I posted this thread awhile back, but never got to see where it went. So here it is again.
How do you balance martials and casters, /tg/? Can you balance them? SHOULD you balance them? What game does it well?
>>47262043
By letting martials do cool things too and accepting once a character is lvl 8 plus they have moved beyond being a.mundane soldier or mercenary.
>>47262043
I told you last time, REMAIN INDOORS
>>47262068
I like this. After reading up on mythological heroes it makes me sad that a level 20 fighter can never pull anything like Beowulf or Cu Chulainn
>>47262068
This fampai.
Also, don't play D&D.
In another one of my terrible ideas, maybe prevent characters from advancing beyond a certain level but let them have feats whenever they normally would have advanced instead?
>>47262146
I had an idea for a Highlander game using ToB classes. They capped out at level 8 and can only ever earn feats by killing another immortal.
>>47262043
Know what the system you are using is designed for.
Some systems are not for balance.
Some are ivory tower.
Some package system mastery rewards under magic.
Should they balance?
Depends on the game and group.
Are Magica should not even feign balance. Mages are better than mundane.
Games that ape mythic or pulp fantasy?
Magic should be situational and often more trouble than it is worth.
>>47262043
At the point where the wizard can stop time, the fighter can cut mountains in half and survive a fall from orbit.
>>47262043
ToB+XPH+MoI only
DSP only
4e
Fantasy Craft
Legend (not the Mongoose one)
Dungeon Crawl Classics
Make You Kingdom
Ryuutama
Splittermond
>>47262146
>Also, don't play D&D.
*aside from 4e.
Where do monks factor into this
>>47262043
>Can you balance them?
Use a classless system, that way cool toys aren't locked away from anyone, regardless of their combat style. The sneaky back-stab guy can become invisible, the sword guy can fly, and the long range fire throwing guy can take levels in Fist.
>SHOULD you balance them?
Absolutely. Every player should feel like they have equal opportunity to impact the game. Even if everyone has roughly equivalent combat ability, the sword guy isn't going to take kindly to being told to sit in the corner being really quiet until the next fight starts.
>>47262043
By three things:
>making martials actually good at fighting
>giving martials abilities for things that aren't fighting
>optionally, forcing casters to specialize in something, so they're not batman wizarding and solving everything.
>>47262797
Also important, though, is don't try and 'balance' a class by making it an unfun pile of shit to play.
None of that 'you get one spell a day, it can light a match, and if you fail the activation roll your soul explodes' bullshit.
But also none of that "Your class is worth less then one of my class features" that plagued 3.PF.
>>47262797
What should martials be good at aside from martialing
>>47263066
Tracking, wilderness survival, connections, leadership, wealth, physical/craftsmanship abilities bordering or passing into on the magical...
If we're talking 3.5, it's not too bad a problem (at least for levels 1-10 or so) if your group works as a team instead of trying to hog the spotlight for themselves (except for irredeemably awful shit like Monk).
The Wizard/Cleric/Druid just need to be in a mindset to use their powers to let martials do cool things even though they could just do the cool things themselves.
It also helps if people aren't powergaming, since that just kicks off an arms-race with the DM who has to try and provide a challenge to the whisper gnome focused conjurer and DMM:Persist CoDZilla while not smushing the other characters like bugs.
Sure the casters could handle the damage-dealing too, but it's more fun for everyone if they focus on support and area control and let the martials deal the big damage.
>but why nerf yourself by playing a sub-optimal character? Why have Barbarian/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard for a party when you could just have 3 Wizards and a CoDZilla?
Because your DM is probably adjusting the adventure to the strength of your party anyway. Remember - you are actually hurting your party overall if you over-optimize a caster by forcing your DM into an arms race against you.
>>47263066
Warriors from the top of society could have leadership, tactics, strategy, persuassion, oratory and riding. Optionally commerce, survival, craft skills and any criminal skill if they are mercenaries.
>>47262043
>How do you balance martials and casters, /tg/?
Either give martials fun abilities to use in a fight, OR if that's too immersion breaking then at the very least balance the math so that they can be competent if not interesting to play.
>Can you balance them?
Yes.
>SHOULD you balance them?
Yes, if both martials and casters are presented as player options.
>What game does it well?
Literally every edition of Dungeons and Dragons except 3.5 and Pathfinder.
>>47262146
>In another one of my terrible ideas, maybe prevent characters from advancing beyond a certain level but let them have feats whenever they normally would have advanced instead?
IIRC this was a fairly popular houserule people used to make 3.5 less awful. I can't remember what it was called but I think the rule was everybody stopped advancing at level 6.
It solves the problem of casters getting to the level where they become untouchable demigods, but it doesn't do anything to make martials more interesting and dynamic in a fight, which is the other problem.
Martials are fast and attack quick with moderate damage
Casters are slow and attack with slow high damage.
Casters on their own die because they'll get stabbed before a spell can be prepared. Martials on their own die because they have no big guns to attack/defend with after the first few moments of battle.
>>47262043
Step 1.
Play anima
Step 2
????
Step 3
Profit
>>47266598
>Play anima
Not OP, but I'm interested as well, tell me more.
>>47262043
>>How do you balance martials and casters?
By giving martials cool shit to do. Think less guy who swings sword good and more Jackie-Chan mixed with Heracules and Cu Chulain with a side of Gilgamesh.
>>Can you balance them?
Absolutely.
>>SHOULD you balance them?
Duh, again absolutely.
>>What game does it well?
Earthdawn does it well. Though it does so by making all classed characters inherently magical. Every class gets its cool abilities by drawing from the power of their archetype. So Wizards sling spells and are awesome with arcane knowledge (they can memorize entire books or mutter strange logical formula that confuse those caught in them), meanwhile Warriors toughen their flesh to the point of turning blades and can leap from treetops like wuxia fighters, and Thieves can turn even the most innocuous of items into lockpicks and literally cloak themselves in shadows.
Shit is cash.
>>47267398
>and can bounce about a battlefield like demented air hocky pucks.
Fixed that for you. Air Dance is the best.
>>47266598
Or
>Step 1
>Don't play anima
>Step 2
>Immediately profit by not playing it
>>47266598
IIRC, martials are stronger than casters in Anima.
>>47262043
>spells are ranked in raw power from 1 to 9
>spells at rank 1 are useful and versatile, containing decent damage and utility nobody else has
>spells become increasingly more bullshit and broken the higher you go
>spellbook is so big that anyone who gives it a thorough thumbing through can tear games apart
Don't fucking do this god damnit.
>>47267445
Haha, Now I want to make a squad of Obsidimen Warriors who Air Dance around by rolling into balls.
The "martial artist" I'm preparing for my friend is actually the strongest chracter against humans, my problem is how to make him very efficent against huge monsters. Any suggestion?
>>47267398
Earthdawn is fricking awesome. Currently having an all-orc-campaign starting in a still closed caer. Party consists of a fighter, a scout, an elementalist and a necromancer.
>>47268008
Not even just high tier. Shit like sleep and ray of enfeeblement are shit that kill martials.
>>47267398
I like this idea but how does an archetype like 'Wizard' even appear? Like a super powered warrior or theif makes sense as something could see as an archetype of humanity, like from Unknown Armies, but how could a Wizard appear like that? It's like a paradox.
>>47262068
> by letting martials do cool things too
They can already kill dozens of orcs without taking a breath, what more do you want, idiot? A wizard uses up precious spells to kill enemies, and they can spread out to avoid him.
The real issue with martial caster supremacy, is DMs using single monster encounters. And fighter players whining that their characters cannot cast spells.
>>47262043
>How do you balance martials and casters, /tg/? Can you balance them? SHOULD you balance them?
Martials and Casters should not be on the same level, you should not even pretend that they should be equal.
I'm sorry, but Hercules and Achilles should not be comparable to someone that pulls a rabbit out of a hat. Martial Power far outstrips petty magery and parlor tricks. Wizards should just be satisfied with pulling scarves from their sleeves while REAL heroes do REAL acts of heroism, like holding up the entire heavens.
>>47274645
I see that semen demon. What is this?
I balance them via hard work, as in actually changing the Wizards spells at their core and how powerful they are, not by being lazy and messing around with secondary things and just how much per day Wizards get.
In my game; Wizards essentially get magical 'loadout' points they can take with them on adventures. These points are spent to either prepare single use but powerful spells (most dnd spells), as well as things like minions, minor magical items, powers and passive buffs.
>>47268008
The real answer here is to limit what spells are available to the caster.
Casters should be limited in scope/specialized. A great deal of spells that are game breaking should simply :gasp: be removed from the game.
Once you do that the game balances itself out, as spells have limited us with component requirements. Increasing cast time for high level effects is also not a bad a idea.
Really any of things could have been done by 3.5'6 /pf at anytime and these problems would have disappeared
>>47267398
The problem with something like Earthdawn is that a certain type of martial players get mad when they have to do "weeaboo fightan magic," because they just want to hit things with swords.
Then they turn around and get mad when mages are stronger than them.
>>47274579
Moshi moshi baitu desu ne
>>47264065
E6, it stood for Epic6. Past lvl 6, you just kept gaining a feat every level, but no more class features. There was a whole list of toned down epic-feats that were available past lvl 6. I think lvl 4 and 5 spells counted as "epic spells" for that feat or something, and you had to get GM approval to get them etc...
>>47262043
If everyone's a caster, nobodies a caster.
>>47262043
>How do you balance martials and casters?
By making their achievable feats comparable, and their resource economics comparable
>Can you balance them?
Yes
>SHOULD you balance them?
If you value balance. That's more of a decision that the GM and the table should decide together when picking a game. As a GM, I generally prefer games where the answer is yes, and my table seems to agree. Not all tables are the same though.
>What game does it well?
4e, FATE, Savage Worlds, 13th age, off the top of my head.
I think the best solution is to just give martial characters the opportunity to learn a narrow subset of spells, but treat them like martial actions. It is pretty common in mythology for warriors to have supernatural abilities which are essentially magic, but have no basis in formal spell casting. Let fighters petrify enemies with their gaze and split the earth with their sword.
>>47262043
Stop playing D&D.
>>47274279
>>47278634
I wish this meme would go away. 1st edition, 2nd edition, 4th edition, 5th edition all have decent balance between martials and casters. Basic and 0e might as well but I've never played them. There's only one popular edition of D&D where martials are both dogshit AND boring, but everyone acts like it's the default.
>>47262146
>In another one of my terrible ideas, maybe prevent characters from advancing beyond a certain level but let them have feats whenever they normally would have advanced instead?
Isn't this literally what Epic Level 6 does?
>>47278995
DnD5e does not have decent balance unless your only measure of balance is 'does equal damage'.
Balance needs to also be 'has equal ability to affect the plot'.
>>47277497
I wish we'd stop tying 'being a caster' to 'having these certain mechanics'. You know what works great here? Strike.
In Strike, you can be an archer like Green Arrow doing sick trickshots.
And you can be a wizard blasting away with firebolts and shooting homing bolts.
And you know what the nice thing is? They're the SAME CLASS, because they do the same thing. You just DESCRIBE them differently.
>>47262043
Be a dick with magic items and see how good a caster is without their fav. magic wands
>>47270391
Anybody?
>>47262043
Fighters are super human
Casters are squishy but powerful/versatile
>>47262043
Drastically reduce the power and versatility of magic. The nigh-omnipotent wizard who can do anything is purely in the realm of villains, a challenge to be overcome with guile and cunning the way a dragon or demon must be.
>>47262043
>How do you balance martials and casters, /tg/?
You don't, this isn't a video game
>Can you balance them?
No. Being able to cast reality warping magic is not realistically comparable with swinging a sword.
>SHOULD you balance them?
See above. Only video games and the casuals that think tabletop is JUST LIKE WOW OMG IM SUCH A GEEK try.
>What game does it well?
None.
>>47281377
Andthenthere'sthisfaggot.jpg
>Playing necromancer
>think wizards aren't that bad, and people are just over-reacting/have bad players
>party fighting boss, sand kraken
>use enervation, twice, both max out the negative levels
>suddenly the boss is a 1 hd pushover -40 hp
>group pally one shots it with a Crit for the rest of its health
>gm and I agree for me to reign it back a bit
Now I truly see the power of wizards, fuck.
>>47262450
Fuck off with your weeaboo naruto crap.
Some people accept that if their character is SWING SWERD MAN they make SACRIFICES.
Casuals like you from the entitled video gamer generation need to learn that lude isn't fair.
>>47281377
>No. Being able to cast reality warping magic is not realistically comparable with swinging a sword.
Then clearly you shouldn't let people learn reality warping magic with anything near the same ease with which they learn to swing a sword.
>>47281396
Then if their character is CAST MAGIC MAN they also need to make SACRIFICES, you fucking casual.
Let's say you are a roof thatcher. You make damn good roofs out of straw.
But then a guy comes along with these things called tiles, which are easier to use and better. Straw roofs just aren't cutting it.
So you cry about how tiles are "unbalanced", and nobody listens.
Adapt or die. Life isn't fair.
>>47281464
Your analogy is bad and you should feel bad.
>>47281396
Yeah why should your 2 bit stage magician be able to stand to to toe with Conan?
>>47281377
>reality warping magic
>realistic in the first place
>>47281464
>Doesn't have the brain cells to spare to even consider the context of the question being asked.
>Thinks he's being clever
>>47281756
Oh, please explain, wise one, why you are so clever
If you build your existence around an obsolete, inherently inferior option then you void all right to complain about other people being better.
If you drive a station wagon you can't complain a Jaguar is faster.
If you choose to wash dishes you can't complain a lawyer earns more
>>47262793
i like this style of this approach, but in practice it is rather useless. the problem that emerges from it is a single or a few OP build(s).
if your players resolve to pick the non-OP build in order to make a well-rounded and convincing character, the question becomes "why did we move away from classes in the first place?"
even when the developers are savvy to this issue and try to set up all the independent skills so that multiple optimal build paths emerge, the question again becomes "why did we move away from classes?"
sometimes it is fun to play in systems like this. i think it is rather futile for role-playing games though.
>>47281966
so, your analogy is based on the presumption:
>here is ancient society, operating in standard fashion. swordsmen, archers, etc. then suddenly, magic. magic is better, so everyone becomes wizards.
i think this makes sense, but doesn't address the equally valid starting point:
>this is a fantasy universe. magic exists, swordsmen are now fantasy swordsmen, archers are now fantasy archers, all capable of the fantastic, reality be damned.
both scenarios can be internally consistent.
>>47279989
The caster then proceeds to make their own.
>>47274861
BroQuest
>>47281966
Because your metaphor has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about. This is game design, not the real world, and if one option is inherently inferior, then you failed as a game designer.
>>47281966
I agree. If you choose to be a shitty magician who needs all of his daily mana to draw a rabbit from a hat you can't possibly complain about Conan the Barbarian or Deathstroke the Terminator being better than you at everything.
See, it works both ways. Why? Because magic is 100% fictional and fucking subjective, so are fantasy superhuman physical feats. The limits are placed solely by the writer. Magic can be anything from "create dimensions" to "meditate for a week to light a candle". Thus the writer's aim should be to create a balanced environment where both martials and spellcasters can contribute equally, limiting magic and giving martials neat superhuman feats if needed.
You're a master baiter but if there are people who actually believe this shit, they could use a reminder.
>>47262043
If you want to play in a setting where wizards feel like wizards and players have balanced characters, I see two options:
Do the Star Wars thing. All Jedi or no Jedi. You can play a bounty hunter in a Jedi campaign if you want, but don't complain when a Sith starts force chocking you. You can't play a Jedi in a normal campaign.
Or do the Ars Magica thing. Everyone plays a wizard and also one or two mundane supporting characters so you have a balaned party without any player having to be the distraction for the wizards.
I let martials get out of hand and start pulling superhuman shenanigans.
From Aragorn to Kratos to Arjuna, you can have journey of growth that matches a "wizard" step for step.
>>47282202
>implying my players know the craft rules
>>47267686
Sortof. In a one-on-one fight, the martial type will usually win.
They have different strengths - a caster has an easier time taking out armies or nations (high level elementalism involves six-mile-wide hurricanes), and the usual utility stuff.
>>47282505
Wasn't Saga edition actually quite good about mixing force powered and non-powered characters?
Never got to play it myself, so I may be talking out my ass here.
I mentioned this in the last thread on the subject, but anyone looking for a system that actually gives martials and wizards equally interesting things to do would do well to check out REIGN. It's nicely balanced between the two and makes them feel both distinct in their abilities yet in no way unequal.
>>47262043
Assuming your stereotypical D&D game, ditch the rest system, it's retarded.
People should not be able to take short rests after every dungeon room, make it so that wizards really have to choose what spells to use and when.
Also, ditch the metagamey spells. Stuff like stat decreases, wish spells, creating magical artifacts, ect.
All that should be used only when the plot demands it, "you find a genie in a lamp."
>>47283955
>People should not be able to take short rests after every dungeon room, make it so that wizards really have to choose what spells to use and when.
Depending on the edition, that's not the fault of rests but having like 30 spells a day by mid levels, and wands/scrolls on top of that.
>>47284083
Hmm, with spells you could rip off dark souls.
>Instead of every spell level having a unique slot, they all share the same slot.
>Higher level spells take up more slots
>Each spell can only be used once per slot taken up
>You want to use that level 6 spell twice a day? That's 12/30 slots used.
>>47284161
Isn't that basically a mana system?
Except I guess you have to slot things in in advance.
>>47282848
N O
>>47282505
Why do wizards need to be overpowered to feel like wizards? If they've tamed the fire of Uar (cantrip), can commune with the spirits of the air (language proficiency), and know the Rite of Al 'Kharash (ritual that takes an hour to cast), how do they not feel like wizards?
I'd love to play a D&D-like game where casters were just really good at utility but shit at fighting directly.
>>47281396
>cutting huge things is only anime related.
>>47285420
Wizards have the ability to exercise godlike control over reality. If you don't have the ability to exercise godlike control over reality, obviously you're not playing a wizard.
>>47279989
But a fighter needs magic weapons even more than a wizard.
>>47285646
Why do wizards need godlike power? Why not more moderate amounts?
Most wizards from mythology, folklore and classical literature have nowhere near the amount of power that a DnD wizard can bring to bear. Mostly they sit around and act as advisors to the heroes of the story, who are almost always invariably some kind of martial warriors.
>>47281396
Exceptionally powerful warriors and "fighters" for lack of a better term far predate anime, and infact form the foundation of most modern western mythology. Go read Beowulf or something and get some culture not originating from a 700 page novel written by a fat guy with a bikini armor chick on the cover.
>>47262043
If we're talking DnD: Wizards get one school only, and summon spells are one-hour rituals. I don't like it, but it kept the munchkin of my group in check.
>>47281377
>Comparing your two-bit stage magician to the Son of Zeus.
>>47282202
In shit editions, maybe
>>47286433
But that's just as shitty as the reverse. Useless and unfun to play. See
>>47262843
>>47285565
D&D 5E?
Only a really specced-out sorcerer/warlock can put out anything like the per-turn damage of a champion or battlemaster fighter. There are no spells to instantly end a fight. Barbarians and high end monks can also have a continuous release of tremendous damage (open hand monks also having access to the only save-or-die in the game). Pure mages can't keep up whatsoever in sheer damage output (at least not without spending their 1-day 8th and 9th level spell slots, so for precisely 2 rounds they may perform better), but they can control the battlefield and make the martial's job a lot easier.
>>47285676
The fighter gets them
>>47290182
There's still plenty you can do with just one school. The real problem is you'd still have to nerf some schools and buff others.
>savage words
>play a spellcaster
>my spells miss or don't do anything half of the time due to inflated thoughness
>my summons miss their attacks half of the time
>pick up this spell that lets me control enemies
>use it on boss, making him a punching bag
>gm losing his shit, be a good sport and do something that lets him do another opposed roll
>'the fight would have been over in a single turn!'
>last session
>gm granted us custom spells, other spellcaster got a really powerful attack spell
>ends boss fight on his first turn
>gm says nothing about it
Boy the only chance my pc had to shine, after shitty rolls and facing damage sponges , and im asked to tone it down, yet the other guy got a free pass, i truly hate my dm
>>47262043
The main problem with 3.5/PF is that martials scale by extrapolation, and casters scale by writing new spells. Once you abolish the idea that a 15th level fighter works exactly the same as a 5th level fighter, there's only detail work left to do. Mostly that boils down to fixing individual spells, reassessing the item requirements of each class, curbing the immediacy with which wizards can drop fight changing effects, etc.
There's a reason Tome of Battle is seen as a "fix" for 3.5 even though there's no further ToB-style support and the flavor is kind of terrible (especially at low levels) -- it fixes the biggest issue closest to the heart of 3.5.
>>47262043
The answer to all of your questions aside from the SHOULD is 'play literally anything other than 3.5 DnD or the 40k RPG's'
The SHOULD is subjective and up to the tastes of your group.
![Book_of_the_Nine_Swords__86510.1439599839.1280.1280[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/GBQfNtM.jpg "Book_of_the_Nine_Swords__86510.1439599839.1280.1280[1].jpg")
Just did.
>>47270391
What system are you playing?
>>47281396
>what is mythology
C'mon man, it's like you don't want to play as fucking heroes of legend
>>47282848
My group never had a problem. The jedis were the tanks that took enemy attention while the the bounty hunter and soldier both picked off priority targets. Droids did droid shit.
>>47285966
Or that one Irish warlord who got so pumped that when his companions tried to cool him off by throwing him into a barrel of water, the barrel exploded. This happened twice.
>>47291441
Aww yiss, Cu Chulainn in the house.
Probably the single most underappreciated western mythological figure in modern culture. Give me THAT movie, Hollywood.
