What do you believe is the best way to address the balance between Martial and Caster classes going forward? In terms of fun, decision making, power, utility, mechanical application, theme, and the overall fantasy of DnD. It's a question that I've been thinking about a lot, and there aren't many easy answers without a full reset of the way the game is designed, which is unlikely. I've given some of my thoughts already, and will expand on them when I have the time here later today, but I'm curious what others think to start it off. :)
I really feel like we need to stop grounding martials to reality so much. We really need to accept that all PC's are superhuman in some way or form.
Currently in 5E, in combat, an optimized Martial and Caster tend to be pretty close. The biggest issue with martial combat was that optimizing a martial required picking very specific feats, which got nerfed in One D&D and we have yet to see compensation for those nerfs. If the power from those nerfed feats were compensated, then combat wise, martials would be okay. Some buffs still could be used, such as having some crowd control options, but combat is not the biggest issue that martials have.
The biggest issue is the utility and versatility that casters have over martials. Magic can often just solve problems while martials often only have their skill checks. Simply put martials need buffs in these areas.
I see a lot of people say to go for nerfs to casters, but casters are in a good spot and are incredibly fun to play. Why take that fun away when we can bump up martials to that power level and fun level? As long as we target the current power level of casters and keep both martials and casters at that power level, we avoid buff spirals.
Thank you, Mana! We have some different opinions but I really appreciate the way you expressed yours in a positive way that encourages a nice discussion. I had meant to ask that everyone keep in mind that we are all just sharing our opinions and that doing so politely makes for the best conversations. Thank you for providing a good example. :)
I mean, if we're going to drop all pretense with D&D not being a superhero game, then so be it. And that includes not pretending the game is fit for themes like horror or low fantasy that work best when the player characters can't just magic the problem aside.
I'll even go further and add that WoTC probably shouldn't be shy about just calling martial abilities magical or supernatural from the get-go. Many of the newer martial subclasses explicitly use magic anyway, which is saying something.
This really highlights part of my concerns. There is a thematic issue that some solutions would make worse. I agree that trend is very evident in new Subclasses, species, feats, features, etc. The answer to most design problems is usually more magic. I'm not against superheroic games, or high magic, or even just some classes with magical varieties. I think magic is great and fun and a lot of new Subclasses are really interesting. I just wonder if there is room anymore for the mundane to feel good too. Even if the mundane borders on Batman or action movies, it's still grounded enough that it appeals to some people. Bard from Lake Town slew a terrible dragon armed with only a (possibly) magic arrow, some advice from a bird, and his own aim. That is a cool feeling for a Fighter type.
I like the idea of all (or most) spells having some minor detrimental effects such as what has been discussed in the case of Knock. In this way, casters could keep their power, but would have to take into consideration when it should be utilized. Unfortunately, I think this would be somewhere between incredibly difficult and impossible to implement in practice. This is especially true if it would be necessary to create a unique negative effect for each of the hundreds of spells. Maybe it would be possible to create some kind of generic system for this, but I fear that would land up being boring and lack real thematic connections.
For martials, the warrior class could maybe have access to a number of "battlemaster light" manoeuvers at will once per round. These could be actions that anyone else could perform, such as ones like Shove, Grapple, Disarm, Trip, etc. that are available already, but could be done for free in combination with a normal attack action, and others could possibly be improved through Eldritch Invocation-style specialities available at certain levels.
In my opinion what distances the martial classes the most from the casters in 5e is the decision making. Casters have many options during combat and therefore many decisions to make. That makes them more fun to play.
So the first thing I would say is to give martial classes more options in combat. And that they have to invest resources in those decisions, in the same way that casters have to invest spell slots.
Then, to balance them out at power level the casters have to be nerfed. At low levels it is not so noticeable, but at high levels the difference is abysmal. And basically it is for three reasons: - The HP that the casters have (or rather, the little real difference between the casters and the marial classes). 3 points on average per level between the class with the most HP, and the class with the least, is a paltry difference. And more taking into account that the martial classes are generally the ones that are going to be receiving the most damage. But they can't give martial classes much more HP either, as that would be too many. So I think the solution would be to give casters less. Especially Wizards and Sorcerers, whose D6 is too much. - The amount of Spell Slots that casters have. At low levels it's classic the joke of the wizard casting four spells, and then firebolts until the next long rest. But at mid-high levels that joke stops being true, as casters have plenty of spell slots to get them through the day. And of course, since magic is so powerful, and it must be, it's impossible for a martial class, especially ones without magic, to be able to keep up. - The limited amount of magic items in 5e. Those of us who are a few years old will remember that the real character improvements in 1.0 and 2.0 came through the magic team. That meant that, although the high level wizards were gods themselves, the warriors were not so far behind. Yes because of their class, but with a good selection of magic items they could continue playing without feeling useless. I'm not saying that nowadays a high level fighter is useless, but he can hardly keep up with a caster. Neither before, but at least the magic equipment mitigated this.
I understand that there are people who do not agree with the above, and that is what we are for. But I want to clarify that I mainly play with casters, and that my favorite class of all time is the wizard. But I honestly think they should be nerfed if we want to balance the classes. Nerf casters in general, and power up martial classes. Especially in the amount of options they have in combat, which is ridiculously low these days.
Being superhuman doesn’t have to be magical. The Batman analogy is perfect. You don’t have to give martials magic, but you do need to give them things that might as well be magic. The hard part with martials isn’t the mechanics but the explanation of why. I’ve heard people complain about battle master maneuvers for years. Some complain that everyone should be able to do it and others complain asking why is it limited clearly my character knows how to do this. While I completely disagree the first idea, the later question is understandable. Dealing damage and knocking someone prone requires training. If you just want to deal damage use the attack action. If you just want to knock someone prone use the shove action. If you want to do both at once you need to know a maneuver. Now that you know this maneuver what is the reason you have limited uses of it per short rest. Honestly their is only one good reason that I need all players to accept. ITS A GAME! It only becomes a problem in game when the player decides it doesn’t make sense. Mechanically you aren’t using a trip attack because you are out of uses. In game you aren’t using it because your character can’t find an opening. Now that we are past that my suggestion is the same here. Give all fighters access to superiority dice. Battle masters would just get more than other fighters. Also make sure that all fighters have to choose at least one of the utility options that were added in Tasha’s. Also create new maneuvers that are unique to each subclass. Monks just need an ability to cheat on skill checks like “ki focused skill” that would allow them to use their ki points to boost their roll on a skill check. Allowing them to guarantee success because that’s what spells do sometimes. To keep them from becoming the new skill monkey let us limit it to Acrobatics, Athletics, and Wis skills. Barbarians could get their 4th edition rage strike back. Basically let’s you expend a rage while you are already raging to deal heavy damage on an attack. For utility advantage in Str checks while raging is not enough. Maybe something that allows them to count a roll as a 20 for a Str check once a day. Then every time they use it beyond one they gain 1d4 levels of exhaustion.
In my opinion what distances the martial classes the most from the casters in 5e is the decision making. Casters have many options during combat and therefore many decisions to make. That makes them more fun to play.
So the first thing I would say is to give martial classes more options in combat. And that they have to invest resources in those decisions, in the same way that casters have to invest spell slots.
Then, to balance them out at power level the casters have to be nerfed. At low levels it is not so noticeable, but at high levels the difference is abysmal. And basically it is for three reasons: - The HP that the casters have (or rather, the little real difference between the casters and the marial classes). 3 points on average per level between the class with the most HP, and the class with the least, is a paltry difference. And more taking into account that the martial classes are generally the ones that are going to be receiving the most damage. But they can't give martial classes much more HP either, as that would be too many. So I think the solution would be to give casters less. Especially Wizards and Sorcerers, whose D6 is too much. - The amount of Spell Slots that casters have. At low levels it's classic the joke of the wizard casting four spells, and then firebolts until the next long rest. But at mid-high levels that joke stops being true, as casters have plenty of spell slots to get them through the day. And of course, since magic is so powerful, and it must be, it's impossible for a martial class, especially ones without magic, to be able to keep up. - The limited amount of magic items in 5e. Those of us who are a few years old will remember that the real character improvements in 1.0 and 2.0 came through the magic team. That meant that, although the high level wizards were gods themselves, the warriors were not so far behind. Yes because of their class, but with a good selection of magic items they could continue playing without feeling useless. I'm not saying that nowadays a high level fighter is useless, but he can hardly keep up with a caster. Neither before, but at least the magic equipment mitigated this.
I understand that there are people who do not agree with the above, and that is what we are for. But I want to clarify that I mainly play with casters, and that my favorite class of all time is the wizard. But I honestly think they should be nerfed if we want to balance the classes. Nerf casters in general, and power up martial classes. Especially in the amount of options they have in combat, which is ridiculously low these days.
If we are giving Martials more options and upping their power, why not just up their power to where casters are? Casters are in a very good spot right now.
I wouldn't call the HP difference to be paltry. 3 HP per level is 15 HP after 5 levels, 30 after 10. Ignoring any HP bonuses from Con, at Fighter at 10th level has 64 HP from their class while a wizard has 42, I would say that is a sizable difference. And honestly, whether or not martials end up taking more damage is more dependent on the DM tactics. I've seen plenty of DM's take advantage of the lower HP amounts that casters have by having enemies hit the backrow with ranged attacks or spells.
I feel like the spell slot issue is dependent on the DM as well. In the games my group does, I find myself having to budget my spell slots, even at high levels because my DMs find ways to make me use my slots throughout the day. However, it seems that other DMs fall into a couple large encounters a day that ends up with casters being able to go all out in those couple of encounters. Plus, if we are adding additional options and resources to martials, this resource issue may resolve itself with this addition depending on the potency of the options. Though combat wise, I always felt like martials were not too far from casters; it was more in the out of combat part of the game that casters had an immense edge in.
Magic Items are honestly purely a DM thing. A DM can always add magic items, and should be giving magic weapons to the martials, and magic items are incredibly plentiful in Adventurers League, where DM's can't willy nilly add magic items due to the AL rules. There are magic items that can definitely help mitigate the divide, DMs just need to start giving them out.
I really don't think a nerf to casters is needed at all. We just need to buff Martials up to the power level of casters.
As for the idea of wanting martials to remain grounded; I feel like that can be done in lower tier games. A martial character remains pretty human in T1. However, as a character goes up in tiers, they very clearly become superhuman. A 20th level fighter can attack 8 times, if they are dual wielding or have polearm master, that increases to 9 attacks. The Samurai subclass can give the fighters another attack for a total of 10 attacks. I feel like 10 attacks within a single turn, especially with a heavy weapon like a halberd, is well beyond human limits.
Hm. What I think needs to be addressed to balance casters vs. martials:
Casters get more abilities. At level 9, the Wizard gets to cast a level 5 spell once a day, while a Fighter gets Indomitable once a day. The Wizard gets to choose from a wide variety of spells, and gets more slots for free as they level. The Fighter has to use another "class ability" slot for more Indomitable uses.
Spellcasters are versatile, able to use ranged, melee, social, exploration, target a variety of saves/AC/resistances. Martials generally have to specialize.
Casters get abilities like Fly and Waterbreathing to deal with flying or swimming monsters. Martials need magic items to accomplish their raison d'etre.
Resource management mini-game vs all day sword swinging. The 8 encounter adventuring day seems to be the exception rather than the rule, which throws off the balance between casters and martials.
I feel like I could write forever on this topic, so I think I'll start with just one part, haha.
I'll start with the theme of the fantasy. Since it is the most subjective, there isn't really much to calculate, just a range of opinions which are all valid. There are so many kinds of fantasy, and despite DnD being basically a slowly growing mound of various inspirations from pop culture and myth, it has still managed to evolve into its own kind of unique fantasy feel. There are elements to it born from the mechanics and all of those influences that kind of amalgamated into its own thing. It's telling the story of a group of people who begin very humble, but grow over the course of their adventures to the point they face world, or even universe, changing challenges. Leveling up from peasant to the world's greatest heroes.
All individual fantasies are welcome. Some people dream of learning magic, and surpassing the greatest Wizards to cast spells that change reality. Some people imagine being chosen by a god, and granted divine gifts that elevate them to saintly miracle workers. And some people like to wonder what a person just like them could accomplish under the right circumstances. For them, a mortal hero standing against the greatest evils and still prevailing is the greatest fantasy. It means that anyone could be strong enough, forged under pressure, if they fight hard and have the will to overcome it all.
Power in DnD comes from many places. You can study hard and learn the secrets of reality. You can make a deal with a strange being. You can have faith and channel holy light. You can build amazing things. You can touch the planes and draw on mysterious strength. You can speak to the dead and use their wisdom. There's almost no limit. There are also those who wonder what they could do on their own.
I feel like the martial classes are the only place where mundane power is an option. They don't all only rely on it. But only martials have the chance to draw from their own strength alone. Fighters are the best example. But Rogues are also good. Both can be built with nothing resembling magic if you want to. Sure a Fighter at high levels can attack with amazing speed or survive a silly amount of injuries, and a Rogue has incredible reflexes. But it's nothing outside of the realm of the typical action movie. The stories where we suspend disbelief to enjoy someone just being very tough, or talented, or strong willed.
Even Barbarians and Monks are believable to some degree. Not because adrenaline is really that strong. And not because anyone could really detoxify their body with meditation. But because they're just close enough. And because the power comes from inside them alone. No magic, no gods, no ancestor, fey, or demons. Just training yourself to be the best a human (Elf, Dwarf, etc) can be.
The game mechanics support that to some degree. A 20 Strength is only capable of lifting a reasonable amount of weight, or jumping a realistic distance. Any real lock can be picked. Things like HP are intentionally vague. It represents more than how many stabs you can take. So all of the fantasy remains feasible.
So, just to talk about this one aspect first, I think there is a demand for at least a few character options where being just a really cool, but still mundane, person is possible. It's a certain type of fantasy. And martials provide it for people. I'm not against pushing the boundaries of it. I'm just curious if that fantasy can survive balancing classes against casters
Hm. What I think needs to be addressed to balance casters vs. martials:
Casters get more abilities. At level 9, the Wizard gets to cast a level 5 spell once a day, while a Fighter gets Indomitable once a day. The Wizard gets to choose from a wide variety of spells, and gets more slots for free as they level. The Fighter has to use another "class ability" slot for more Indomitable uses.
Spellcasters are versatile, able to use ranged, melee, social, exploration, target a variety of saves/AC/resistances. Martials generally have to specialize.
Casters get abilities like Fly and Waterbreathing to deal with flying or swimming monsters. Martials need magic items to accomplish their raison d'etre.
Resource management mini-game vs all day sword swinging. The 8 encounter adventuring day seems to be the exception rather than the rule, which throws off the balance between casters and martials.
This is a good list of a lot of the issues that cause the disparity between them. And much more succinct than I would have managed. Thank you! XD
So... what constitutes the divide and how to possibly address it.
Sheer power. In theory, the drawback of casters' power is that it's limited by spell slots. In reality, the situation when casters are completely empty and have to resort to cantrips is very, very rare. And only spellcaster get to inflict AoE damage. It has been said that martials can kind of catch up if properly equipped and optimized, but herein lies another problem - reliance on items and feats. And while items are at the mercy of a DM, feats are another thing. I think that gaining a mandatory fighting style mastery feat (like GWM or Sharpshooter) should become free for martial classes, just like fighting styles themselves.
Multitude of options. Best we can do is expanding maneuvers or similar mechanics to classes other than fighter. Rogue could definitely use some kind of dirty fighting techniques to cripple, disrupt, and otherwise sabotage opponents, like steal their healing potions and sucker punch mages in the gut to interrupt spellcasting, while monk could have more shaolin techniques in a base class. It's important to not over-codify things and remember that anyone can attempt to shove, try to disarm an opponent or make an attack while jumping from above, just some classes specifically train for that and do it better.
Versatility. Magic can twist reality to one's convenience, trivializing most tasks. An elegant way to address this, as Stegodorkus noticed in the previous thread, is side effects. Knock opens locks, but makes a very loud noise. Haste speeds you up, for the price of making you exhausted later. Charm person and Suggestion are visible and audible when cast, and the victim knows it's been charmed after the effect wears out. And there should be more of that. Summoned creatures shouldn't automatically obey the spellcaster - a spellcaster has to be mindful of what creatures' interests align with the party in a given situation. Spells that provide nourishment, trivializing survival, should only temporarily postpone hunger, not sate it. Invisible creatures should have problems handling their inventory, because, well, all the contents of their bags and pockets are invisible to them, too. It was cool when I started to rely pretty heavily on Gaseous Form and DM made me consider the wind, because it could simply blow me away in an outdoors location. The idea is that magic crudely warps reality, and if there's a way achieve the same goal naturally with your skills, it's always a safer, more reliable way.
Yeah, I know - the old spells consider that, but then we got a whole bunch of simplified summoning spells like Summon Fiend that throw it all out of the window and treat summons like it's a videogame without considering the type; fiend, aberration, shadowspawn - they automatically obey you without question and disappear once you stop concentrating. Contrary to that, Infernal Calling essentially introduces a new NPC into the story to play a brief or lasting role.
To partially address why I personally don't like the idea of giving battle master maneuvers to all warriors - Firstly, I just think they are poorly designed. They are a neat idea that needed the years of experience we now have to refine them. But that's another post to fully explain.
The thing I want to say for the moment is about why they might feel like a good answer, and why I don't think they really are. I could be way off, so I definitely invite any other takes on it.
I feel like most people suggest them as a way to both give martials a little more power, and to give them options in combat. More than just rolling to attack. And I totally get that. But what is the root cause?
You can already do many of the options. You can attempt to push, trip, disarm, etc. As many people have noted. But players rare do. I suspect it is because of the action economy and the value of the action. The common wisdom is that the best use of your action is to kill monsters as quickly as possible so they don't kill you. As soon as you swing the action balance in your team's favor, you will win.
But knocking someone down doesn't hurt them. It barely inconveniences them. If you have an ally that can attack them with advantage before they get up, then it's situationally good. But only if that ally can do more damage with their attacks on it than both of you could have done together if you both used your action to attack. Like a sneak attack might. If you can't do that, then the monster is just going to stand back up and keep fighting you.
Which is why a maneuver is so good. It lets you make all of your attacks while also knocking the enemy down. There is no wasted opportunity cost. You don't have to give up your action to do it. That's what it sounds like people really want. But that can be done much easier without having dice pools and a list of special options you have to limit yourself to. They have already shown us how that could look. And that's why I prefer a concept like crayonshinchuck mentioned. Instead of maneuvers, just options on every attack.
The new Unarmed Strike lets you use one of your attacks to hit the enemy with your body. You can then choose to grapple them, shove them, or knock them prone. That gives us options already. At a cost that makes decent sense. You can't do your full weapon damage while trying to push someone over. You trade doing full damage with one of your attacks for the special attack chance.
The Shield Master feat is another example. As part of your attack action, you get to do your full weapon damage, while also performing a Shield Bash to push them once per turn. It's a little silly that you have to take a feat for that part. Since that's literally part of what training to use a shield should include. Everyone with Shield Training should be able to shield bash. But the feat does have other nice advantages, and it lets you do your full weapon damage while bashing, so it's still good. I could see a basic feature of being trained in a shield letting you bash at the cost of one of your attacks but at reduced damage, maybe 1d4.
So the game is already going to let everyone attempt to Push, Grapple, or Knock Prone without sacrificing much of your action economy, just some reduced damage. If you have another attack, you can even gain the benefits of a prone opponent for yourself in the same turn.
I think we should expend on these options. Everyone should be able to do most of the battle master maneuvers if they are trained to fight with a weapon. At least those trained in martial weapons. That's what weapon training actually is. Learning to Feint, Parry, Riposte, Disarm, Lunge, etc. It's so silly to me that only one subclass in the game tries to parry during a fight. (I know it's just a name)
Warriors should be better at all of these things. Maybe they get to add their proficiency bonus to the DCs, and no one else can. Maybe just restricting it to Martial weapons and certain armor training is enough. Then Rangers and Paladins and certain subclasses can benefit too. But these are options people should be able to do without sacrificing their whole action. Because the way the action economy works, no one wants to do them. And half of the maneuvers, although common tricks anyone trained in a weapon should know, aren't available to anyone without investing something in them.
So one option might be to have a list of maneuvers that anyone can do no matter what. And a bigger list for things that you can do if trained in the right equipment. Maybe they are just weapon properties, or apply to all Martial weapons. Then you use the Unarmed Strike as an example. Let everyone try one of them each turn as part of the attack action. Make it come with a tradeoff for some damage. Make it require a save. Then let the Warriors do them better. Let them do their full weapon damage, and include their proficiency in the save DC.
I just feel this method would be so much cleaner, and actually make sense in the world. No dice pools to deal with, no more only learning some of your sword lessons. No short rests and small damage bursts to balance. Just basic skills that people actually have. And an edge to the Warriors.
And if the damage bonus of maneuvers is really important to people, then give Warriors that dice pool with no strings attached, a number d8s per day they can add in whenever they want. Base it on level, or PB, or whatever. Scale it like Channel Divinity or Bardic Inspiration. Whatever works for the raw damage output balance if needed.
I noticed a number of people mentioned how 4E kept martials and casters on pretty even footing but disparaged how complex it made the game. One thing to note with with 4E was the massive amount of in game book keeping on all the various effects, their triggers, and durations. We probably could give martial characters a number of features similar to the powers in 4E and as long as we kept the number of things we have to track to a minimum, it should be fine. The biggest issue of 4E imo was the huge number of effects you had to keep track of in combat.
To help illustrate what I'm saying, here is a list of the battle master maneuvers and where I think they belong:
Things that do make sense as an actual special feature of a class (like all Fighters) or a subclass (like Battle Master):
Ambush
Bait and Switch
Commander's Strike - could work better like Voice of Authority
Commanding Presence
Distracting Strike - could have just been the Help Action as a Bonus Action
Evasive Footwork - could have just been Disengage as a Bonus Action
Maneuvering Attack
Rally
Riposte - fine for a feature, but it would certainly speed up combat if everyone could do it XD
Quick Toss - sure?
Tactical Assessment
Things that anyone trained in martial weapons should know how to do (with some reworks needed for some):
Brace - Makes sense for any martial weapon user, but it would very much change how all combats play out, maybe in a good way
Disarming Attack
Grappling Strike - we basically have it now
Lunging Attack - as a bonus action?
Parry - should use your reaction
Precision Attack - maybe a bonus action, or an alternate use for damage dice pool if you want to go that way
Pushing Attack - similar to the Unarmed Strike version, but for weapons and shields
Sweeping Attack - could be a nice Two-Handed Weapon property
Trip Attack - similar to the Unarmed Strike version, but for weapons and shields
Things that anyone should be able to do with a charisma roll in some way:
Feinting Attack - Deception
Goading Attack - Deception/Persuasion
Menacing Attack - Intimidation
All of these would obviously take some careful rewrites to various degrees to balance out as either features or always on options. Many would work just fine with some basic rules in place. I just hope this helps show the general concept.
I noticed a number of people mentioned how 4E kept martials and casters on pretty even footing but disparaged how complex it made the game. One thing to note with with 4E was the massive amount of in game book keeping on all the various effects, their triggers, and durations. We probably could give martial characters a number of features similar to the powers in 4E and as long as we kept the number of things we have to track to a minimum, it should be fine. The biggest issue of 4E imo was the huge number of effects you had to keep track of in combat.
A lot of what kept martials and casters even in 4e was that 4e seriously gutted caster capabilities. You could, with some mild adjustments to handle different assumptions about power scaling, import 4e martial characters into 5e, and they'd have about the same set of problems as 5e martial characters do (they'd be at a similar level of versatility and complexity to a battle master fighter).
To partially address why I personally don't like the idea of giving battle master maneuvers to all warriors - Firstly, I just think they are poorly designed. They are a neat idea that needed the years of experience we now have to refine them. But that's another post to fully explain.
The thing I want to say for the moment is about why they might feel like a good answer, and why I don't think they really are. I could be way off, so I definitely invite any other takes on it.
I feel like most people suggest them as a way to both give martials a little more power, and to give them options in combat. More than just rolling to attack. And I totally get that. But what is the root cause?
You can already do many of the options. You can attempt to push, trip, disarm, etc. As many people have noted. But players rare do. I suspect it is because of the action economy and the value of the action. The common wisdom is that the best use of your action is to kill monsters as quickly as possible so they don't kill you. As soon as you swing the action balance in your team's favor, you will win.
But knocking someone down doesn't hurt them. It barely inconveniences them. If you have an ally that can attack them with advantage before they get up, then it's situationally good. But only if that ally can do more damage with their attacks on it than both of you could have done together if you both used your action to attack. Like a sneak attack might. If you can't do that, then the monster is just going to stand back up and keep fighting you.
Which is why a maneuver is so good. It lets you make all of your attacks while also knocking the enemy down. There is no wasted opportunity cost. You don't have to give up your action to do it. That's what it sounds like people really want. But that can be done much easier without having dice pools and a list of special options you have to limit yourself to. They have already shown us how that could look. And that's why I prefer a concept like crayonshinchuck mentioned. Instead of maneuvers, just options on every attack.
The new Unarmed Strike lets you use one of your attacks to hit the enemy with your body. You can then choose to grapple them, shove them, or knock them prone. That gives us options already. At a cost that makes decent sense. You can't do your full weapon damage while trying to push someone over. You trade doing full damage with one of your attacks for the special attack chance.
The Shield Master feat is another example. As part of your attack action, you get to do your full weapon damage, while also performing a Shield Bash to push them once per turn. It's a little silly that you have to take a feat for that part. Since that's literally part of what training to use a shield should include. Everyone with Shield Training should be able to shield bash. But the feat does have other nice advantages, and it lets you do your full weapon damage while bashing, so it's still good. I could see a basic feature of being trained in a shield letting you bash at the cost of one of your attacks but at reduced damage, maybe 1d4.
So the game is already going to let everyone attempt to Push, Grapple, or Knock Prone without sacrificing much of your action economy, just some reduced damage. If you have another attack, you can even gain the benefits of a prone opponent for yourself in the same turn.
I think we should expend on these options. Everyone should be able to do most of the battle master maneuvers if they are trained to fight with a weapon. At least those trained in martial weapons. That's what weapon training actually is. Learning to Feint, Parry, Riposte, Disarm, Lunge, etc. It's so silly to me that only one subclass in the game tries to parry during a fight. (I know it's just a name)
Warriors should be better at all of these things. Maybe they get to add their proficiency bonus to the DCs, and no one else can. Maybe just restricting it to Martial weapons and certain armor training is enough. Then Rangers and Paladins and certain subclasses can benefit too. But these are options people should be able to do without sacrificing their whole action. Because the way the action economy works, no one wants to do them. And half of the maneuvers, although common tricks anyone trained in a weapon should know, aren't available to anyone without investing something in them.
So one option might be to have a list of maneuvers that anyone can do no matter what. And a bigger list for things that you can do if trained in the right equipment. Maybe they are just weapon properties, or apply to all Martial weapons. Then you use the Unarmed Strike as an example. Let everyone try one of them each turn as part of the attack action. Make it come with a tradeoff for some damage. Make it require a save. Then let the Warriors do them better. Let them do their full weapon damage, and include their proficiency in the save DC.
I just feel this method would be so much cleaner, and actually make sense in the world. No dice pools to deal with, no more only learning some of your sword lessons. No short rests and small damage bursts to balance. Just basic skills that people actually have. And an edge to the Warriors.
And if the damage bonus of maneuvers is really important to people, then give Warriors that dice pool with no strings attached, a number d8s per day they can add in whenever they want. Base it on level, or PB, or whatever. Scale it like Channel Divinity or Bardic Inspiration. Whatever works for the raw damage output balance if needed.
You really should check out 4e. I think you would like it. Or at the very least you would like the at will abilities that all characters get. No one ever just attacks in that game. I’m going to say that because of the “meta” of DND the additional damage of the d8s matter. No matter how many options you have on your turn if you don’t do enough damage you will eventually feel ineffective. What you are asking for will probably be addressed by the new weapon properties. I think they will be doing something similar to BG3 if you have played the early access.
I noticed a number of people mentioned how 4E kept martials and casters on pretty even footing but disparaged how complex it made the game. One thing to note with with 4E was the massive amount of in game book keeping on all the various effects, their triggers, and durations. We probably could give martial characters a number of features similar to the powers in 4E and as long as we kept the number of things we have to track to a minimum, it should be fine. The biggest issue of 4E imo was the huge number of effects you had to keep track of in combat.
A lot of what kept martials and casters even in 4e was that 4e seriously gutted caster capabilities. You could, with some mild adjustments to handle different assumptions about power scaling, import 4e martial characters into 5e, and they'd have about the same set of problems as 5e martial characters do (they'd be at a similar level of versatility and complexity to a battle master fighter).
What kept martials and casters even in 4E was that they had a similar level of options and versatility. That is what we should take away from 4E. If we give martials a similar level of meaningful options and versatilities, targeting the same power level as casters, you can buff martials to be on par with casters.
What kept martials and casters even in 4E was that they had a similar level of options and versatility. That is what we should take away from 4E. If we give martials a similar level of meaningful options and versatilities, targeting the same power level as casters, you can buff martials to be on par with casters.
Sure, but it's hard to do that while keeping casters as versatile as they are, because casters are crazy versatile.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Creating this thread to carry on a conversation that started in here, without further taking that discussion off topic:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/unearthed-arcana/160080-warrior-ua-wish-list?page=7
What do you believe is the best way to address the balance between Martial and Caster classes going forward? In terms of fun, decision making, power, utility, mechanical application, theme, and the overall fantasy of DnD. It's a question that I've been thinking about a lot, and there aren't many easy answers without a full reset of the way the game is designed, which is unlikely. I've given some of my thoughts already, and will expand on them when I have the time here later today, but I'm curious what others think to start it off. :)
I really feel like we need to stop grounding martials to reality so much. We really need to accept that all PC's are superhuman in some way or form.
Currently in 5E, in combat, an optimized Martial and Caster tend to be pretty close. The biggest issue with martial combat was that optimizing a martial required picking very specific feats, which got nerfed in One D&D and we have yet to see compensation for those nerfs. If the power from those nerfed feats were compensated, then combat wise, martials would be okay. Some buffs still could be used, such as having some crowd control options, but combat is not the biggest issue that martials have.
The biggest issue is the utility and versatility that casters have over martials. Magic can often just solve problems while martials often only have their skill checks. Simply put martials need buffs in these areas.
I see a lot of people say to go for nerfs to casters, but casters are in a good spot and are incredibly fun to play. Why take that fun away when we can bump up martials to that power level and fun level? As long as we target the current power level of casters and keep both martials and casters at that power level, we avoid buff spirals.
Thank you, Mana! We have some different opinions but I really appreciate the way you expressed yours in a positive way that encourages a nice discussion. I had meant to ask that everyone keep in mind that we are all just sharing our opinions and that doing so politely makes for the best conversations. Thank you for providing a good example. :)
This really highlights part of my concerns. There is a thematic issue that some solutions would make worse. I agree that trend is very evident in new Subclasses, species, feats, features, etc. The answer to most design problems is usually more magic. I'm not against superheroic games, or high magic, or even just some classes with magical varieties. I think magic is great and fun and a lot of new Subclasses are really interesting. I just wonder if there is room anymore for the mundane to feel good too. Even if the mundane borders on Batman or action movies, it's still grounded enough that it appeals to some people. Bard from Lake Town slew a terrible dragon armed with only a (possibly) magic arrow, some advice from a bird, and his own aim. That is a cool feeling for a Fighter type.
I like the idea of all (or most) spells having some minor detrimental effects such as what has been discussed in the case of Knock. In this way, casters could keep their power, but would have to take into consideration when it should be utilized. Unfortunately, I think this would be somewhere between incredibly difficult and impossible to implement in practice. This is especially true if it would be necessary to create a unique negative effect for each of the hundreds of spells. Maybe it would be possible to create some kind of generic system for this, but I fear that would land up being boring and lack real thematic connections.
For martials, the warrior class could maybe have access to a number of "battlemaster light" manoeuvers at will once per round. These could be actions that anyone else could perform, such as ones like Shove, Grapple, Disarm, Trip, etc. that are available already, but could be done for free in combination with a normal attack action, and others could possibly be improved through Eldritch Invocation-style specialities available at certain levels.
In my opinion what distances the martial classes the most from the casters in 5e is the decision making. Casters have many options during combat and therefore many decisions to make. That makes them more fun to play.
So the first thing I would say is to give martial classes more options in combat. And that they have to invest resources in those decisions, in the same way that casters have to invest spell slots.
Then, to balance them out at power level the casters have to be nerfed. At low levels it is not so noticeable, but at high levels the difference is abysmal. And basically it is for three reasons:
- The HP that the casters have (or rather, the little real difference between the casters and the marial classes). 3 points on average per level between the class with the most HP, and the class with the least, is a paltry difference. And more taking into account that the martial classes are generally the ones that are going to be receiving the most damage. But they can't give martial classes much more HP either, as that would be too many. So I think the solution would be to give casters less. Especially Wizards and Sorcerers, whose D6 is too much.
- The amount of Spell Slots that casters have. At low levels it's classic the joke of the wizard casting four spells, and then firebolts until the next long rest. But at mid-high levels that joke stops being true, as casters have plenty of spell slots to get them through the day. And of course, since magic is so powerful, and it must be, it's impossible for a martial class, especially ones without magic, to be able to keep up.
- The limited amount of magic items in 5e. Those of us who are a few years old will remember that the real character improvements in 1.0 and 2.0 came through the magic team. That meant that, although the high level wizards were gods themselves, the warriors were not so far behind. Yes because of their class, but with a good selection of magic items they could continue playing without feeling useless. I'm not saying that nowadays a high level fighter is useless, but he can hardly keep up with a caster. Neither before, but at least the magic equipment mitigated this.
I understand that there are people who do not agree with the above, and that is what we are for. But I want to clarify that I mainly play with casters, and that my favorite class of all time is the wizard. But I honestly think they should be nerfed if we want to balance the classes. Nerf casters in general, and power up martial classes. Especially in the amount of options they have in combat, which is ridiculously low these days.
Being superhuman doesn’t have to be magical. The Batman analogy is perfect. You don’t have to give martials magic, but you do need to give them things that might as well be magic. The hard part with martials isn’t the mechanics but the explanation of why. I’ve heard people complain about battle master maneuvers for years. Some complain that everyone should be able to do it and others complain asking why is it limited clearly my character knows how to do this. While I completely disagree the first idea, the later question is understandable. Dealing damage and knocking someone prone requires training. If you just want to deal damage use the attack action. If you just want to knock someone prone use the shove action. If you want to do both at once you need to know a maneuver. Now that you know this maneuver what is the reason you have limited uses of it per short rest. Honestly their is only one good reason that I need all players to accept. ITS A GAME! It only becomes a problem in game when the player decides it doesn’t make sense. Mechanically you aren’t using a trip attack because you are out of uses. In game you aren’t using it because your character can’t find an opening. Now that we are past that my suggestion is the same here. Give all fighters access to superiority dice. Battle masters would just get more than other fighters. Also make sure that all fighters have to choose at least one of the utility options that were added in Tasha’s. Also create new maneuvers that are unique to each subclass. Monks just need an ability to cheat on skill checks like “ki focused skill” that would allow them to use their ki points to boost their roll on a skill check. Allowing them to guarantee success because that’s what spells do sometimes. To keep them from becoming the new skill monkey let us limit it to Acrobatics, Athletics, and Wis skills. Barbarians could get their 4th edition rage strike back. Basically let’s you expend a rage while you are already raging to deal heavy damage on an attack. For utility advantage in Str checks while raging is not enough. Maybe something that allows them to count a roll as a 20 for a Str check once a day. Then every time they use it beyond one they gain 1d4 levels of exhaustion.
If we are giving Martials more options and upping their power, why not just up their power to where casters are? Casters are in a very good spot right now.
I wouldn't call the HP difference to be paltry. 3 HP per level is 15 HP after 5 levels, 30 after 10. Ignoring any HP bonuses from Con, at Fighter at 10th level has 64 HP from their class while a wizard has 42, I would say that is a sizable difference. And honestly, whether or not martials end up taking more damage is more dependent on the DM tactics. I've seen plenty of DM's take advantage of the lower HP amounts that casters have by having enemies hit the backrow with ranged attacks or spells.
I feel like the spell slot issue is dependent on the DM as well. In the games my group does, I find myself having to budget my spell slots, even at high levels because my DMs find ways to make me use my slots throughout the day. However, it seems that other DMs fall into a couple large encounters a day that ends up with casters being able to go all out in those couple of encounters. Plus, if we are adding additional options and resources to martials, this resource issue may resolve itself with this addition depending on the potency of the options. Though combat wise, I always felt like martials were not too far from casters; it was more in the out of combat part of the game that casters had an immense edge in.
Magic Items are honestly purely a DM thing. A DM can always add magic items, and should be giving magic weapons to the martials, and magic items are incredibly plentiful in Adventurers League, where DM's can't willy nilly add magic items due to the AL rules. There are magic items that can definitely help mitigate the divide, DMs just need to start giving them out.
I really don't think a nerf to casters is needed at all. We just need to buff Martials up to the power level of casters.
As for the idea of wanting martials to remain grounded; I feel like that can be done in lower tier games. A martial character remains pretty human in T1. However, as a character goes up in tiers, they very clearly become superhuman. A 20th level fighter can attack 8 times, if they are dual wielding or have polearm master, that increases to 9 attacks. The Samurai subclass can give the fighters another attack for a total of 10 attacks. I feel like 10 attacks within a single turn, especially with a heavy weapon like a halberd, is well beyond human limits.
Hm. What I think needs to be addressed to balance casters vs. martials:
I feel like I could write forever on this topic, so I think I'll start with just one part, haha.
I'll start with the theme of the fantasy. Since it is the most subjective, there isn't really much to calculate, just a range of opinions which are all valid. There are so many kinds of fantasy, and despite DnD being basically a slowly growing mound of various inspirations from pop culture and myth, it has still managed to evolve into its own kind of unique fantasy feel. There are elements to it born from the mechanics and all of those influences that kind of amalgamated into its own thing. It's telling the story of a group of people who begin very humble, but grow over the course of their adventures to the point they face world, or even universe, changing challenges. Leveling up from peasant to the world's greatest heroes.
All individual fantasies are welcome. Some people dream of learning magic, and surpassing the greatest Wizards to cast spells that change reality. Some people imagine being chosen by a god, and granted divine gifts that elevate them to saintly miracle workers. And some people like to wonder what a person just like them could accomplish under the right circumstances. For them, a mortal hero standing against the greatest evils and still prevailing is the greatest fantasy. It means that anyone could be strong enough, forged under pressure, if they fight hard and have the will to overcome it all.
Power in DnD comes from many places. You can study hard and learn the secrets of reality. You can make a deal with a strange being. You can have faith and channel holy light. You can build amazing things. You can touch the planes and draw on mysterious strength. You can speak to the dead and use their wisdom. There's almost no limit. There are also those who wonder what they could do on their own.
I feel like the martial classes are the only place where mundane power is an option. They don't all only rely on it. But only martials have the chance to draw from their own strength alone. Fighters are the best example. But Rogues are also good. Both can be built with nothing resembling magic if you want to. Sure a Fighter at high levels can attack with amazing speed or survive a silly amount of injuries, and a Rogue has incredible reflexes. But it's nothing outside of the realm of the typical action movie. The stories where we suspend disbelief to enjoy someone just being very tough, or talented, or strong willed.
Even Barbarians and Monks are believable to some degree. Not because adrenaline is really that strong. And not because anyone could really detoxify their body with meditation. But because they're just close enough. And because the power comes from inside them alone. No magic, no gods, no ancestor, fey, or demons. Just training yourself to be the best a human (Elf, Dwarf, etc) can be.
The game mechanics support that to some degree. A 20 Strength is only capable of lifting a reasonable amount of weight, or jumping a realistic distance. Any real lock can be picked. Things like HP are intentionally vague. It represents more than how many stabs you can take. So all of the fantasy remains feasible.
So, just to talk about this one aspect first, I think there is a demand for at least a few character options where being just a really cool, but still mundane, person is possible. It's a certain type of fantasy. And martials provide it for people. I'm not against pushing the boundaries of it. I'm just curious if that fantasy can survive balancing classes against casters
This is a good list of a lot of the issues that cause the disparity between them. And much more succinct than I would have managed. Thank you! XD
So... what constitutes the divide and how to possibly address it.
Yeah, I know - the old spells consider that, but then we got a whole bunch of simplified summoning spells like Summon Fiend that throw it all out of the window and treat summons like it's a videogame without considering the type; fiend, aberration, shadowspawn - they automatically obey you without question and disappear once you stop concentrating. Contrary to that, Infernal Calling essentially introduces a new NPC into the story to play a brief or lasting role.
Everyone is bringing up great ideas.
To partially address why I personally don't like the idea of giving battle master maneuvers to all warriors - Firstly, I just think they are poorly designed. They are a neat idea that needed the years of experience we now have to refine them. But that's another post to fully explain.
The thing I want to say for the moment is about why they might feel like a good answer, and why I don't think they really are. I could be way off, so I definitely invite any other takes on it.
I feel like most people suggest them as a way to both give martials a little more power, and to give them options in combat. More than just rolling to attack. And I totally get that. But what is the root cause?
You can already do many of the options. You can attempt to push, trip, disarm, etc. As many people have noted. But players rare do. I suspect it is because of the action economy and the value of the action. The common wisdom is that the best use of your action is to kill monsters as quickly as possible so they don't kill you. As soon as you swing the action balance in your team's favor, you will win.
But knocking someone down doesn't hurt them. It barely inconveniences them. If you have an ally that can attack them with advantage before they get up, then it's situationally good. But only if that ally can do more damage with their attacks on it than both of you could have done together if you both used your action to attack. Like a sneak attack might. If you can't do that, then the monster is just going to stand back up and keep fighting you.
Which is why a maneuver is so good. It lets you make all of your attacks while also knocking the enemy down. There is no wasted opportunity cost. You don't have to give up your action to do it. That's what it sounds like people really want. But that can be done much easier without having dice pools and a list of special options you have to limit yourself to. They have already shown us how that could look. And that's why I prefer a concept like crayonshinchuck mentioned. Instead of maneuvers, just options on every attack.
The new Unarmed Strike lets you use one of your attacks to hit the enemy with your body. You can then choose to grapple them, shove them, or knock them prone. That gives us options already. At a cost that makes decent sense. You can't do your full weapon damage while trying to push someone over. You trade doing full damage with one of your attacks for the special attack chance.
The Shield Master feat is another example. As part of your attack action, you get to do your full weapon damage, while also performing a Shield Bash to push them once per turn. It's a little silly that you have to take a feat for that part. Since that's literally part of what training to use a shield should include. Everyone with Shield Training should be able to shield bash. But the feat does have other nice advantages, and it lets you do your full weapon damage while bashing, so it's still good. I could see a basic feature of being trained in a shield letting you bash at the cost of one of your attacks but at reduced damage, maybe 1d4.
So the game is already going to let everyone attempt to Push, Grapple, or Knock Prone without sacrificing much of your action economy, just some reduced damage. If you have another attack, you can even gain the benefits of a prone opponent for yourself in the same turn.
I think we should expend on these options. Everyone should be able to do most of the battle master maneuvers if they are trained to fight with a weapon. At least those trained in martial weapons. That's what weapon training actually is. Learning to Feint, Parry, Riposte, Disarm, Lunge, etc. It's so silly to me that only one subclass in the game tries to parry during a fight. (I know it's just a name)
Warriors should be better at all of these things. Maybe they get to add their proficiency bonus to the DCs, and no one else can. Maybe just restricting it to Martial weapons and certain armor training is enough. Then Rangers and Paladins and certain subclasses can benefit too. But these are options people should be able to do without sacrificing their whole action. Because the way the action economy works, no one wants to do them. And half of the maneuvers, although common tricks anyone trained in a weapon should know, aren't available to anyone without investing something in them.
So one option might be to have a list of maneuvers that anyone can do no matter what. And a bigger list for things that you can do if trained in the right equipment. Maybe they are just weapon properties, or apply to all Martial weapons. Then you use the Unarmed Strike as an example. Let everyone try one of them each turn as part of the attack action. Make it come with a tradeoff for some damage. Make it require a save. Then let the Warriors do them better. Let them do their full weapon damage, and include their proficiency in the save DC.
I just feel this method would be so much cleaner, and actually make sense in the world. No dice pools to deal with, no more only learning some of your sword lessons. No short rests and small damage bursts to balance. Just basic skills that people actually have. And an edge to the Warriors.
And if the damage bonus of maneuvers is really important to people, then give Warriors that dice pool with no strings attached, a number d8s per day they can add in whenever they want. Base it on level, or PB, or whatever. Scale it like Channel Divinity or Bardic Inspiration. Whatever works for the raw damage output balance if needed.
I noticed a number of people mentioned how 4E kept martials and casters on pretty even footing but disparaged how complex it made the game. One thing to note with with 4E was the massive amount of in game book keeping on all the various effects, their triggers, and durations. We probably could give martial characters a number of features similar to the powers in 4E and as long as we kept the number of things we have to track to a minimum, it should be fine. The biggest issue of 4E imo was the huge number of effects you had to keep track of in combat.
To help illustrate what I'm saying, here is a list of the battle master maneuvers and where I think they belong:
Things that do make sense as an actual special feature of a class (like all Fighters) or a subclass (like Battle Master):
Things that anyone trained in martial weapons should know how to do (with some reworks needed for some):
Things that anyone should be able to do with a charisma roll in some way:
All of these would obviously take some careful rewrites to various degrees to balance out as either features or always on options. Many would work just fine with some basic rules in place. I just hope this helps show the general concept.
A lot of what kept martials and casters even in 4e was that 4e seriously gutted caster capabilities. You could, with some mild adjustments to handle different assumptions about power scaling, import 4e martial characters into 5e, and they'd have about the same set of problems as 5e martial characters do (they'd be at a similar level of versatility and complexity to a battle master fighter).
You really should check out 4e. I think you would like it. Or at the very least you would like the at will abilities that all characters get. No one ever just attacks in that game. I’m going to say that because of the “meta” of DND the additional damage of the d8s matter. No matter how many options you have on your turn if you don’t do enough damage you will eventually feel ineffective. What you are asking for will probably be addressed by the new weapon properties. I think they will be doing something similar to BG3 if you have played the early access.
What kept martials and casters even in 4E was that they had a similar level of options and versatility. That is what we should take away from 4E. If we give martials a similar level of meaningful options and versatilities, targeting the same power level as casters, you can buff martials to be on par with casters.
Sure, but it's hard to do that while keeping casters as versatile as they are, because casters are crazy versatile.