Okay so first off I'm not advocating for either side of the Martial vs Caster debate but one of the martials biggest arguments is that Casters can perform amazing superhuman feats while the Martial can'tbarring magic items and a lot of Feats
So my question is how would you buff Martials without nerfing Casters in any way in order to eliminate the perceived disparity
What even game system are you talking about bruh?
>>47627527
Lets assume 3.PF as that is the system that usually suffers most from this issue
Gestalt levels for classes without spells
>>47627511
>So my question is how would you buff Martials without nerfing Casters in any way in order to eliminate the perceives disparity?
You don't. Martials represent the peak physical condition, casters tap into the nature of existance itself and manipulate the forces of time and space... They are not and should never be balanced.
You can hamper the Caster's progression or require amazing feats or quests to obtain a fraction of a component required to cast a single high level spell, but that's it.
>>47627560
People have been trying to fix 3e since it came out, it's a hopeless endeavour, unless you want to rebuild everything.
The closest thing to a fix is 5e, or maybe Fantasy Craft, which likewise tore the whole thing down and rebuilt it to not be ass-backwards.
You could go a ways towards fixing 3.5 though, by emulating the feat chains from Fantasy Craft. One of the big things that nerfs martials in 3.5 is how you have these big long chains of feats needed to do amazing stuff like "trip a guy", and if you don't have all the necesary feats then your Fighter is unable to figure out how to trip someone.
Replacing these "feats" with actual Feats (the kind of thing that would impress somebody) can go a long way, and FC's are pretty good in that department. The problem with importing them is they rely a lot on all the other changes FC made in order to operate.
>>47627511
Like I keep saying.
The right to instakill anything significantly weaker than him in a single blow, perhaps spilling over onto other weaklings. Generic Goblin walks up to a Lv5 fighter? Fighter has the right to declare him dead
>>47627803
Lets clear this up early
I don't want 200 shitpost about Martials vs Casters
Or whether or not there is a problem in the first place
Assume there is a problem and Martials need to be buffed
Casters are left alone NO ONE TOUCHES CASTERS
They do not get nerfed in any way
How do you bring martial to an EQUIVALENT LEVEL of power and ability
The problem is a fundamental double standard.
If you allow Martials to perform superhuman heroic actions as a core part of the system, it fixes everything.
But 3.PF and similar systems have an odd sense of 'Realism', where everything should be as close to reality as possible Unless it is explicitly magical. Which is fucking stupid, yet a lot of people buy into it.
>>47627871
Let's assume d20.
Instead of a 20-level base class for martials, we instead have a slew of Lv3, Lv5, and Lv10 base classes that all do completely different things, with capstones that say "Your character level is now your class level for the purpose of calculating the potency of your class abilities".
>>47627511
Let Martials be Cu Chulain, Beowulf, Roland, et cetera.
Not "random schmuck wit a sword #1530642".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Br%C3%A8che_de_Roland
>>47627912
So every 3/5 levels they get a massive jump in power because their Level 2 abilities become Level 15 ability? Makes sense, Wizards have almost every ability they have grow each level.
>>47627511
Why the fuck would you not nerf casters?
>>47627511
You literally can't unless you go full Naruto than green suit guy style.
You SHOULD nerf the progression of the casters. They are suppose to spend like 50 years studying and shit. The only thing you need is extend the middle tier spellcaster spells before they reach godhood.
That's literally all you have to do.
>>47627965
Because high power games can be fun as long as everyone is high power.
>>47627970
>You literally can't unless you go full Naruto than green suit guy style.
See >>47627953
Nigga cut a 40 meter wide, 100 meter high trench through solid fucking rock with a swing of his sword.
Western myths and legends have plenty of high powered martials, no matter how loudly casterfags cry "weeaboo" at the idea that Martials might actually get to be get to be as powerful as their precious casters.
>>47627957
I made a few classes under that philosophy, my favorite of which being someone who defeats foes by smacking them with nonlethal negative levels all day.
>>47627560
>Last session
>Have Haste
>Smite full attack gives 90 some-odd damage, sending cultist into -70hp
>Not an amazing superhuman feat
>>47628084
>Spellcasters are more powerful than their mythological equivalents, 99% of which were divine in nature, and can emulate many of their inspirations at the same time
>this is fine, said the 3.5 douchebag
>Martials want to be able to emulate ONE of their mythological inspirations because they can't even do that much
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Every fucking time.
>>47627871
>Assume there is a problem and Martials need to be buffed
Why are we assuming this? What brings you to that conclusion? If a wizard waving a wand and destroying a mountain is the baseline, then rename the class "fighter" and have a swing of the "sword" level the same mountain.
Martials are already assumed to reach "Greek Hero" status at higher levels. Whu are you assuming that's not working as intended?
It's easy.
If we can divide "arcane" and "divine" and "psionic" up arbitrarily then why can't we divide "martial prowess" up in a category of 'magic' arbitrarily. It's just earned through physical prowess rather than studying ancient texts, praying to a god or being exposed to the far realm.
>>47628345
>Greek Hero
>can fight well AND either know how to trip a guy, or how to disarm a guy, but not both
>>47627560
Play another system.
Full stop. You cannot bring up martials anywhere near the same level as casters without getting magic involved. Tome of Battle came as close as it ever got in making martials viable in 3.x.
This martial/caster discrepancy is a problem only in 3.x and, to a slightly lesser extent, 5e. You did not see this in 1e, 2e, BECMI, or 4e.
>>47628403
That's exactly what 4e did.
And the grognards did what they do. They whined and screamed "weeaboo".
>>47627511
There is no way to fix this problem by buffing martials. You either have to make all martialy and skill focused characters swordmages/paladins or force casters to buy spells with feats or skill points.
>>47628439
>Hit One time with Shield once per Encounter
>Magic!
Go fucking home, Casterfag.
>>47627972
You don't need to give casters THAT much power to play high power games
>>47628530
>>47627803
I can't even tell if people are dumb enough to believe this or if they're just trolling.
>>47627511
Revamp the whole Martial System. Make it so that Martial feats are the equivalent of Spells without the spells slots and non-ranged AoE.
>>47628282
You would think that people who are supposedly well-versed in mythology would know about those myths, but I guess they're not nearly as educated as they would have you believe.
Shit dude 99% of these mythological heroes are warriors. The spellcaster shit came from relatively modern fiction rather than religion or myth.
>>47627871
Thing is, tier 1 classes bend the game over a barrel and rape its ass without lube and don't even have the goddamn common courtesy to give the game the reach-around, often without much metagaming, since it's as simple as going "ooh, could my animal companion be a bear?" or "conjuration sounds cool."
Bringing martials up to their level would mean giving them access to equally redonkulous game-breaking power.
>>47628603
That how it was done in earlier systems.
Fighters were among the fastest levelers, while wizards were slowest.
No "cantrip whenever I feel like it" bullshit. You memorized spells and when they were gone that's it. You had to plan ahead or you were fucked. And if you wanted to cast the same spell twice you had to memorize it twice...no "I use a banked slot to cast that last spell again".
All spells had to be found and copied from scrolls or spell books, with a high rate of failure. This allowed the DM to actively limit what shit happened in game.
Wizards had to be mindful of their spellbooks and make/cary "travel sized" versions or risk losing all accumulated spells if the book was destroyed.
The problem is that casters now have it easy.
>>47628718
I have come to the point in my life where I no longer care when a cheeto-stained grubby-fingered neckbeard shrieks about something being weeaboo. I've actually started to consider it a positive thing, because if their attitude is that shitty and they're always so miserable, then maybe liking what they don't like is a good thing.
God knows they never seem to provide an answer besides "It sucks and I hate it." One of them even started ranting about cultural marxism when I asked why he hates Japanese things so much.
Why do people refuse to go full "anime" again?
I mean what's the problem when the universe already has mages in robes?
>>47628273
>It's ridiculous to think the game doesn't let martials do superhuman things
>Just recently, I killed a person!
>(with the aid of a magical spell)
>(and channeling holy magic)
2/10 I replied. And this is /tg/ so getting a bite isn't impressive.
>>47628649
>Shit dude 99% of these mythological heroes are warriors.
Blessed with artifacts and favors from the gods themselves. Mythology balanced martials with magic items...which still amounted to shit when said martial went toe to toe with a sorceress.
>>47628769
Reply to the wrong post?
>>47628822
Maybe.
>>47628786
Can you name some examples of mythological heroes getting their shit wrecked when they faced "sorcerers" please?
>>47628786
Beowulf beat up a giant and a dragon. He had no magical artifacts.
>>47628718
>Fighters were among the fastest levelers, while wizards were slowest.
Wrong, it was Thief>Cleric>Fighter>Wizard in leveling speed, with the Wizard actually overtaking the Fighter in leveling speed later in the game.
>>47628905
Appreciate the correction, thank you. It's been a while. Could have sworn the Cleric was slower than the Fighter...
>>47627511
Scaling feats so you keep getting new bonuses and options from them as you level up.
Give Martials their own Save or Sucks and debuffs, battlefield control, and support/utility things, like sniffing out invisible enemies, having gut instincts that predict ambushes/betrayal, self-healing with a second wind, speed/mobility buffs, seeing the weakspots in inanimate objects and therefore being able to punch a castle in half.
Condense some skills together, give Martials enough skill points,and let them be used to perform supernatural stuff without needing to hit shit like DC 80. Enough Athletics/Acrobatics/Balance should let you leap tall buildings, run on walls and balance on clouds, enough Stealth should let you teleport when no one is looking.
Make combat rounds last longer than 6 seconds, like half a minute or so, so while the Caster spends the round waving around their hands, praying, or performing interpretive dance the Martial can justify pulling cinematic stunts during that time period, like cutting a rope anchoring a chandelier and using it falling to pull you up to the second floor.
>>47628876
Sir Gawain was powered by the sun. He had incredible strength at dawn, fading around sunset. He did some crazy shit, as did all the knights. And while magic items and stuff did play a role in some of it, it wasn't the whole story.
>>47628786
Heracles was doing fine with a huge club, bow and poisoned arrows
>>47627511
Give martials more skill points so they could be useful out of combat. Really people focus on the combat or PVP parts of the martial/caster disparity all of the time, but the real problem is that when it comes to solving puzzles or problems that can't be solved by full attacking, the wizard will always have a solution while a fighter will not. So more skills, more skill tricks, more synergy bonuses. Let the fighter outdo the wizard using sheer street smarts, a 10 ft pole and some rope from time to time.
Remove tax feats and make feats stronger. Instead of taking Combat Expertise and two more feats to be decentish at running into people and pushing them back, you should take one feat and be immediately proficient at the trick and capable of effectively using it in different situations. It's bizarre that you need to spend several feats to gain an ability that's worse than a low-level spell AND is generally not preferable to just full attacking.
Give Fighters something like a daily ability to add their level x2 to a Strength check or a save to resist magic to represent them mobilizing their force of will and inner power to perform a superhuman feat. If anything it would allow martial players to actually feel like powerful heroes from time to time rather than BMX Bandits to their Angel Summoner allies.
>>47629020
Apparently he was a ranger
>>47629020
Right. So as long as your martial is a demi-god with superhuman strength and the king of the gods interfering on his behalf, you'll be equal to a wizard, gotcha. Why aren't we looking a nerfing spell casters again?
>>47628786
And mythological casters were in the same boat. Merlin was half-demon, for example.
>>47629093
Because people who've gotten used to wizards that make Merlin look like a two-bit piker would get upset?
>>47629111
Only in one, very modern version that caught on. It doesn't appear before Le Morte d'Artur
Why buff martials/keep casters the same? High level games are where things start to break down. Weaken the casters down to doing glorified magic tricks at low levels, moving up to decent Wizards by the time Fighters are decent fighters.
>>47628530
I'm against the idea of caster supremacy, actually. I'm just realistic in that in 3.x you can't bring up martials to the same level as casters without significantly hampering/nerfing casters, which has problems in and of itself.
Trying to fix 3.x is a hopeless endeavor. People have tried for years, with mixed results. You have to rework the system from the ground up to even come close, at which point you may as well go play another system entirely for all the work you're putting into it.
>>47628981
God, this. This is exactly what I want.
I want a warrior who, when the enemy mage teleports away, can reach in to the rift in reality left by the spell and pull the mage right back out so he can punch him in the face. I want a thief who can steal a mage's magic or a warrior's strength for himself, or steal the idea right out of someone's mind. I want a berserker whose rage is so potent that lesser warriors just being near him causes them to piss themselves with fear. I want a swordmaster who parries arrows and spells right out of the air and can cut you so hard that even the defensive spells protecting you are cut.
>>47629093
This is honestly what I've been considering if I ever suffer a bout of idiocy strong enough to make me run 3.PF again. I'd be heavily houseruling it and heavily nerfing casters, possibly to the point of just plain not allowing 9-level casters, while at the same time adding more combat maneuvers and improvisational tactics for martials.
>>47629161
This is why I've given up on 3.PF and set my binder full of houserule ideas aside and just played something else. Why yes, I DID take /tg/'s advice and just not play D&D, and it worked out great for me. I'm actually having fun playing other games now! Who the fuck knew, right?
>>47629093
>Ignores someone bring up Beowulf
>cherry picks Hercules so he can bring up demi-gods instead
>ignores that mythological casters were also usually not human or demi-gods
>still wants his normal human wizard to be even better than they ever were
>>47629131
Are you sure? I thought he was a cambion in some of the earliest tales.
>>47627560
The main problem with martials is a lack of versatility, especially with classes like the fighter. The easiest solution is to merge together a bunch of martial classes until you have something that more resembles the wizard: a martial character that levels up quadratically. A class like this might start out choosing whether they want to be good at hitting things, good at archery, good at sneaking, or good at leadership and social skills, but by level 20 they are good at all these things and more - much like the wizard starts out with a small selection of spells, but eventually obtains dozens with a wide variety of effects. This only works if the skill system and martial combat are themselves decent from the outset, giving martials quadratic access to two shit systems is just shit x shit = shit.
This approach could potentially bring martials up to the level of tier 2 casters, which is close enough.
>>47627902
>If you allow Martials to perform superhuman heroic actions as a core part of the system, it fixes everything.
While this is useful from a creative standpoint, because it gives you more room to work, it doesn't fix anything by itself. There are no tier 1 or 2 martials, but there are tier 5 and 6 casters - being unrealistic is necessary, not sufficient.
There are already several conceits in the game that let martials do superhuman things, ranging from pure skill (fighters can catch bullets), to rage (barbarians in Pathfinder can absorb fire and breathe it back at enemies) to ki (monks can straight-up teleport). But it won't get you to tier 1 or 2 unless it's handled quadratically. The monk is a good example of a martial that is clearly superhuman and magical, but still shit because it's designed so poorly.
>>47629029
>daily
Really nigga? Just give rrhem.a resource system that they can spend as they please on such feats. I would call it action points if those did not already exist.
Newb here, Can I make a captain America style fighter?
>throws shield lika a boomerang
>rush forwards and impale him with a spear or something
>>47629232
Yeah that would be a good idea.
>>47627837
Got a list to the rest of these feats? They would fit right in with my other techniques and martial schools in my world.
>>47629224
>The easiest solution is to merge together a bunch of martial classes until you have something that more resembles the wizard
You're making me want to dig out my old 3.PF houserules and make this.
>>47629250
>Fighter
No.
>Warblade/Bloodstorm Blade
Yes.
>>47629250
No
>>47629250
Depends on the system. D&D has throwing and returning weapons across its various editions, stick that tag on a shield and you're golden.
>>47629224
Don't Monk suffer because they were too MAD. They basically needed STR to hit, DEX to tank-dodge, WIS for AC, INT for skills and spells, and then CON for tanking hits since they were frontline martials.
>>47629198
No, it's pretty much early modern, it definitely doesn't show up in any of the earliest tales he shows up in.
>>47629192
>>Ignores someone bring up Beowulf
Missed it. Its a good example of Heroic Martials.
>>cherry picks Hercules so he can bring up demi-gods instead
Hercules was mentioned. He as well as many greek heros are children of gods, making them stronger than mortal men.
>>ignores that mythological casters were also usually not human or demi-gods
Usually? >>47629131
>>still wants his normal human wizard to be even better than they ever were
Did you miss the post about casters, spell books, memorizing and generally sucking for the early game? >>47628718 this is what helped curb casters early. I miss my 2e wizard doing more with his sling than magic because I fucked up my spell priority.
Martials don't need a buff. Casters need to be brought back down.
>>47629250
Yes. You would get a -4 to an attack roll to throw a shield as an improvised weapon and only deal 1d3+str damage, though. Or you could take two feats and wait until you have +9 BAB so you can throw a shield with Shield Sling, dealing a bit more damage and even attempting a trip.
That's being a martial for ya.
There is Tome of Battle/Path if War, but the simplest solution is to let Martians preform what is basically a SLA if they can preform a sufficient Skill check, but with the duration or effects more limited because they still have better hp, bab, etc. On average than the one everyone bitches about (the Wizard)
But yeah, imagine a Fighter mimicking Greater Dispel Magic as he literally slashes the magic apart with his sword off a Sunder attempt, or a Rogue effectively Dimension Dooring via high Acrobatics roll and then Enervating his target with a perfect killing stroke- if they survived his knives they will wish they hadn't!
>>47629419
>martials
ftfy
>>47629419
This is just making me realize that to create the D&D I want, I'd have to either play 4e or create so many houserules that I wouldn't even be playing D&D anymore.
>>47629344
Or you just play that prestige class in ToB based around throwing weapons and doing cool shit.
>>47629441
Yeah kinda. The powercreep for casters was way too fking fast.
>>47629441
Welcome to game design, you will never be satisfied. Enjoy your stay!
>>47629257
They're in the Fantasy Craft core book, you can probably find it in an FC general if you search the archives.
Here's the fencing tree, which I love. Note how it synergizes: Drop into total defense, then wait. When an enemy steps into range, auto hit him. If he misses you, which is likely because you're in total defense, you can pull back and draw him into the square you were in before. If you do that, hey, he just entered a square adjacent to you while you were in TD! Auto-hit him again.
The Supremacy trick basically lets you instakill any one mook that doesn't have the dexterity to match you, once per round.
Then there's the Knife tree, where one feat means that as long as you have a knife anywhere in your inventory, you are considered armed with it regardless of other circumstances. Like the enemy took you prisoner, disarmed you, and tied you to a chair, but missed that knife in your boot? Hey, call him over and whisper sweet knifings in his ear!
>>47629441
4e is honestly a pretty good game. It's just a very different beast from traditional D&D, but it's one I've actually found myself preferring.
>>47629419
> a Fighter mimicking Greater Dispel Magic as he literally slashes the magic apart with his sword off a Sunder attempt
Barbarian in PF can do exactly that actually. Too bad it's once per rage and only affects one ongoing effect with a rather hefty DC.
>>47629487
Therein lies the problem. The only limiting factors I would apply are obvious ones like duration, capability, and reducing spam. Obviously your Warrior probably should not be able to mimic a wish spell whenever they want, or duplicate the gate spell, especially if it does not match the character or their story.
Other obvious things would be like polymorph indefinitely and obvious signs of abuse. But when they do transform like Cu Chulainn it should be obviously very useful and extremely powerful.
Why doesn't /tg/ design their own game? Take eveything of value of the current systems and just homebrew a new one.
>>47629589
It's been done, to various degrees of success.
>>47629303
Yes, among other things. The monk was a clusterfuck of bad design, the first two answers here explain it very well:
http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13/optimizing-a-dd-3-5-monk
>>47629589
Design by committee or large collaboration never works well unless everybody's being paid and even then you still need a director to keep people's shit in line.
Too many cooks in the kitchen. Ultimately some or a lot of people are not going to agree on something and it just rolls downhill from there.
Besides some of the best products are made by very small teams or individuals with a focused goal and tons of resolve.
>>47629589
The problem here is that not every mechanic fits into every genre. You wouldn't use health rules from a high-flying cinematic heroic game for a down-and-dirty gritty game about post-apocalyptic survival.
>>47629598
Yeah, if you really want to play a 3E-like, with balanced martials and casters, just go with Fantasy Craft. Martials get cool stuff, casters are jack of all trades, master of none, it works pretty well.
There aren't really any modules for it, though, much less adventure paths, and folks have been waiting since forever for the Spellbound supplement, but that shouldn't deter most groups.
>>47627511
Hello there. I advise to use 5e or old school editions instead of the one that does not satisfy you.
>>47629308
Nope, Geoffrey of Monmouth, 12th century. From timelessmyths.com:
In the work, titled Historia regum Britanniae ("History of the Kings of Britain", c. 1137), Geoffrey of Monmouth wrote that he was a son of a nun and grandson of the King of Demetia in southern Wales. As to his father, he was either a devil or an incubus. Merlin is a paradox, he was the son of the devil, yet he was the servant of God.
>>47627511
Just don't play D&D
My group swiched to Savage Worlds a while ago, and while there are a couple things I don't like, there is simply far less bullshit and a lot of fun options. I was amazed that the single page dedicated to social conflicts was legitimately more realistic than the crap that the PHB offered. I am sure that any other system like Runequest or Fantasy Age can also satisfy your needs.
>>47629478
apparently there hasn't been a fantasy craft general in seven days
so that's good
>>47630262
Does FC even have enough fans for a general? Or am I thinking of some other game with a vocal and obnoxious but small fanbase?
>>47630343
Dunno, maybe Dungeon World gets a shitpost or two. I don't really want to pay for a pdf i might end up not using, so i just wanted to look at the rules in full.
>>47630343
FC used to have generals regularly, but the interminable wait for Spellbound sort of sucked the life out of them. There wasn't much to talk about with very little new coming out, and there's no need for big arguments about how to fix shit, because it pretty much works as-is.
>>47630363
DW's fans have mostly given up on the possibility of any sane discussion of it here on /tg/. I know I did long ago. It's a shame, we had really nice threads for a while, then the Shitpostening began...
Anyway, Fantasy Craft. Here ya go.
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/nzs6xsnzbid4t/Fantasy_Craft
>>47630535
Thanks guy
>>47627560
>>47627511
Use the Tome of Battle/Path of War in order to use one feat and unlock eight million ways to punch people, and stop whining about how anything that isn't hitting with a sword is somehow magic because that's just going to kill the motivation to "fix" things.
>>47627511
Tome of Battle is the best you can do.
I told my players that if one of them would try a fighter, I'd allow them to use any homebrew or third party or whatever feats they wanted (D&D 3.5, by the way). One agreed, and ended up with a human fighter who wielded a 10 foot long sword which he could swing around without penalty and throw with pinpoint accuracy. I thought it was awesome but everyone else was still unimpressed.
>>47629480
The most important thing with 4e is putting effort into making the combat scenarios fleshed out.
Like avoid "Room with monster in it" and make sure combat has interesting mechanics and goals you know.I mean you should do this in almost every game but 4e does this really well.
If we're trying to be realistic about your options for 3.pf, it really does come down to splatbooks.
I've played fighters in the past and ultimately the major benefit you will get from them is your massive equipment load, because, you have to fucking face this, you are defined by your equipment.
Generally, I wish martials got more bonuses to ranged weapons, because it's entirely logical that one would be so acquainted, but barring that, I tend to work as follows for books:
>Tome of Battle/ 9 Swords is an obligate choice, it utterly invalidates vanilla fighters and frankly that's a good thing. It's therefore unavoidable and required.
>Master of Arms by Second World Simulations is full of combat maneuvers and martial feats that you should bullshit your DM into letting you use. There are moments of Peter Jackson Tolkien movie fuckery that will keep your character at least interesting in combat. You can also pull shit like hamstringing monsters or breaking holes in their armor and shield that you can target.
>Equipment-wise you need to hoard splatbooks on Dwarves. They get some of THE most ridiculous kit I've ever seen in a d20. Same goes for Drow, but Dwarves get a lot of really interesting situational weapons. For instance, using Hammer And Helm from Races of Renown, I made a dragon slayer who used a dwarven Bolt Drives to bore chained screws into a dragon, thus giving me something to grab onto, climb up him, and letting me pin him with weights at the end of the chain.
>Complete Warrior will have combat feats, special items, etc.
And you're gonna need bags of holding to keep all your kit.
45% of playing a good Martial is doing things that will surprise your DM, 45% is bullying the DM into letting you get access, crafting, divine favor or otherwise, to magical items that YOU want (I always go for halberds in this case because halberds are rarely ever made interesting, magic or otherwise in tabletop), and 10% is hitting things.
>>47630262
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5dkzgw3cn842eyw/AACivEvWTEODXQgsjBPsHv8wa?dl=0
>>47627511
Make the only martial class a Gestalt between everything in Tome of Battle, along with Barbarian and Rogue for extra shit. Go ahead and double skillpoints and give them extra maneuvers known as well.
That still probably won't be enough to compete with Tier 1 casters though.
>>47628439
This.
Martialfags suffer from serious cognitive dissonance.
They're still compaining about 3.PF, a system that was released over a decade ago.
If you don't like it go and play something else.
I'm sick of these whiny entitled kids who think that the entire fucking system should be changed so that their character "Bob the Fighter" is invicible.
>>47628786
Bhishma, from the Mahabharata, killed an entire army on his own at age 18 using a bow. When he was later blessed with Immortality, he went on to become THE GREATEST warrior in all of Hindu Mythology. Greater than all the demi-Gods and incarnated Gods he encountere. THAT is what a Martial should be.
>>47638476
1/10
>>47638573
>someone has a different opinion than me?
>impossible... this... this cannot be!
>he must a troll!
Martialfags are cancer
>>47638611
>>47638519
If you want your fighter to do things that defy the laws of physics, you have two choices:
1. he has some sort of innate magical ability
2. he's been granted divine powers by the gods
There's no way that a mere mortal with no arcane or divine power can do the shit you're suggesting.
>>47638653
Keep crying martialfag.
Maybe Mike Mearls will read you whiny blog posts one day...
>>47638674
1/10
>>47627511
>So my question is how would you buff Martials without nerfing Casters in any way in order to eliminate the perceived disparity
You don't.
Make spells which confer decent direct damage and damage resistance only accessible to high level casters.
You can also grant martials the ability to take feats or skills which confer additional resistance or immunity to spells which circumvent needing to actually fight them, like sleep, paralysis, and transmutative spells.
>>47638707
>>47638611
You are, goddammit. In every thread that mentions castrs and martials balance you get triggered and angrily say the same things all over. Just ignore the goddmn thread, write in the other if you don't like this one.
>>47638658
He's a Dire Human
>>47638755
If you want to play Hercules or Gilgamesh then talk to your DM and homebrew that shit.
Why do you feel that the entire game needs to change to accomodate your playstyle preference?
>>47630535
>>47638094
Nice. Any essential splats, or at least ones that patch holes in the core system?
What if you gave the fighter a similar mechanic as the wizards "spells per day" but instead of taking spells they could choose from fighter bonus feats, and would gain additional feats per level based on say...Str modifier. Like wizards, every level the fighter can swap out "feats known", and the fighter bonus feats could be cataloged into different "levels", so the higher the fighter level, he'll unlock more feats to choose from.
You could even catalog them into things like "dex feats" or "con feats" and give barbarians and rogues a similar progression, to say sorcerers and bards. Their increased feat selection bonus modifier changing to say con and dex respectively.
>>47638989
You could say fighters have access to all Str/dex/con feats, but say a barbarian gets con and either Str or dex feats, and the rogue gets dex and either Str or con.
>>47638989
Rather the fighter is able to choose his feat modifier to which ever physical stat he wants at character creation.
And if any of the martials already have the beginning of a feat chain, say TWF, when they would unlock that specific feat, they would instead gain access to the next feat in that chain at that level instead.
>>47638989
You could even come up with martial "cantrips" like say, +1 or +2 to trip attempts, or sundering rolls and break them down into the Str/dex/con feat groups so everyone could access them.
And have them work every other round so they're not just getting constant static modifiers.
>>47638865
Why do you feel that entire /tg/ needs to throw their opinions into trash?
>>47638989
I'm liking this idea I've come up with. Could anyone point out where it may fail in practice? Sitting here thinking about "feat levels" I was thinking a total of five levels, unlocked every four class levels?
>>47638989
>>47639423
I've seen it said that you could give Fighters every combat feat in 3.5 and it still wouldn't bridge the gap, because combat isn't the full picture.
Having all those feats and maneuvers will make Fighters cooler in a fight and give them some options sure, but the real power of Tier 1 is the sheer variety of problems they solve.
Giving Fighters access to all the Fighter bonus feats is still just making them good at combat.
>>47639469
What if you gave them a few more skill points per level and some more class skills as well then?
>>47627953
Yes, that's what we're trying to do. It ignores the question of "How?"
>>47639469
I mean, can see where you're going with this, but at that point I think it comes down more to the individual players philosophy on using magic. In some or most cases players playing magic users might be of the mindset of "why not use magic to just do everything" and some play that way. Others may look at the use of magic as a tool to solve problems that aren't simply creature comforts. Let's say theres a big boulder blocking the entrance/exit. Sure the wizard could just make a hole through the boulder, or melt it or something, but at the same time if you have three other burly guys with you with shovels and picks, why not as a group move it without resorting to magic. But really that comes down to group dynamics I think. I personally would enjoy the team effort of moving the boulder instead of just hitting the easy button, be it if I were the magic user, or the burly guy. It comes down to how the group functions, which no amount of fixing the mechanics and change I suppose.
>>47628876
Beowulf had a shield made to resist dragonfire, and died to the Dragon's venom after someone else killed it.
>>47639737
If I recall correctly there was nothing magical about Beowulf's shield, it was just fuckhuge and fuckthick with fucktons of fucksteel all over the front of it.
>>47638920
Get the Adventure Companion, and the Call to Arms classes.
As for patching things, Vitality gets a little bit bloated in high level enemies, so either cut it down a bit, or at least be sure your players know they can work around an enemy's vitality with crits or stress damage, so they can plan their characters to handle those things.
Not much else needs patching, it's a very tight system.
>>47639737
I remember reading a fantasy book where a dragonslayer had heard of a dragon bothering a village, so he went out to find its cave. He had magical armour that was indestructible. It turned out that it wasn't a dragon, but a big dinosaur. The dinosaur picked him up in his mouth, and normally if it was a dragon, it would have been smart enough to realize the magic of the armour and wouldn't have tried to bite down. Unfortunately the dinosaur wasn't smart and bit down, crushing the man inside and breaking every tooth in its mouth. The armour was fine though.
>>47639666
Right. A Wizard can choose to not use their amazing powers to solve a problem. That doesn't mean they're incapable of solving the problem, just that they chose not to.
To make a Fighter on par with that, you need something that can potentially solve any problem, and then gets to make the decision if they want to.
Making Fighters better at combat doesn't make them go up to Wizard level. It just means they're better at the one thing they're good at.
>>47639737
Whoa, same guy here, looked it up. Apparently the shield wasn't magic, just iron. My old translation didn't make that distinction, so that may vary.
Not really fair to say that someone else killed the Dragon, either, though I still would. Tldr Beowulf stand it in the head, which doesn't seem to stop it or even really do anything explicitly, and his man shows up and guts the thing, and they both vaguely wail on it, then Beowulf eats shit and dies from the Dragon venom.
>>47639597
Revamp feats. Make it so that martials get to do all the fun stuff like choking out the Lion of Nemea, or like Houyi using archery to slay giant sun eating crows.
A lvl 20 fighter should be death to anything but level 20 or higher CR. This is a man who survived mind-eating illithids, slayed an adult red dragon, and hold off an Orc horde. He should have options beyond 'I hit thee with thine sword'. Anything less than the full arsenal of a lvl 20 should spell instant suicide. Invisibility? Doesn't change the fact that the wizard have no actual skill in being stealthy and creates small visual clues like footprints, broken branches, and shit for the experienced fighter to pick up. Sleep? Bitch pls, the fighter had better lullabies to be put to sleep. Flight? Good job being an open target with no cover against a supersonic javelin.
>>47639516
Then you've basically made a Rogue Barbarian gestalt. Great at killing things. Good at skills. Might make it into Tier 3. Still nowhere near a Wizard.
Having a big list of things you can swap out isn't all that casters have going for them. There's a reason Sorcerers are stl great despite not getting to swap spells
>>47639807
That's lame. I guess the only way to "balance" them would be just kind of just have a group discussion on fair play or something, so everyone can have some spotlight. But even that is subjective. I'd still opt to give them more skill points and class skills though.
>>47639880
Yeah, you can avoid a lot of these problems by talking to the group. Heck, you can just limit people to one tier. Warblades and Beguilers both fit well as more balanced versions of fighters and wizards.
You can't get it by just buffing fighters without nerfing casters though. You need to limit them in some way, whether by talking to the group or house ruling.
More skills doesn't bridge the gap. I don't think anything mundane could.
>>47639865
>Invisibility
In Chainmail, high level fighters (called heroes) could see through invisibility.
>>47628981
So... You wanna play 4e?
>>47627560
>playing a broken and out dated system replaced a decade ago
I urge you to come out from under that rock. Caster supremacy is gone from dungeons and dragons, because either you have access to spells anyway (without even dual classing), or you have so many tricks up your sleeve that the wizard will still only be on par with you.
Anyone who sincerely thinks 3e and any of the variants are even remotely better than the newest edition, are people who played wizards exclusively, and enjoyed being super broken compared to the martials.
>>47638519
Fuckin Bhishma man
But seriously the idea that one group of classes has godlike superhuman abilityCastersand the otherMartialsdoesn't is ridiculous
But what do I care I stopped playing D&D years ago
>>47627803
In 3.5 this isn't actually true though. The straight up assumes that the fighter is incompetent at everything he hasn't spent feats on. When the game did the transition from 2ed to 3ed, the devs completely hamstringed the fighter's capabilities in order to shoehorn in feats as a mechanic (because instead of designing actual feats, they just ripped out basic game mechanics and re-purposed them as "feats").
The first step to make fighter's competent would be to give them all the feats in core for free.
>>47640412
It's pointless trying to reason with martialfags.
They're so butthurt about 3.PF that they think that any system is broken unless wizards are reduced to frail old men chanting around a candle whilst fighters are gods in the flesh capable of killing a tarrasque bare handed.
It doesn't matter how many times you explain to them that 3.5 was 13 years ago they still pretend that it's current and that casters are overpowered.
I honestly wonder how many of them have even tried 5e.
>>47638476
The problem is, PF as a system promotes too many bad habits that end up breeding power gamers, rules-lawyers, and other forms of THAT GUY because of the way the game is designed.
If it was simply a matter of taste then there wouldn't be that much of a problem, there are equally bad systems that one could play that don't have any basis on me or my group's enjoyment.
it's just that so much cancer has been spawned from 3.PF as a whole, from the idea that only casters can be relevant, to the idea that each system requires months of study to "master," to the idea that you can only do what's written on your sheet and only perform it as it's written, to the idea that alignments are something that's not only objective but something that governs every aspect of how your character interacts with the world around them.
I've run games with hardcore 3.PF faggots and been in games with hardcore 3.PF faggots and the result are the same, no matter what system they're invited to play.
They build outrageous characters that are practically invincible for the level they're at, incite squabbles because of a combination of "invincibility" and alignment, force the GM to choose between challenging him and challenging the rest of the party, and if they're ever put in a difficult spot, they bitch and moan and cry because you had the nerve to actually find a hole in their flawless character build.
There's a reason why people don't bother going to /pfg/ anymore, and there's a reason why people have developed a hatred to players who only exclusively play 3.PF.
Not every THAT GUY started with it but damn if a large majority can be traced back
>>47640579
PF has its flaws just like any system. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to play it.
I just don't understand why in every single thread about caster/martial disparity people act as if 3.5 is still the current edition of D&D.
Also, just as an aside, the idea that alignments are objective is not something that 3.5 spawned. It's been that way since the beginning of D&D.
>>47640631
>I just don't understand why in every single thread about caster/martial disparity people act as if 3.5 is still the current edition of D&D
OP was about 3.PF. Although, yes, the solution to many class issues is to play a different edition that isn't dog shit from the whiteboard phase of it's design.
>>47640683
Nope, OP was about addressing MvC disparity, of which 3.X is the most obvious offender.
>>47640744
>first post
>first response: "what system?"
>OP responds: "3.5"
>>47640631
>I just don't understand why in every single thread about caster/martial disparity people act as if 3.5 is still the current edition of D&D.
Because an obnoxiously large proportion of the D&D player base still refuses to try anything other than 3e/PF, and many of them insist that it's balanced in spite of all objective evidence to the contrary.
>>47640804
I agree. It really sucks that you're forced to play with those people.
If only we lived in a free society where we could choose who we played with and thanks to advances in technology we could facilitate communication between gamers all over the world and make it easier for them to find groups of like-minded people to game with... One can only dream...
>>47640769
>>47627560
>Lets ASSUME 3.PF as that is the system that usually suffers most from this issue
Learn to read, faggot.
>>47640869
And deal with the literal brain damage that the system inflicts, and the bad habits it instills. 3.PF is a cancer.
>>47640887
>people like a different system than me
>fucking braindamaged retards
You're just being silly now.
I don't like 4e but I don't go around claiming that 4e players are brain damaged.
Are you really this butt blasted about wizards being better than fighters?
>>47640907
Fuck you, nigger. Yes, in this case? Liking the system is literal brain damage. It's trash, and you suck up that shit off the floor.
Like, it is not even hard. Save-or-die on hit alone would make fighting types at least useful even if they can't necessarily beat casters.
>>47640913
>ad hom
>nigger
>literally
>>47640875
Are you seriously retarded or just practicing? Let's assume 3.PF means we will be discussing 3.PF.
When the person who starts a conversation says lets assume the topic is pillow cases...the topic isn't ball valves.
>>47640952
Your system is dying slowly. Not fast enough, but soon the abominations its created will be washed from memory, and everyone will forget it.
I just wish we could put you fucks in concentration camps to hurry it up.
>>47629250
>>47629250
Yes. Brawler, Shield Champion. Class and archetype both from the Advanced Class Guide.
>>47640973
You sound upset?
Are you upset?
Because you definitely sound upset.I don't even play 3.PF
This guy right here >>47633775
Are you proud of yourself? This thread was on the last fucking page, where cancer like this deserves, and was minutes away from being archived.
I hate you dude.
>>47638658
>1. he has some sort of innate magical ability
I'll admit I just assume all Classed Characters are inherently magical these days unless it's in a low magic setting(so basically the same solution that Earthdawn came up with about 20 years ago for the Caster/Martial problem)
>>47641000
D&D 4E brawler was really fun. Like a monk, but not a fag.
>>47627871
go back to different exp tresholds for different classes, and start equaling chracters with the same ammount of exp and not the same level.
>>47640631
>Also, just as an aside, the idea that alignments are objective is not something that 3.5 spawned. It's been that way since the beginning of D&D.
3.PF did spawn the idea that not only are alignments objective but certain classes should lose their abilities if they choose to stop playing into the GM's perceived notion of what the alignment is supposed to represent.
You can not only fall as a paladin but you can "fall" as a monk if you're no longer lawful, "fall" as a barbarian if you're not chaotic enough, "fall" as a Druid if you're not neutral enough, and spawned a shitload of shitty variants that only exist to subvert this notion, like the anti-paladin, gray paladin, and the like.
>>47627511
>>47642536
Earlier editions of D&D did have the Paladin or Cleric lose abilities for not following alignment/code.
Not playing your alignment would usually lead to an alignment shift (AD&D encourages the DM to track the player's "true alignment" without telling the LG Fighter he's actually become NG, etc.) resulting in a penalty to exp gains (or exp loss) as well as in universe loss of contacts or resources.
Not playing within your alignment has always been a big deal.
>>47642948
>Not playing within your alignment has always been a big deal.
It was only a big deal for those classes and honestly, it made sense because you were aligning yourself away from your diety.
Even then, it required you purposefully and repeatedly do some grimy shit that should've made you fall.
Nowadays though, you can get thrown into a catch 22 and end up falling just because the GM is a fedora tipper who believes that the paladin is supposed to fall.
>>47627511
Make high-level feats that are actually worth it. +1 natural armor is a joke for an epic feat, and Weapon Supremacy is something a martial should be able to take at level 12, not 18. Give them more skills and skill points to represent them not having to learn magic, meaning they have more time to learn EVERYTHING ELSE. Also, this guy has a pretty good idea: >>47627863
>>47643073
>It was only a big deal for those classes and honestly, it made sense because you were aligning yourself away from your diety
>>47642948
>Not playing your alignment would usually lead to an alignment shift and exp loss/penalty
The DM was supposed punish any class that played outside their alignment. Yes Clerics and Paladins stood to lose more, but getting smacked with an exp penalty or outright lacking the ability to gain levels until you made peace with the alignment change/repented, was a thing.
>NG Fighter levels up via Oldman Mentor of same alignment.
>Fighter becomes CN.
>Mentor refuses to teach him anymore and now Fighter needs to make right by Mentor or find an equally aligned teacher to continue gaining levels.
The problem became Paladins and Clerics had a clearly defined punishment, while alignment penalties were left to the DM to be creative. Most DMs aren't.
>>47642536
That makes sense though.
It prevents powergaming minmaxing retards from playing the class.
It doesn't make sense for a druid to be evil and to slaughter people willy nilly.
Classes are more than just numbers on a piece of paper. Many of them have distinct mindsets associated with them. Your barbarian should not be acting in a "lawful" manner unless you can come up with an exceedingly convincing backstory as to why he is.
>>47644826
>It doesn't make sense for a druid to be evil and to slaughter people willy nilly.
What is survival of the fittest?
>>47644826
>It doesn't make sense for a druid to be evil and to slaughter people willy nilly.
Are you sure about that?
How is D&D 5?
>>47647485
Not as well balanced as 4E, but miles better than 3E. Roughly on par with Basic/1e/2e for class balance.
>>47638658
Why not?
Some simple easy ways.
Martials become the "Elementals" of the Physical plane, they basically hyperadapt to it's rules.
They seem to age less and less, they seem to not catch diseases more often and their skin grows tough and durable.
A Barbarian who may have huddled in a fur of a great bear in a Blizzard may walk through it like a soft summer breeze after years of honing his body and mind.
Thieves become so deft and quick they move like smoke through crowds, not literally, but just so subtle you never seem to notice them.
Fighters may swing swordblows that bisect treetrunks and wrestle with dragons.
quite simply, when Casters start unraveling the laws of reality, Martials just adapt to what reality can throw at them.
>>47647795
I quite like that take on it
>>47647795
That sounds pretty dope
I think a good way is to give Martials access to things Casters get at the same level
>Caster gets spell to inflict status effects like daze,exhausted,unconscious,ect
Martial gets it same level
>Caster gets spells like fireball that target multiple enemies
Martial gets to target all adjacent enemies
>Caster gets movement based spells like flight or teleport
Martial gets similar abilities or effective counters
>Casters get "Save Or Die" spells
Martials get "Save Or Die" attacks
The difference is that Casters would be more about utility and battlfield control
and Martials would be direct damage bruisers who can close the distance in one move action
If you wanted you could also give Martials different skills based on class like leadership stuff for Fighters, rage and spiritual stuff for Barbarians, and stealth stuff for Rogues
>>47644826
>It doesn't make sense for a druid to be evil and to slaughter people willy nilly.
What is Poison Ivy.
>>47649538
what about things like wish or summons?
hmm, summons could be followers, but still, wish?
>>47649726
Legends.
More limited than Wishes, but once expended, a Legend forges the destiny of the hero.
Basically it's sort of a plot asspull. Cutting the gordian knot, Beowulf vs Grendel, Samson with his ass jawbone.
>>47649796
Hm, destiny guiding the hero or stuff like that? I can dig that
>>47649726
In all honesty I wouldn't make wish a spell
It would be a Ritual time consuming and very expensive requiring rare materials
As for summons I would leave that as a Caster only thing for specialists like Conjurers and Necromancers though Fighters and Knights/Paladins could take followers but they would be more NPCs than anything else
>>47649870
Yeah, I would also go more the route of bringing the PL of wizards down, and making martials more interesting than just "I swing my sword". I guess taking not D&D is the easier way for that though. But that's probably because I dig stuff that is more down to earth lately. Started reading Elric and shit.What anime?
>>47649939
I believe that's from The Animatrix
>>47649981
>The Animatrix
Ah, thanks. Looks like it towards the bottom right corner there.
>>47649870
That's pretty much how i see the fighters movement abilities being>>47649538
Not outright Flight or Teleporting but impressive none the less
>>47638658
OR, you know,
3: He trained super fucking hard.
4: Magic has a number of internal issues in the setting itself that are the result of it actively affecting the natural world, and thusly is another aspect of nature that can effectively be mimicked and/or even neutralized by other, less wizardy, natural beings. Salt, for example in Codex Alera, having a property that destabilizes the internal structuring of air magics and the like.
>>47650948
>He trained super fucking hard.
I hate that anybody with a 100IQ can learn to shoot fire out of there dick and start on the path of fucking reality but you can't train to do the same shit physically
I would have a system where every class basically did magic the only difference between Casters and Martials is Casters would focus on the more esoteric stuff and Martials would focus on enhancing their own abilities but both could dip into the others repertoire occasionally for certain abilities
>>47651143
Why, though? If someone can think hard enough to create fireballs by wiggling his fingertips, why can't one do enough push-ups to be able to do ranged attacks with shockwaves by flexing or scale skyscrapers? Mundane laws of physics are already out of the picture.
>>47651270
Because 3.PFags hate fun that's not earned after jumping through a dozen hoops or by casting a spell.
>>47651270
That's what I'm saying
Magic by its nature is undefined its limitations and requirements are left up to the author or game designer to create
Having people study ancient texts and learn runes and spells isn't any more or less valid than having someone train and meditate and be able to cut things at a distance or jump 100ft straight up or any thing else
Once you introduce Magic and Monsters the world only plays by what rules you determine it no longer needs to be based in reality because it is by default unrealistic
>>47651143
>>47651270
Some people like to play D&D in low-magic, quasi-realistic settings where certain laws apply.
If all of a sudden fighters, the most mundane class, can start cleaving mountains in twain that's not going to work.
>>47651143
>but you can't train to do the same shit physically
You don't need to be able to. You just have to write it into the rules of a fictional game.
>>47652539
>Some people like to play D&D in low-magic, quasi-realistic settings where certain laws apply.
No one likes that. D&D is explicitly not low-magic simply by the way the rules are set up. If you plop characters made according to the classes into a world that is "quasi realistic" they are going to stick out like a sore thumb.
>>47652663
It's entirely possible to play in a low magic setting or even a setting where magic doesn't exist at all.
Just because the default D&D world is high fantasy doesn't mean that every setting has to be.
>>47652539
if i was crazy enough to use D&D for playing low-magic, quasi-realistic games, i would probably limit the characters to levels that suit what i have in mind. it would not make sense to let my players hit level 20 and then complain they are too powerful.
>>47652791
>It's entirely possible to play in a low magic setting or even a setting where magic doesn't exist at all.
Yeah, by cutting out more than half the classes, banning certain archetypes, unbalancing the classes remaining, and removing any enemy that is magical in nature or is too difficult to destroy without magic or magical weapons.
IE, a really, really, really, fucking stupid thing to do.
>>47652856
Why are complaining that it would be unbalanced when at the same time you're claiming that the game is already unbalanced?
Fuck balance if it gets in the way if storytelling and having fun. The rules are to fit the narrative not the other way around.
>>47652967
>Why are complaining that it would be unbalanced when at the same time you're claiming that the game is already unbalanced?
Presently it has some kinks that could be ironed out.
Your suggestion is like trying to fix a broken leg by removing the other leg.
>Fuck balance if it gets in the way if storytelling and having fun.
Generally speaking, it doesn't. In my experience as a DM, the most balanced systems result in no one player feeling useless and falling into a sulk, which brings the overall quality of play down. Balance aids in fun.
>>47653031
You realise that D&D will never be perfectly balanced right? There are too many variables. There will always be party members who are stronger or weaker relative to the rest of the group.
If you can't enjoy the game as a result I suggest you play something else. Like chess perhaps.
>>47653170
Chess isn't balanced.
>>47653170
>If you can't enjoy the game as a result I suggest you play something else. Like chess perhaps.
Never said that. >>47653031
I like D&D. It's a lot of fun. I said YOUR SUGGESTION was stupid.
To reiterate:
D&D: Flawed but good
Your idea: irredeemable shitpile
>>47653277
It wasn't a suggestion.
I'm telling you that narrative comes first and balance comes second.
You're claiming that I can't run a low magic setting because it wouldn't be balanced.
Just fuck off you cancerous 4e kiddie. Go back to play league and dota. D&D is not for you.
>>47653170
Just because something will never be perfectly balanced doesn't mean improving it isn't worthwhile
>>47653577
Except your idea of "improving" might be my idea of ruining it.
This is why house rules exist.
>>47653541
I would say the reason you can't run low magic (especially in 3.5) is due to how boring it would end up being.
All fights now mostly involve people standing still and full-attacking. Tons of interesting monsters and adventures can't be used because they assume magic is way more common. The System math breaks down even harder without magic items. Even living through a fight means you're spending a weak recovering all of your hit points.
If I was to run a low-magic game, I would use 4e or 5e.
4e has martial classes that are actually interesting, and alternative systems to the magic item treadmill.
5e allows for a full mundane party to have a bit more variety and versatility to it, while also helping with the healing issue.
No matter what though, D&D is a terrible option, because it sets itself up as High Fantasy by its rules. You can change the rules to try and make it low fantasy, or you can play a game actually designed for it
>>47653541
>You're claiming that I can't run a low magic setting because it wouldn't be balanced.
he gave several reasons why it would be a shit idea and you homed in on one of them
and nobody said you "can't", just that it's dumb
>>47653541
Every time
Sure no system will ever be perfect or not have holes, but that doesn't mean that they should just stop trying to be balanced and making the game enjoyable regardless of what type of character you are playing. In the end D&D is just not made for low magic, it is made for and by people who want casters to always be on top, unlike many other systems that can fit crazy Kung-Fu along with wizards who shoot fireballs instead of one hit kill spells.
>>47653643
Only if your idea of what makes 3.5 good is demigod wizards.
I'm actually willing to recognize and identify the flaws in 3.5, while all I see from the people who play it is insisting its fine.
>>47653671
Who said anything about 3.5?
>>47653675
I've done it before and it worked out just fine. Of course, I don't play with whiny little DotA kiddies who cry about "balance" in a tabletop RPG.
>>47653743
D&D is just not made for you.
Casters have always been more powerful and more versatile than martials and they always will be. Everything in the lore backs this up but you can' accept it so you make the same thread over and over in the hopes that maybe Mike Mearls will read it or something.
>>47653754
I liked that wizards were much more powerful than fighters in 3.5 but I disliked it for a myriad of reasons.
>>47627511
Jesus fucking christ, martials do not need to be buffed. They're strong enough as is.
I swear, you crybabies want to not only have your cake and eat it to, but want fucking ice cream with it.
>>47628770
Because its fucking stupid.
>>47653853
>Who said anything about 3.5?
Considering it's the edition where most of these caster/martial problems are the biggest, I'd say it was implied
>>47653853
>Casters have always been more powerful and more versatile than martials and they always will be.
>I've only played 3.5
>>47653882
Let me guess, you think Barbarians are really strong and psionics are OP?
>>47653853
>Who said anything about 3.5?
the OP?
>>47653853
Thank you for being the platonic example of 3.PF brain cancer.
>>47653853
>Who said anything about 3.5?
OP did in the second reply in this thread, when asked what system we shall discuss.
>>47627511
Isn't that exactly what this was trying to do?
>>47654254
If it's only an issue in 3.5 then why are there so many threads about it? Who the fuck plays 3.5 anymore?
>>47654430
Cry more martialfag.
I use fighters' tears as a spell component and aslube to fuck their girlfriends
Simple just state that your campaign setting follows a logic similar to many an light-novel/anime/manga and Jrpgs, warriors can just train and train until they cross into the realm of the superhuman.
Unlocking an inner-power vaguely analogous to Ki/Chi may or may not be explicitly involved.
http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Haki
>>47654450
you'd be surprised how many people still play 3.5 out of pure intertia. even discounting pathfinder it's still one of the more popular games on roll20.
>>47653853
>Casters stronk
>Why
>cuz it sayz so in the book.
>Why
>Cuz Caster Stronk
>MFW
>>47654450
Because people for some reason continue playing 3.5 and insisting that martials and casters are perfectly balanced.
>>47654555
Or go the other extreme and insist that casters should be able to do everything, because that's how it's in the book.
Basically, induced brain damage.
How to "fix" Fighters:
>Take Wizard, rename it Fighter
>Gains Spells...errr..Combat Maneuvers as they level
>Rename "Magic Missile", "Rain of Arrows", casting component: Bow + Arrows
>Rename "Invisibility", "Blinded by Awesomeness"...
>>47639865
Those are great ideas Timmy, but we're trying to talk about balanced game discussion here, not masturbatory power fantasies.
>>47654602
That's exactly what 4e did.
>>47654615
What, like your constant, nonstop masturbation over wizards?
>>47654613
>Martials and casters should not be balanced.
>It's absurd to think that a fighter could take on a wizard.
Great opinion, anon.
Mid and higher level fighters are already magical enough to survive many minutes of being gored by a triceratops, there's nothing wrong with bringing them up to the power level of wizards, and flavoring it in a way that appeals to the "badass normal" archetype.
>>47654613
>It's absurd to think that a fighter could take on a wizard.
Define 'wizard'
>>47654613
>It's absurd to think that a fighter could take on a wizard.
You might as well say that it's absurd to think a fighter could take on an elf, or a goblin, or an imp.
All of those things are made up anyway. The game designers were the ones who chose how they should work. There is nothing inherent in the idea of a wizard that says they need to be stronger than fighters.
Why should D&D operate using an idea of wizards that not only goes against what the game advertises, but doesn't even fit in with typical fictional depictions of wizards?
>>47654714
>the "badass normal" archetype
The what? You just made that up.
As you say though, fighters are ordinary. Wizards are extraordinary.
Wizards will always be more powerful and have more options.
Keep crying about it on /tg/ though. I'm sure that will make a difference.
>>47654749
It's defined in the PHB.
Fighting types just need something else other than roll for hit, roll for damage, repeat. They need actual skills. The game seems to ignore that being a skilled fighter is a lengthy and challenging training regimen that requires lots of learning and getting better, not just getting stronger.
>>47628608
>>47639263
I would suggest something like this as well. Give the warrior "moves." Some kind of ability that takes up a slot like a spell for a caster only it is a complex martial art move that the warrior had to learn and train, which gets more powerful as they go up in level. Maybe have it work off stamina, the warrior only has so many of those complex martial moves a day in them without resting.
Give them moves with titles like "Talon of the Falcon" that involves a downward jump swing and has it's own damage basis. "Basilisks Tail" or "Avalanche Strike" anything with a name, and a damage set will do. The description of what it is only needs to be fluff, but the result is the same as a magic missile, damage to an enemy.
This kind of shit was not totally limited to kung fu, westerners did it in the middle ages too. Even then tons of eastern martial artists would fall under the warrior umbrella than the monk one.
>>47654749
I think that's always been one of my bigger gripes with D&D. Wizard is such a broad archetype that the class ends up capable of almost everything.
>>47654803
>There is nothing inherent in the idea of a wizard that says they need to be stronger than fighters.
Yes there is.
Wizards can literally summon 1d4 fighters to fight for them.
Martialfags are just so BTFO over 3.PF they'll never recover.
>>47654845
Hey guys, I just homebrewed a new class. It's called the Wihzahrd.
>Hit dice: 1d4
>BAB: As Wizard
>Saves: As Wizard
>Spell slots: 1 1st level slot per level
>A Wihzahrd knows one spell from the Wizard spell list and can cast it as a 1st level spell. A Wihzahrd knows up to 3 cantrips with the same school as their one known spell.
I guess it's impossible to make a Wizard that would suck huh?
>>47654872
That's exactly what 4e did and it was shit.
If you want to play a class with options and choices, don't play a fighter.
>>47654845
>As you say though, fighters are ordinary. Wizards are extraordinary.
so are truenamers, doesn't do them much good
>>47654889
Really? Because I've seen Wizards who can't do that, because Wizard is a made up word.
You're saying that Wizards should be stronger because 3.5 made them stronger.
>>47654913
Nothing's stopping you from using that in your games instead of wizards.
>>47654948
Yes, he is. I've argued this thesis for years.
3.PF inflicts brain damage. And people like him are the best examples of it.
>>47654948
We're talking about D&D wizards.
They've always been stronger than fighters.
But please keep crying about it martialcuck. My dick is so hard right now.
>>47654845
>It's defined in the PHB.
Reading over the class entry implies that wizards have to study very hard and conduct research in order to practice magic, and that while their spells might be very strong compared to a single swing of an axe, they're also quite vulnerable.
So how does that line up with the untouchable, invisible, flying, man who can learn spells each level for free, and each level costs the same experience as any other class?
>>47654975
>We're talking about D&D wizards.
Alright
>They've always been stronger than fighters.
Except for all of the editions where they aren't demigods
>>47654975
TSR and AD&D wizards have never been as crazy strong as 3.5/PF wizards. Last time I check basic never gave you the ability to open pocket dimensions or buff yourself to the point where nothing can hurt you. If you mean in the lore, then see >>47654988
I am certain that you are just trolling at this point, but I suppose that it proves a point about the sort of people who only play 3.5.
>>47654988
>>47655015
Martialfags please... My dick can only take so much!
Wizards command forces beyond the comprehension of mere mortals.
Fighters swing sticks.
>hurr why are wizards stronger than my fighting man :DDD
>>47654445
And it did so terribly.
Never allowed that book at my table, never will.
>>47654951
No, nothing does. Except I'm mainly using it to prove that
>Wizards will always be more powerful and have more options
Is a false statement. I made a Wizard that isn't more powerful and doesn't have more options.
>>47655082
And why's that, my brain damaged little faggot?
>>47655071
>My dick can only take so much!
Well, 2 inches isn't a lot, so that makes sense.
>Wizards command forces beyond the comprehension of mere mortals.
You raise a good point. Since the powers are beyond the comprehension of mere mortals, I guess that means Wizards shouldn't be able to use magic at all.
I guess you can always play a guy in a bathrobe who does magic tricks, although I don't think that's going to be much help next to a trained soldier.
>>47655094
Overpowered bullshit for one.
The other is replicating mechanics. Call your muscle magic whatever the fuck you want, its still largely from a system based off magic. If you want to play as a Wizard that uses STR/DEX instead of INT for spells, then I'll call you out on your shit for being lazy.
At least Fantasycraft and 13th Age do different things with martials vs Casters, making them feel unique and varied. If you allow Weeaboo Fighting magic, I'll simplify the process and say only casters are allowed.
>>47655086
Cool. So when you're the lead designer for D&D, you can make wizards as weak as you want.
Until thenkeep crying bitch night
