. If the caster doesn't significantly impair the martial in the first go - it's open season. I close to melee, and I do irreperable damage. And I keep doing it. Flight is the only option. As in running away. Don't try flying, it doesn't end well. My current martial is a very melee rogue who has a habit of mounting dragons as they fly over, and murdering them or their riders or both (it's dragonlance - dragons are essentially mules).
He's a .. kind of a gish, of course .. so he cheats, and has various ways of upping his mobility.
Obviously this isn't universally true all the time for everyone everywhere. But I've played since some time in the 80's. 85, I think. I've never felt - as a martial going up against casters - that 'oh noes, I'm so weak'. Never. It's always been 'let me get my mitts around the throat of this guy, we'll see how clever his spells really are!'
You’ve probably had good DMs then. Martials in 5e don’t naturally get any other saving throw profs (unless you’re monk, in which case you have.. numerous other problems), so you’re more likely to fail on average. In addition, if you’re fighting a caster (PVP or lich or spell slinging NPC) they can just reaction silvery barbs you. Then of course they can cast something you can’t even make a save against. Or turn invisible. Most martials aren’t going to break enough damage turn one to one-shot a spellcaster anyway, unless you’re either at higher levels or you build specifically for damage. Flight isn’t the only option but it’s certainly one of them. Teleportation for one. Illusion spells and INT saves can knock you out of a fight completely.
But even outside of combat, martials are just less useful unless you’re a rogue making skill checks, thanks to the wide array of options you get from spells. Of course a good DM can find a better way to balance this, but I’m looking to find a mechanical way to do it without just flat boosting martial damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fanδ — making a smoothie for meta ——————| EXTENDED SIG |—————— Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
You’ve probably had good DMs then. Martials in 5e don’t naturally get any other saving throw profs (unless you’re monk, in which case you have.. numerous other problems), so you’re more likely to fail on average. In addition, if you’re fighting a caster (PVP or lich or spell slinging NPC) they can just reaction silvery barbs you. Then of course they can cast something you can’t even make a save against. Or turn invisible. Most martials aren’t going to break enough damage turn one to one-shot a spellcaster anyway, unless you’re either at higher levels or you build specifically for damage. Flight isn’t the only option but it’s certainly one of them. Teleportation for one. Illusion spells and INT saves can knock you out of a fight completely.
But even outside of combat, martials are just less useful unless you’re a rogue making skill checks, thanks to the wide array of options you get from spells. Of course a good DM can find a better way to balance this, but I’m looking to find a mechanical way to do it without just flat boosting martial damage.
But you're back to talking on paper, in a vacuum. I have a party behind me. I have (their) spells and abilities to keep me in the fight. The GM isn't pulling any punches, trust me.
Oh, and of course I build for damage. I'm a martial, I'm not there to talk, or impress everyone with my knowledge of culture or etiquette. But I'm not a super optimizer or anything like that, I'm generally a single class straight whatever - this current character is a arcane trickster. With a good race, background and so on. A good magic item or two. But still just a rogue.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
In addition, if you’re fighting a caster (PVP or lich or spell slinging NPC) they can just reaction silvery barbs you.
???? In a caster vs caster fight with reaction spells casters are useless. NPC casters can just counterspell anything your party's caster tries to put up.
PVP is utterly pointless to talk about so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. D&D is not designed for one-v-one or p-v-p combats. The whole point of D&D is you need a group of players with characters with different abilities working together to combat monsters. Every class is bad at 4/6 saving throws and different enemies target different saving throws to have variety so some characters shine in some combats others shine in other combats. If you DM is designing combats where martials are useless 90% of the time you have a bad DM.
Any spell the creates something, that thing should be destroyable, so Wall of Force, Wall of Thorns, Prismatic Wall, Forcecage, Black Tentacles, Grasping Vine, the Conjure spells, etc... all should have some way to destroy them by hitting them with a weapon. For an example where I think this is done well is the Wall of Ice spell, its powerful but there are multiple ways to overcome it with different benefits/costs associated with them.
Secondly, all the spells that can instantly end a 1-v-1 combat situation need to be nerfed so it is easier to escape - things like Polymorph, Maze, Banishment, etc...
Thirdly, defensive spells need to be nerfed or redesigned so they cannot stack on top of armour or full spellcasting needs to be made incompatible with wearing armour -> bounded accuracy was a lovely thing too bad WotC didn't stick to it.
Fourthly, spells that instantly solve non-combat challenges need to be boosted to higher level spellslots. e.g. Misty Step should be removed and made into class-specific features for certain subclasses or turned into a separate feat. Tiny Hut either needs more limitations or to be a higher level. Fly should be bumped up to 4th level so it is along side buffs like Freedom of Movement or Death Ward. The 2nd level Invisibility spell should just be removed. Mind control spells like Suggestion need to be much more limited and easier to break more like Charm Person.
Firstly, attacking the object is very rarely the most effective option for anything except the walls, even if it was possible. Everything you've listed is a Concentration spell. You want it to end? Hit the caster in the face a few times, it'll end. And there's no reason that all martials must be able to single-handedly deal with every possible obstacle a caster can throw up- this is a collaborative game, sometimes you need to step back and let another party member work, and sometimes you do end up sitting out a particular fight through one circumstance or another. It happening once in a while is the ebb and flow of the game, it happening consistently is a failure of your DM, because the game already presents an extensive suite of creatures and circumstances for the party to encounter.
Secondly, given that D&D is not at all designed to support 1v1 combat- as has been repeatedly pointed out and ignored in this thread- that point is a complete non-starter.
Thirdly, can you elaborate on that point a bit? What exactly are "defensive spells"? Mage Armor already doesn't stack, Shield of Faith uses concentration and so is rarely worth it, Shield is a one-off and has no scaling so it is rapidly outpaced by attack bonuses at higher tiers, and the only casters who can get at heavy armor with core class features are Clerics, who don't get the Shield spell or any other particularly outstanding "defensive" options, suggesting that bounded AC is actually functioning normally.
Fourthly, spells that can instantly solve non-combat challenges are narrow in scope, use limited resources that are also quite useful for combat, and require you to preemptively anticipate the need for them. Misty Step only works for the caster, so in any scenario where the group needs to get from point A to B it's pretty useless unless they just need to pull a lever for everyone else. Tiny Hut doesn't stop spells of 3rd level or higher and nothing stops the monsters from just camping outside it until it ends. Invisibility is not undetectability- you still need to make stealth rolls if you're trying to circumvent security. Fly is single target so it's not doing anything a PC with a fly speed can't for non-combat options. Suggestion is a level above Charm Person, ergo it should logically be more effective, and it only "solves" something if the issue relies on a single person carrying out a single action and then not immediately being able to reverse or otherwise undo what they did once it ends. Tell the gate guard he doesn't need to see your papers and to let you pass? Sure. Tell the cult leader about to sacrifice you in front of all his followers to stop and make you the new leader? Somehow I don't think the followers will go for it.
Any spell the creates something, that thing should be destroyable, so Wall of Force, Wall of Thorns, Prismatic Wall, Forcecage, Black Tentacles, Grasping Vine, the Conjure spells, etc... all should have some way to destroy them by hitting them with a weapon. For an example where I think this is done well is the Wall of Ice spell, its powerful but there are multiple ways to overcome it with different benefits/costs associated with them.
Secondly, all the spells that can instantly end a 1-v-1 combat situation need to be nerfed so it is easier to escape - things like Polymorph, Maze, Banishment, etc...
Thirdly, defensive spells need to be nerfed or redesigned so they cannot stack on top of armour or full spellcasting needs to be made incompatible with wearing armour -> bounded accuracy was a lovely thing too bad WotC didn't stick to it.
Fourthly, spells that instantly solve non-combat challenges need to be boosted to higher level spellslots. e.g. Misty Step should be removed and made into class-specific features for certain subclasses or turned into a separate feat. Tiny Hut either needs more limitations or to be a higher level. Fly should be bumped up to 4th level so it is along side buffs like Freedom of Movement or Death Ward. The 2nd level Invisibility spell should just be removed. Mind control spells like Suggestion need to be much more limited and easier to break more like Charm Person.
That all sounds good. Challenges that prompt some kind of action seems like a better model than shutting down agency altogether. And I'd say that for both players & enemies. Example: I like how 2024 Monk limited Stunning Strike to once per turn, but the rest of the class is now better designed in almost every way, encouraging you to engage with it more.
Your third example on defensive spells highlights an example of what seems to be a fake strength for martials: good AC. Or rather it's pretty decent in what it does, just that casters can replicate it while still being able do all their caster stuff. Perhaps there could be some limits to casters that wear certain kinds of armor? Or perhaps strengthen armor for martials that wear medium or heavy armor?
For example, I've wondered why helmets aren't a thing in D&D? Cuz they were a pretty helpful item to wear in real medieval combat. Sounds like they are assumed to be part of an armor I guess for book keeping? But why not allow it to either be a separate item (+1 AC) only for Medium or Heavy Armor wearers? Or maybe an optional +1 AC but with some limitation to casting or something, similar to some armor's Disadvantage on Stealth? Martials strong enough to wear armor should be rewarded. Also Intimidation should be based on STR, not CHA, in my opinion.
Other ideas: perhaps as martials progress levels, they could gain multiple Weapon Masteries on the same weapon? Like all two-handed weapons could have Cleave in addition to what they also have? That hardly seems even as powered as AOE spells like Fireball, etc. But yeah, many spells seem like they should be bumped to higher level.
The problem with most of these discussions is they assume one encounter or direct fights. And on one encounters. The more encounters you have per day the more powerful martial characters become. The more enemies in an encounter, the more powerful martial characters become.
Martial characters become more powerful with more short rests.
spell casters are more powerful in the first encounter and against lots of minions. But more likely to die on the fourth encounter with lots of opponents who aren’t minions.
The biggest problem with individual pieces of armor granting a bonus is that it penalizes pcs with low armor too much. For example I have a pc with an AC of 23. The rogue and ranger have an AC of 16. If helmets add +1 then the high AC character becomes AC 24 + shield of fire would be AC 26. I would need a nat 20 to hit him. While the rogue and ranger are still 16 and I need roughly a 10 to hit them.
basically you are penalizing a class like the rogue in addition to spell casters, while making some spell casters that can use armor even stronger.
The core problem is that people want mundane martials and fantastic spellcasters, and you can't balance those. You can solve the problem either making martials fantastic (and that doesn't mean mildly fantastical like barbarian durability, I'm talking stuff you mostly see in manga/anime) or by bringing spellcasters down to earth.
Which is why at least half the martial subclasses give them some kind of overt powers.
Ah yes, late tier 3 abilities that are on a par with second level spells. I'm sorry, but no. It's not enough to have powers... they have to be powers at a similar level of nonsense to full casters.
The biggest problem with individual pieces of armor granting a bonus is that it penalizes pcs with low armor too much. For example I have a pc with an AC of 23. The rogue and ranger have an AC of 16. If helmets add +1 then the high AC character becomes AC 24 + shield of fire would be AC 26. I would need a nat 20 to hit him. While the rogue and ranger are still 16 and I need roughly a 10 to hit them.
basically you are penalizing a class like the rogue in addition to spell casters, while making some spell casters that can use armor even stronger.
Just an idea. That said, the idea is to correct weaknesses. I'm newer to D&D, but my sense is that there a fair amount of endarounds that allow non-armored builds to replicate the AC. Which I don't mind terribly - I like there being multiple ways of having some kind of AC. But I thought it seemed like armor had a pretty steep price of having high strength? I'm not sure of all the exploits, so could be off. I am not sure +1 to AC is a huge difference, but the idea being that martials are supposed to be able to take hits, partially through superior AC. So if a Wizard can replicate that AND pull off world-bending magic, that steals the fire from martials a bit? So a correction, not a pentalty. Again, just spitballing.
When you start the game with heavy armor, it's only chain mail, so 16 AC, 17 if you can take Defense fighting style. Not sure how that compares with other non-martial classes and all their defenses?
Which is why at least half the martial subclasses give them some kind of overt powers.
Ah yes, late tier 3 abilities that are on a par with second level spells. I'm sorry, but no. It's not enough to have powers... they have to be powers at a similar level of nonsense to full casters.
Except they really really don’t. Martials maintain far more consistent combat performance in tier 3 than casters. Despite the spin, the reality is that casters get 1 to 3 good shots, except at this point powerful enemies have multiple strong saves, Legendary Resistances, and often Magic Resistance as well. If all that happens is the party walks up to a single BBEG and fights they can try and nova them down, but if they’re actually put through two or three encounters against more than trash mobs the tank starts running lean and you see a lot of spells splash against saves or LRs.
Which is why at least half the martial subclasses give them some kind of overt powers.
Ah yes, late tier 3 abilities that are on a par with second level spells. I'm sorry, but no. It's not enough to have powers... they have to be powers at a similar level of nonsense to full casters.
Except they really really don’t. Martials maintain far more consistent combat performance in tier 3 than casters. Despite the spin, the reality is that casters get 1 to 3 good shots, except at this point powerful enemies have multiple strong saves, Legendary Resistances, and often Magic Resistance as well. If all that happens is the party walks up to a single BBEG and fights they can try and nova them down, but if they’re actually put through two or three encounters against more than trash mobs the tank starts running lean and you see a lot of spells splash against saves or LRs.
1 to 3 good shots? Sounds like you're only counting uppermost spells in tier 3? But plenty of other mid or even low-level spells can be quite impactful, from what I've seen in my limited experience. Especially if you consider buffs, healing, and remedies. Martials usually can only attack. In tougher fights, you'll need to be able to handle a variety of challenges.
I can only think of two back-to-back sets of large combats over the past year where our group was pressed hard, running through our casters' spells and group HP. But it wasn't just the casters, it was all of us in different ways. Perhaps our martials maintained some damage through the end? But still pretty sure the average favored the casters.
Which again is fine. I don't think exactness is the goal. Comparable or complementary contributions is all. Sounds like some here feel that is what we have currently. I would say there is plenty of room for martials to be better at what they do (hit better or harder or more + tank somewhat) and/or have some kind of control aspect. 2024 Weapon Masteries are a step in that direction, as are some revamped martial classes like Monk and Fighter to a lesser degree.
Why would they dump dex and con? As a wizard your two most important stats are INT followed closely by CON. Casters should be dumping strength, and then charisma or int depending on the type of caster.
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fan δ —
making a smoothie for meta
——————| EXTENDED SIG |——————
Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
Going based on this comment: "Casters always outperform martials in interactions (they have higher mental stats, which are used in more checks)"
Yes, if you dump charisma and you’re an INT or WIS caster, you’re going to have several INT based skills you’re very good at, as well as several WIS based skills likely. If you’re a CHA caster and you dump INT, you have very good charisma skills, as well as likely wisdom skills. If you’re a full martial, you want either dexterity and con, or strength and dexterity and con. None of these primary attributes have many skill checks.
I can’t really tell what you’re arguing. Are you saying there isn’t a martial caster divide?
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fan δ —
making a smoothie for meta
——————| EXTENDED SIG |——————
Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
Well, if considered in a vacuum - that might be true.
But it's not. Not in a vacuum - and also not true.
A caster get's one chance. Cast something that a martial doesn't save against. Then, maybe. Of course in almost all cases, the martial then saves on the next round, and we're back to square one. If the caster doesn't significantly impair the martial in the first go - it's open season. I close to melee, and I do irreperable damage. And I keep doing it. Flight is the only option. As in running away. Don't try flying, it doesn't end well. My current martial is a very melee rogue who has a habit of mounting dragons as they fly over, and murdering them or their riders or both (it's dragonlance - dragons are essentially mules).
He's a .. kind of a gish, of course .. so he cheats, and has various ways of upping his mobility.
Obviously this isn't universally true all the time for everyone everywhere. But I've played since some time in the 80's. 85, I think. I've never felt - as a martial going up against casters - that 'oh noes, I'm so weak'. Never. It's always been 'let me get my mitts around the throat of this guy, we'll see how clever his spells really are!'
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
You’ve probably had good DMs then. Martials in 5e don’t naturally get any other saving throw profs (unless you’re monk, in which case you have.. numerous other problems), so you’re more likely to fail on average. In addition, if you’re fighting a caster (PVP or lich or spell slinging NPC) they can just reaction silvery barbs you. Then of course they can cast something you can’t even make a save against. Or turn invisible. Most martials aren’t going to break enough damage turn one to one-shot a spellcaster anyway, unless you’re either at higher levels or you build specifically for damage. Flight isn’t the only option but it’s certainly one of them. Teleportation for one. Illusion spells and INT saves can knock you out of a fight completely.
But even outside of combat, martials are just less useful unless you’re a rogue making skill checks, thanks to the wide array of options you get from spells. Of course a good DM can find a better way to balance this, but I’m looking to find a mechanical way to do it without just flat boosting martial damage.
— δ cyno • he/him • number one paladin fan δ —
making a smoothie for meta
——————| EXTENDED SIG |——————
Φ • redpelt’s biggest fan :) DM, minmaxer, microbiology student, and lover of anything colored red • Φ
But you're back to talking on paper, in a vacuum. I have a party behind me. I have (their) spells and abilities to keep me in the fight. The GM isn't pulling any punches, trust me.
Oh, and of course I build for damage. I'm a martial, I'm not there to talk, or impress everyone with my knowledge of culture or etiquette. But I'm not a super optimizer or anything like that, I'm generally a single class straight whatever - this current character is a arcane trickster. With a good race, background and so on. A good magic item or two. But still just a rogue.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
???? In a caster vs caster fight with reaction spells casters are useless. NPC casters can just counterspell anything your party's caster tries to put up.
PVP is utterly pointless to talk about so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. D&D is not designed for one-v-one or p-v-p combats. The whole point of D&D is you need a group of players with characters with different abilities working together to combat monsters. Every class is bad at 4/6 saving throws and different enemies target different saving throws to have variety so some characters shine in some combats others shine in other combats. If you DM is designing combats where martials are useless 90% of the time you have a bad DM.
Right, the party fights a lich/npc and the DM homebrews them to have a broken spell just to screw with the martials.
So what are some homebrew buffs folks would give to martials to help balance? Or do spells need to get nerfed some?
Some interesting ideas from Bone Wizard here: How You Should Buff Martials: Combat
Spells need to be nerfed.
Any spell the creates something, that thing should be destroyable, so Wall of Force, Wall of Thorns, Prismatic Wall, Forcecage, Black Tentacles, Grasping Vine, the Conjure spells, etc... all should have some way to destroy them by hitting them with a weapon. For an example where I think this is done well is the Wall of Ice spell, its powerful but there are multiple ways to overcome it with different benefits/costs associated with them.
Secondly, all the spells that can instantly end a 1-v-1 combat situation need to be nerfed so it is easier to escape - things like Polymorph, Maze, Banishment, etc...
Thirdly, defensive spells need to be nerfed or redesigned so they cannot stack on top of armour or full spellcasting needs to be made incompatible with wearing armour -> bounded accuracy was a lovely thing too bad WotC didn't stick to it.
Fourthly, spells that instantly solve non-combat challenges need to be boosted to higher level spellslots. e.g. Misty Step should be removed and made into class-specific features for certain subclasses or turned into a separate feat. Tiny Hut either needs more limitations or to be a higher level. Fly should be bumped up to 4th level so it is along side buffs like Freedom of Movement or Death Ward. The 2nd level Invisibility spell should just be removed. Mind control spells like Suggestion need to be much more limited and easier to break more like Charm Person.
Firstly, attacking the object is very rarely the most effective option for anything except the walls, even if it was possible. Everything you've listed is a Concentration spell. You want it to end? Hit the caster in the face a few times, it'll end. And there's no reason that all martials must be able to single-handedly deal with every possible obstacle a caster can throw up- this is a collaborative game, sometimes you need to step back and let another party member work, and sometimes you do end up sitting out a particular fight through one circumstance or another. It happening once in a while is the ebb and flow of the game, it happening consistently is a failure of your DM, because the game already presents an extensive suite of creatures and circumstances for the party to encounter.
Secondly, given that D&D is not at all designed to support 1v1 combat- as has been repeatedly pointed out and ignored in this thread- that point is a complete non-starter.
Thirdly, can you elaborate on that point a bit? What exactly are "defensive spells"? Mage Armor already doesn't stack, Shield of Faith uses concentration and so is rarely worth it, Shield is a one-off and has no scaling so it is rapidly outpaced by attack bonuses at higher tiers, and the only casters who can get at heavy armor with core class features are Clerics, who don't get the Shield spell or any other particularly outstanding "defensive" options, suggesting that bounded AC is actually functioning normally.
Fourthly, spells that can instantly solve non-combat challenges are narrow in scope, use limited resources that are also quite useful for combat, and require you to preemptively anticipate the need for them. Misty Step only works for the caster, so in any scenario where the group needs to get from point A to B it's pretty useless unless they just need to pull a lever for everyone else. Tiny Hut doesn't stop spells of 3rd level or higher and nothing stops the monsters from just camping outside it until it ends. Invisibility is not undetectability- you still need to make stealth rolls if you're trying to circumvent security. Fly is single target so it's not doing anything a PC with a fly speed can't for non-combat options. Suggestion is a level above Charm Person, ergo it should logically be more effective, and it only "solves" something if the issue relies on a single person carrying out a single action and then not immediately being able to reverse or otherwise undo what they did once it ends. Tell the gate guard he doesn't need to see your papers and to let you pass? Sure. Tell the cult leader about to sacrifice you in front of all his followers to stop and make you the new leader? Somehow I don't think the followers will go for it.
That all sounds good. Challenges that prompt some kind of action seems like a better model than shutting down agency altogether. And I'd say that for both players & enemies. Example: I like how 2024 Monk limited Stunning Strike to once per turn, but the rest of the class is now better designed in almost every way, encouraging you to engage with it more.
Your third example on defensive spells highlights an example of what seems to be a fake strength for martials: good AC. Or rather it's pretty decent in what it does, just that casters can replicate it while still being able do all their caster stuff. Perhaps there could be some limits to casters that wear certain kinds of armor? Or perhaps strengthen armor for martials that wear medium or heavy armor?
For example, I've wondered why helmets aren't a thing in D&D? Cuz they were a pretty helpful item to wear in real medieval combat. Sounds like they are assumed to be part of an armor I guess for book keeping? But why not allow it to either be a separate item (+1 AC) only for Medium or Heavy Armor wearers? Or maybe an optional +1 AC but with some limitation to casting or something, similar to some armor's Disadvantage on Stealth? Martials strong enough to wear armor should be rewarded. Also Intimidation should be based on STR, not CHA, in my opinion.
Other ideas: perhaps as martials progress levels, they could gain multiple Weapon Masteries on the same weapon? Like all two-handed weapons could have Cleave in addition to what they also have? That hardly seems even as powered as AOE spells like Fireball, etc. But yeah, many spells seem like they should be bumped to higher level.
The problem with most of these discussions is they assume one encounter or direct fights. And on one encounters. The more encounters you have per day the more powerful martial characters become. The more enemies in an encounter, the more powerful martial characters become.
Martial characters become more powerful with more short rests.
spell casters are more powerful in the first encounter and against lots of minions. But more likely to die on the fourth encounter with lots of opponents who aren’t minions.
The biggest problem with individual pieces of armor granting a bonus is that it penalizes pcs with low armor too much. For example I have a pc with an AC of 23. The rogue and ranger have an AC of 16. If helmets add +1 then the high AC character becomes AC 24 + shield of fire would be AC 26. I would need a nat 20 to hit him. While the rogue and ranger are still 16 and I need roughly a 10 to hit them.
basically you are penalizing a class like the rogue in addition to spell casters, while making some spell casters that can use armor even stronger.
The core problem is that people want mundane martials and fantastic spellcasters, and you can't balance those. You can solve the problem either making martials fantastic (and that doesn't mean mildly fantastical like barbarian durability, I'm talking stuff you mostly see in manga/anime) or by bringing spellcasters down to earth.
Which is why at least half the martial subclasses give them some kind of overt powers.
Ah yes, late tier 3 abilities that are on a par with second level spells. I'm sorry, but no. It's not enough to have powers... they have to be powers at a similar level of nonsense to full casters.
Just an idea. That said, the idea is to correct weaknesses. I'm newer to D&D, but my sense is that there a fair amount of endarounds that allow non-armored builds to replicate the AC. Which I don't mind terribly - I like there being multiple ways of having some kind of AC. But I thought it seemed like armor had a pretty steep price of having high strength? I'm not sure of all the exploits, so could be off. I am not sure +1 to AC is a huge difference, but the idea being that martials are supposed to be able to take hits, partially through superior AC. So if a Wizard can replicate that AND pull off world-bending magic, that steals the fire from martials a bit? So a correction, not a pentalty. Again, just spitballing.
When you start the game with heavy armor, it's only chain mail, so 16 AC, 17 if you can take Defense fighting style. Not sure how that compares with other non-martial classes and all their defenses?
Except they really really don’t. Martials maintain far more consistent combat performance in tier 3 than casters. Despite the spin, the reality is that casters get 1 to 3 good shots, except at this point powerful enemies have multiple strong saves, Legendary Resistances, and often Magic Resistance as well. If all that happens is the party walks up to a single BBEG and fights they can try and nova them down, but if they’re actually put through two or three encounters against more than trash mobs the tank starts running lean and you see a lot of spells splash against saves or LRs.
1 to 3 good shots? Sounds like you're only counting uppermost spells in tier 3? But plenty of other mid or even low-level spells can be quite impactful, from what I've seen in my limited experience. Especially if you consider buffs, healing, and remedies. Martials usually can only attack. In tougher fights, you'll need to be able to handle a variety of challenges.
I can only think of two back-to-back sets of large combats over the past year where our group was pressed hard, running through our casters' spells and group HP. But it wasn't just the casters, it was all of us in different ways. Perhaps our martials maintained some damage through the end? But still pretty sure the average favored the casters.
Which again is fine. I don't think exactness is the goal. Comparable or complementary contributions is all. Sounds like some here feel that is what we have currently. I would say there is plenty of room for martials to be better at what they do (hit better or harder or more + tank somewhat) and/or have some kind of control aspect. 2024 Weapon Masteries are a step in that direction, as are some revamped martial classes like Monk and Fighter to a lesser degree.