-
Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
I've been really invested in this thread, which talks about Martials regularly being less than magical classes.
My concerns are this: Classes like Fighters and Barbarians are specialized into combat, but other classes (Wizards, Paladins) do almost as well in combat (if not better in some circumstances) while also being less specialized. A Wizard can participate just fine in combat, and provide a lot of solutions to non-combat problems, but the Barbarian can only provide for combat problems.
I am a big advocate for intra-party balance. However, I don't want to lower the Casters' versatility to bring them on the same page as Martials. Rather, I want the Martials to become either:
- Just as versatile as Casters in terms of non-combat options, OR
- So good at combat that they feel like specialists, to the point where a Caster is as relevant in combat as a Martial is out of combat.
(Option #1 is the ideal, but Option #2 might be an option for some tables)
So...how do we do that?
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Two ideas I've had--
1. DMs should let them do things without checks (or with easy checks) more. Someone with a great Strength (Athletics) check should be able to climb up anything spiderclimb allows or jump as far as longjumper. A good Wisdom (Animal Handling) check might allow someone to actually make friends with an animal, just like animal friendship. Etc.
2. Move a large fraction of the "utility" effects from spells into ritual-like things that anyone can do if they learn the process, 4e style. Casters can get some for free and get additional ways to use them, but everyone should be able to raise dead or teleport or fly if they find the ritual and can pay the costs. But they're no longer spells to be learned as a normal part.
I'm working on a version of #2 that incorporates ability checks.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
First step, take the idea that "Utility is for Rogues, combat is for Fighters" out behind the shed and murder it with an axe. Casters don't follow this, they're expected to fully contribute in all 3 pillars.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
My solution has always been to let skills, good plans and RP work.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
This is a big issue and it isn't going away any time soon.
One thing I tried but didn't work well was more skill checks, especially out of combat: how fast do you want to travel? Ok, Athletics-Con check to see if you roll up with a level of exhaustion. This just penalised martials as much as casters and didn't add so much - especially when casters can do things like teleport or phantom stead to obviate this.
One shift which is not quite there, but is showing some promise is giving more nebulous tasks as a DM. Do you need to do X? For a skill check there is little lost, for a spell there is a cost. At least it gives an incentive to push the skills to the front. Mysterious text with little time to read? After comprehend languages you find it is a shopping list - the BBEG likes tomatoes.
I am thinking to push endurance based activities towards using hit dice some way. To me, these seem to be the one area where martial characters excel and if they can be an out of combat resource I think it could be good. Determine how long you can hold your breath and so on.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Snarky answer: They dont?
Rogues obviously can perform amazing proficiency related feats, and do so at the expense of no resources.
Are we talking about Fighters?
Cliffs to climb, stuff to break, and maybe, just maybe they take one of those bonus ASIs and grab some non-combat utility.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ImproperJustice
Are we talking about Fighters?
Cliffs to climb, stuff to break, and maybe, just maybe they take one of those bonus ASIs and grab some non-combat utility.
While I fully support the notion of spending bonus ASIs on non-combat utility (like Wood Elf Magic, Ritual Caster, Prodigy, etc), this isn't sufficient to span the entire utility gap. It merely narrows it.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Mundane challenges can be overcome by magic, but only by levelled spells. Where a Wizard might need a floating disc to carry something, a Fighter can just pick it up. Where a Wizard might cast Reduce on a door, the Rogue can just scale the wall and open it from the inside.
Etc.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Yunru
Mundane challenges can be overcome by magic, but only by levelled spells. Where a Wizard might need a floating disc to carry something, a Fighter can just pick it up.
A floating disc is a ritual, it doesn't take up the Wizard's spell slot. If the Wizard wanted to, they could have the Floating Disc be active all day.
Also, it's not like the Wizard lacks skills or stats. They get just as many skill points as the Fighter, and the out-of-combat benefits of Intelligence are harder to replicate than the out-of-combat benefits of Strength. Also note that things like the Intelligence (Arcana) skill let you both detect and disarm traps (as noted in the DMG).
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Give them extra information or circumstantial advantage on a skill if the situation logically favors a martial class. Stuff like:
"The long trek and the cold weather is taking a toll on you. Make a Constitution check everyone. You get advantage on it, though, since you're a barbarian from the north."
"As a fighter, you can make a history check with advantage if you want to recognize the sigil of that mercenary band."
"You, fighter, can see that the bandit to the left seems a bit more skilled than the rest, but on the other hand, he seems to wear lighter armor than most."
Etc.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
I've been really invested in
this thread, which talks about Martials regularly being less than magical classes.
My concerns are this: Classes like Fighters and Barbarians are specialized into combat, but other classes (Wizards, Paladins) do almost as well in combat (if not better in some circumstances) while also being less specialized. A Wizard can participate just fine in combat, and provide a lot of solutions to non-combat problems, but the Barbarian can only provide for combat problems.
I am a big advocate for intra-party balance. However, I don't want to lower the Casters' versatility to bring them on the same page as Martials. Rather, I want the Martials to become either:
- Just as versatile as Casters in terms of non-combat options, OR
- So good at combat that they feel like specialists, to the point where a Caster is as relevant in combat as a Martial is out of combat.
(Option #1 is the ideal, but Option #2 might be an option for some tables)
So...how do we do that?
Fighter gets that bonus ASI/feat that can go a long way to providing a flexible choice of non combat options.
Barbarian on the other hand is very ASI starved and only a few of the sub classes grant any noncombat features.
I think both classes could use some minor explore/ social features. Probably about on par with a background feature.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
For the "resource" concern, I used to think the same way, but consider the fact that
- Most casters have 4 cantrips
- Casters usually use about 2 Cantrips for combat, leaving the remaining 2 for utility, often having unique effects that either replace or surpass skills. Consider if someone offered you Proficiency/Expertise in Sleight of Hand, or Mage Hand. Which is more expensive, and which would you take?
- Goodberries (a level 1 spell) can feed an entire group of players for a day without a check, while also healing them from Dying.
- Most tables ignore Encumbrance
- Many utility-esc spells (Tenser's Floating Disk) are available as Rituals.
- From level 1 to 20, without Expertise, your skill rolls will increase by about +6 points (so your 50% chance DC goes from 15 to 20 over 20 levels, less than the rate that AC scales).
Even if a Fighter spent all of his feats on utility effects, I wouldn't think that he'd perform as well in combat, and out of combat, as a Wizard grabbing ASIs. I'm comfortable with certain builds being designed for certain uses (the Knowledge Cleric is better out of combat, duh), so long as what they lose is equal to what they gain. But I don't think that a Fighter gains combat effectiveness for what he loses out of combat.
Maybe each Martial class needs some kind of non-combat buff that scales heavily with level. Something like:
- Barbarians: Gain a bonus to Intimidation, Athletics, and Animal Handling equal to half of their level, so long as the check utilizes their shear size.
- Fighters/Rangers: Get a bonus to Insight, Perception and Investigation equal to half of their level, so long as the check utilizes their combat experience.
- Monks: Get a bonus to Acrobatics, Athletics and Stealth equal to half of their level, so long as the check utilizes their shear agility.
These bonuses do not apply while combat (initiative) is relevant.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Unless you're an AT, you can't use mage hand for things that Sleight of Hand can do. You're letting spells go beyond their descriptions. Mage hand is visible, slow, limited in weight, and can't interact with worn things beyond retrieving items from containers (or stowing them). It can't hide something on someone or pick their pocket (since those are features granted by the AT version).
This is the big problem here. Spells must be read much more restrictively than they are. Currently, spells are read expansively (anything remotely related to the spell is allowed) while ability checks and non-spells are read restrictively (It doesn't say you can...). I'd say that the proper way is the other way around. Non-spells should be bounded only by your imagination, while spells produce discrete, limited effects. This is balanced because non-spells may require checks, while utility spells don't (and take resources to boot).
-
Re: How to make Martials more versatile?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
I am a big advocate for intra-party balance. However, I don't want to lower the Casters' versatility to bring them on the same page as Martials.
Cool. You could ...slightly modify the ritual caster feat.
(fighter advantage: they have lots of ASIs, so have one to spare for this
barbarian advantage: many work on the survival skill check)
feat: advanced wilderness training
by training or necceccity, you've been through harsh training, learning to survive in hostile territory.
When you take this feat, pick 3 options. you can learn more in your off-time.
- know your foe -- it's not comprehend language / speak with animals
spend 1 hour and a succesfull stealth/survival (int) check (DC 10+target's int mod), to study a creature without it noticing you (or animal handling(cha) if it's an animal). With a succesful check, you're able to communicate on a very rudamentairy level, even if you don't understand the language - study your tools -- it's not identify
You can spend 1 hour testing a non consumable magic item, and understand it's magical properties. This will not find hidden properties, such as curses. - know your ally -- it's not message/Rary's telepathic bond
you learn your allies hand signals - allowing you to communicate unheard over a range of 30 ft (requires line of sight)
a deception/stealth(dex) vs perception(wis) check is possibe to give a signal with some people not knowing you did.
At lvl 10, people who know the signals get advantage on this check, those who don't gets disadvantage. - taste your food -- it's not detect poison & disease
you can take 1 minute and taste some food. if it's poisoned, or diseased, you make the constitution saving throw with advantage, and you're aware of it's effects (able to warn others). - mark the path -- it's not illusionairy script
You're able to place suddle clues other people can find. make a survival/sleight of hand (dex or wis) heck to determine the maximum DC you want to set for people to roll survival/investigate/nature (wis or int) to find the clue. People who know you get advantage on this check, those who don't gets disadvantage. The clue itself is the equivalent of a 3 words mesage. - Cammouflage (req. level 5)-- it's not silence
spend 1 minute per ally, rolling a survival/nature(wis) check to substitute this value over a character's stealths check. This lasts for 15 minutes, or until the camouflage washes away. You can perform this on yourself, with disadvantage. - Secret camp -- it's not tiny hut
Roll a stealth/survival/deception(wis) check to hide a camp (10ft radius area). everyone who's in that camp, and not making too much ruckus (sleeping, guarding, ...), is considered hiden by the result of this check.
At lvl 10, you get advantage on this check. - night practice training -- it's not alarm
You've been trained to sleep lightly, ready for anything. reduce the amount you require sleep with 25% (elves do not benefit, as they don't sleep), and get +5 on perception checks while sleeping. - underwater training (req. level 5) -- it's not water breathing
you can spend 1 minute per ally making everyone accustomed to underwater environments. make a survival/athletics(charisma) check. for the next hour, they can hold their breath 50% longer and they can substitute their check against drowning by the result of your check. - animal training -- it's not find familiar
(requires 30 gp, and 1 week of training). You can get a dog (mastive) or bird(hawk) as loyal pet. you can communicate with it in 100ft by whisteling, giving it very specific commands which it follows. you can use your action for it to make a single attack against a target of your chosing. you can't have both a pet and a familiar.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PhoenixPhyre
Unless you're an AT, you can't use mage hand for things that Sleight of Hand can do. You're letting spells go beyond their descriptions. Mage hand is visible, slow, limited in weight, and can't interact with worn things beyond retrieving items from containers (or stowing them). It can't hide something on someone or pick their pocket (since those are features granted by the AT version).
This is the big problem here. Spells must be read much more restrictively than they are. Currently, spells are read expansively (anything remotely related to the spell is allowed) while ability checks and non-spells are read restrictively (It doesn't say you can...). I'd say that the proper way is the other way around. Non-spells should be bounded only by your imagination, while spells produce discrete, limited effects. This is balanced because non-spells may require checks, while utility spells don't (and take resources to boot).
I didn't say that Mage Hand overwrites Sleight of Hand, I just meant that, given a choice, which would you choose?
I would choose default Mage Hand in a heartbeat. Grabbing things at range has an infinite number of uses, even if it's something as mundane as holding my beer. Sleight of Hand as a Good character? Hope my DM makes some kind of Indiana Jones scenario in a temple, or it'll never see use.
Sleight of Hand doesn't make you a better Barbarian/Mage/Paladin/Fighter/Druid/Whatever. Mage Hand is always useful. And that's just one example. Don't even get me started on comparing Spare the Dying with Medicine.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
I didn't say that Mage Hand overwrites Sleight of Hand, I just meant that, given a choice, which would you choose?
I would choose default Mage Hand in a heartbeat. Grabbing things at range has an infinite number of uses, even if it's something as mundane as holding my beer. Sleight of Hand as a Good character? Hope my DM makes some kind of Indiana Jones scenario in a temple, or it'll never see use.
Sleight of Hand doesn't make you a better Barbarian/Mage/Paladin/Fighter/Druid/Whatever. Mage Hand is always useful. And that's just one example. Don't even get me started on comparing Spare the Dying with Medicine.
It's a false choice. Because each can do things the other can't, they're not in conflict. In my experience, non-AT mage hand is entirely cosmetic, like prestidigitation. It's entirely flavor.
And if you hyper-specialize (I'm a barbarian, I can't do that!), you're only causing the problem yourself. Being well-rounded (ability scores and willingness) beats specialization in everything but damage, and even damage is over-rated. Being able to participate in all areas is enough. IMO, no one should have "I win" buttons for any circumstance. No one should be able to wave a wand and "fix" a situation unless the situation is trivial enough that there's no need to mechanize it. Everything important should require rolls and effort, everything that's not important should be hand-waved.
Anyway, my preferred solution is to break the idea that utility belongs to casters/spells. Make that available to anyone and you're done. Sure, that means you're no longer a "non-magic" person. But then again, everyone that matters in a fantasy adventure system is fantastic. It's kinda part and parcel.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
I've been really invested in
this thread, which talks about Martials regularly being less than magical classes.
My concerns are this: Classes like Fighters and Barbarians are specialized into combat, but other classes (Wizards, Paladins) do almost as well in combat (if not better in some circumstances) while also being less specialized. A Wizard can participate just fine in combat, and provide a lot of solutions to non-combat problems, but the Barbarian can only provide for combat problems.
I am a big advocate for intra-party balance. However, I don't want to lower the Casters' versatility to bring them on the same page as Martials. Rather, I want the Martials to become either:
- Just as versatile as Casters in terms of non-combat options, OR
- So good at combat that they feel like specialists, to the point where a Caster is as relevant in combat as a Martial is out of combat.
(Option #1 is the ideal, but Option #2 might be an option for some tables)
So...how do we do that?
Add more game structures for noncombat activities. 5E's ruleset is focused almost exclusively on combat, but if you want non-combat activities like building alliances, opening new trade routes, construction, and resolving emotional conflicts to be a larger part of play, you need to add the appropriate affordances for players to engage with. Play gravitates to structure.
The structures can either be explicitly explained to the players as "rules," or they can just be conventions in the DM's head which the players get used to seeing over and over. Either way can work. As an example, if every time players walk into a town they find a job board listing who needs what done for how much and a list of people seeking new friends, and if those jobs include not only violent activities ("avenge my daughter's defilement by kicking her seducer's teeth in! 50 gp") but also peaceful stuff ("build me a new chicken coop: 5 gp"), then that game structure was never explained to the players as a "rule," but it still counts as a game structure which players can reliably choose to engage with if they like. You might find adventurers who keep an eye out specifically for things that can help them in those peaceful job board activities ("do these hobgoblins we just killed have any chickens? maybe I can sell them to the guy I just built a chicken coop for!") or even optimize their characters around (Expertise in Carpenter's Tools and Insight!).
TL;DR give players more interesting choices to make outside of combat.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
I didn't say that Mage Hand overwrites Sleight of Hand, I just meant that, given a choice, which would you choose?
slight of hand, because this?
Grabbing things at range has an infinite number of uses, even if it's something as mundane as holding my beer.
sorry ... what? If casters are more vesitile because they can hold their beer from 10 ft away, the problem isn't they are more versatile - the problem is there ego. If I look through the history of my games, and recount the amount of times it was vital we picked something up outside of our reach within the wieght limit ... vs the amount of thimes we needed to conceil something...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixPhyre
In my experience, non-AT mage hand is entirely cosmetic, like prestidigitation. It's entirely flavor.
SACRILIDEGE!!! prestidigitation is THE spell to clean & dry clothes.
... and that's about it.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PhoenixPhyre
Anyway, my preferred solution is to break the idea that utility belongs to casters/spells. Make that available to anyone and you're done. Sure, that means you're no longer a "non-magic" person. But then again, everyone that matters in a fantasy adventure system is fantastic. It's kinda part and parcel.
In that regard, I think we have the same goal, but what exactly is the solution you're suggesting? From my understanding, your solution is "make Martials Fantastic", but considering a Barbarian can lift a boulder, they've already hit that point of "Beyond Mundane". How do you go above that, and what do you do so that it's normalized with the system?
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Id imagine you can mess with skill checks (dont tell them tbe difficulty before hand) and have character traits help. Like despite the lower int scores of classic barbarians and fighters, perhaps have the passing score for history checks on tribal politics or military etiquette have them more likely to succeed than the wizard who read it in a book
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qube
slight of hand, because this?
Grabbing things at range has an infinite number of uses, even if it's something as mundane as holding my beer.
sorry ... what? If casters are more vesitile because they can hold their beer from 10 ft away, the problem isn't they are more versatile - the problem is there ego. If I look through the history of my games, and recount the amount of times it was vital we picked something up outside of our reach within the wieght limit ... vs the amount of thimes we needed to conceil something...
SACRILIDEGE!!! prestidigitation is
THE spell to clean & dry clothes.
... and that's about it.
On my last character, I used Prestidigitation for:
- Gaining a child's trust by combining Shape Water and the flavor changing effect of Prestidigitation to make a snow cone. He was a witness to a crime, and he wouldn't talk to anyone else.
- Combining it with Disguise Self to make myself look and smell like a drunkard.
- Chill a towel for an hour to help someone's Medicine Check against a fever.
- Create an arrow for directions in a dungeon.
- Sneak my way into the local lord's (minor BBEG) mansion by getting hired as a magical butler. He was opulent and hedonistic, and wanted to show off his wealth.
On the surface, it might look useless. Then again, so does the Whip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arcangel4774
Id imagine you can mess with skill checks (dont tell them tbe difficulty before hand) and have character traits help. Like despite the lower int scores of classic barbarians and fighters, perhaps have the passing score for history checks on tribal politics or military etiquette have them more likely to succeed than the wizard who read it in a book
13th Age (Creators of 4e) did something similar, where backgrounds determined what skills you could use, not your class. So if your background determined you were a noble Barbarian in a tribe of merchants and hunters, you'd get a bonus for dealing with merchants, nobility, or tribesmen.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
First, try actual play, do martials FEEL like they're lacking at your table? If not, no problem.
If there is a problem, then the solution IMAO is to let all martials be GOOD at skills and ability checks.
Magic is supposed to be hard and take lots of time and effort to learn. A swords bard gets full casting + extra attack + to add insult to injury he gets JOAT (better than the athletics bonus of champion fighters) and expertise making him better at skills and ability checks than a fighter.
Let's make elevating a fighter to where he is BLATANTLY better than a bard at skills and ability checks the minimum baseline. The bard will still have spells, if you're not blatantly better better at skills and if spells are being used for utility, then the fighter will lag in utility.
Proposal:
Any character has an "ability bonus", for all characters but warlocks this is half his character level (rounded up) minus his highest level slot.
For warlocks, this rule treats major arcana as slots and caster/warlocks subtract both their highest level daily slot and their highest level warlock slot.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Martials do not suck out of combat. You're two editions too late for trying to fix it.
Trying to pretend that the Barbarian cannot provide solutions out of combat is beyond obviously false.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sigreid
My solution has always been to let skills, good plans and RP work.
The GM has to set things up so that players don't need skills or spells to contribute. Breaking a magical barriers is for spellcasters, handling locks and traps is for rogues. Everything else should be possible without requiring dice.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
In that regard, I think we have the same goal, but what exactly is the solution you're suggesting? From my understanding, your solution is "make Martials Fantastic", but considering a Barbarian can lift a boulder, they've already hit that point of "Beyond Mundane". How do you go above that, and what do you do so that it's normalized with the system?
My basic idea is to remove the following spells from the game:
Spoiler: Spells to convert to incantations
Show
All spells marked as rituals except Find Familiar
Mending (0U)
Animal Friendship (1N)
Beast Bond (1N)
Snare (?) (1N)
Detect Evil and Good (1D/A)
Goodberry (1N)
Purify Food and Drink (1D/N)
Arcane Lock (2A)
Darkvision (2U)
Clairvoyance (3A)
Knock (2A)
Lesser Restoration (2D)
Locate Object (2U)
Nystuls Magic Aura (2A)
Rope Trick (2A)
Spider Climb (2U)
Zone of Truth (2D)
Fly (3U)
Nondetection (3A)
Remove Curse (3U)
Speak with Dead (3D)
Speak with Plants (3N)
Tongues (3A/D)
Glyph of Warding (3A/D)
Magic Circle (3A/D)
Locate Creature (4U)
Fabricate (4A)
Private Sanctum (4A)
Awaken (5N)
Control Winds (5N)
Greater Restoration (5D)
Hallow (5D)
Legend Lore (5U)
Planar Binding (5A/D)
Raise Dead (5D)
Reincarnate (5N)
Scrying (5A)
Telepathic Bond (5A)
Teleportation Circle (5A)
Arcane Gate (6A)
Instant Summons (6A)
Druid Grove (6N)
Find the Path (6N)
Guards and Wards (6U)
Heroes Feast (6D)
Programmed Illusion (6A)
Wind Walk (6A/N)
Magnificent Mansion (7A)
Plane Shift (7A)
Regenerate (7N)
Resurrection (7D)
Symbol (7D/A)
Teleport (7A)
Temple of the Gods (7D)
Antipathy/Sympathy (8U)
Control Weather (8N)
Demiplane (8A)
Mighty Fortress (8U)
Astral Projection (9A)
Gate (9U)
Imprisonment (9U)
True Resurrection (9D)
The number is the spell level, ADNU is Arcane, Divine, Nature, or Universal (a categorization system)
These effects would be converted into 4e-style rituals (called Incantations) that anyone can learn and perform. To quote my current WIP document:
Quote:
Incantations are ritual practices and observances that, if followed scrupulously, produce magical effects similar to spells. Anyone with enough personal power (represented by character level) can learn and perform incantations. Incantations are graded in ranks from 0 to 9 like spells, and the maximum rank a character can learn or perform is given by half their level (rounded down). So a 2nd level adventurer can perform 1st-rank incantations, while an 18th level character can learn and perform 9th rank incantations.
Incantations are found written down, taught by grateful patrons, or given as rewards by otherworldly influences. Those obtained from another person or otherworldly source do not require any form of check to learn, while those found written down do require a check. Success or failure destroys the scroll, so if you fail you must find another source to learn that incantation. The DC for learning an incantation from a scroll is 8 + the rank of the incantation. Each incantation specifies the check requiredit is the same as the check needed to perform the incantation.
Incantations are long and complicated rituals, involving diagrams, chanted phrases, actions, and props. As a result, they require 10 minutes to perform (at a minimum, more if marked otherwise) and are interrupted by movement. While conducting an incantation, the officiator is considered to be concentrating as if on a spell. Incantations above rank 0 generally require a sacrifice of valuables to power the spell. This monetary component can be provided in any form with a listed price. Magic items are considered to be worth the minimum amount shown on the table in the DMG for their rarity. These are consumed at the beginning of the casting and are lost if the incantation is disrupted or fails.
Each incantation requires making an ability check (described in the incantation) at the end of the casting period. The DC for this check is 8 + the rank of the incantation. Some incantations can be cast as a higher rank (bounded by the maximum rank that the officiator can cast); doing so increases both the difficulty and the effect if successful. Many incantations gain additional strength if you beat the DC by more than 5; others may cause penalties if you fail by more than 5 on the check.
Many incantations (marked Group) gain power if multiple people conduct them together. Each participant must know the incantation. At the end of the incantation period, each participant makes an ability check as if they were the one officiating. The effect is increased by one rank for each person that succeeds on the check, but the DC is increased by one for every two people participating (reflecting the necessity of keeping everyone in sync). Note that this is easier than upcasting an incantation by yourself. Any penalties for failure accrue to everyone in the group, however.
So a detect magic incantation requires an Intelligence (Arcana) check (the exact numbers are a WIP) to use, costs 10 gp (per use), and can only be cast as a ritual (10 minutes). Wizards get an altered feature that lets them spend spell slots to either reduce the cost or to reduce the cast time (for Arcane incantations). Anyone can do it, wizards can do it cheaper/faster, at a cost.
Same for all the other replaced spells.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
What I do is present a scenario to the party then ask on player "What do you do?" Once they tell me what their character does, I decide if it's succeeds or fails or if the outcome is uncertain. If it's uncertain we roll one or more dice to help figure out the outcome.
Everybody gets an equal chance to interact with and even overcome a challenge.
So far Martials haven't sucked any more than casters with this approach. It's mostly Players contributing to failure (or a successful outcome they didn't want) with poorly thought out approaches to scenarios.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Man_Over_Game
On my last character, I used Prestidigitation for:
- Forging a medal of honor, to (falsely) gain someone's trust.
- Gaining a child's trust by combining Shape Water and the flavor changing effect of Prestidigitation to make a snow cone. He was a witness to a crime, and he wouldn't talk to anyone else.
- Combining it with Disguise Self to make myself look and smell like a drunkard.
- Chill a towel for an hour to help someone's Medicine Check against a fever.
- Create an arrow for directions in a dungeon.
- Sneak my way into the local lord's (minor BBEG) mansion by getting hired as a magical butler. He was opulent and hedonistic, and wanted to show off his wealth.
On the surface, it might look useless. Then again, so does the Whip.
it's not that it's useless ... but lets look at your examples:- "Forging a medal of honor" :smallconfused: ... you mean you cast a vocal/somatic spell, to have a 6 second item? 'don't mind the spell I'm casting here, good sir, and don't ask to see the thing again I just shown you' You're quite lucky your DM didn't instantly let you fail your deception.
- a sniff of spice, which you could arguable get out of a spell compoment pouch
- to smell like a drunk, rinse your mouth with a mug ale and spill the rest. 4 cp
- litterly just flavor to the help action.
- creating arrows for dungeons? chalk. 1 cp. for all dungeons you'd expect to be in longer then an hour, or need more then 3 arrows? "Sorry guys, this is the fourth corridor - we'll have to turn back"
- anything from a slight of hand (medician), to persuasion, to ... whatever creative use you can find for a skill.
To use your whip analogy: It's not that a whip is useless per see, it's just not hing special when anyone can have a rope.
you can use prestidigitation to clean & dry clothes, instantly, without having to strip.
That, in my experience, is what it actually brings to the table. All else, you're just doing common things on a magical way.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Keep them awake for a day and a half. :/
after about 8 hours the wizard will probably run out of spells.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
I suspect some of the difficulty has to do with the stats that are important to the classes in question. Fighters and barbarians often use strength and constitution primarily, which gives them... Athletics. Which is rarely given a lot of use (although it probably should be used more often for things like jumping across a chasm with a rope to get everyone else across, climbing up a wall for the same thing, etc.) and Acrobatics is often allowed to sub for it. Dex fighters at least have more skills they'll also have a high stat in, but if there's a rogue in the party, they'll often have expertise in those skills and you're back to not really adding anything of value. High level fighters have plenty of ASIs they can spend on feats, but I'm not sure the feats add quite enough utility (but maybe I'm undervaluing them). It makes sense for many fighters to be good at perception - guard/sentry duty is a stereotypical fighter-type activity, but they don't get many proficiencies and if there's a wisdom caster they're probably better at it than you. A fighter or barbarian could be intimidating or persuasive... but if you have a charisma caster they're probably better at it.
Actually now I'm wondering if the problem with fighters in particular is more the fault of the rogue class than casters. The rogue gets all of the skill capacity and that can easily leave combat as the only place where the fighter can arguably beat the rogue. If the three martial classes (barbarian, fighter, and rogue) all actually got good support for being skilled, maybe that would help. That or better feat support and/or out of combat abilities in the classes themselves.
It just occurred to me that I'm leaving monks out, but I feel like they have better out of combat support than fighters or barbarians. Not sure how true that is, though.
-
Re: Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Arcangel4774
Id imagine you can mess with skill checks (dont tell them tbe difficulty before hand) and have character traits help. Like despite the lower int scores of classic barbarians and fighters, perhaps have the passing score for history checks on tribal politics or military etiquette have them more likely to succeed than the wizard who read it in a book
Quote:
Originally Posted by
qube
it's not that it's useless ... but lets look at your examples:
- "Forging a medal of honor" :smallconfused: ... you mean you cast a vocal/somatic spell, to have a 6 second item? 'don't mind the spell I'm casting here, good sir, and don't ask to see the thing again I just shown you' You're quite lucky your DM didn't instantly let you fail your deception.
- a sniff of spice, which you could arguable get out of a spell compoment pouch
- to smell like a drunk, rinse your mouth with a mug ale and spill the rest. 4 cp
- litterly just flavor to the help action.
- creating arrows for dungeons? chalk. 1 cp. for all dungeons you'd expect to be in longer then an hour, or need more then 3 arrows? "Sorry guys, this is the fourth corridor - we'll have to turn back"
- anything from a slight of hand (medician), to persuasion, to ... whatever creative use you can find for a skill.
To use your whip analogy: It's not that a whip is useless per see, it's just not hing special when anyone can have a rope.
you can use prestidigitation to clean & dry clothes, instantly, without having to strip.
That, in my experience, is what it actually brings to the table. All else, you're just doing common things on a magical way.
A lot of what you said is valid, but you can't help without your DM determining that your Help is reasonable.
My whip analogy isn't exactly about it being a rope, but about it being a combat option. It deals less damage than any Strength build, and the only benefit of it over a polearm is the fact that you can wear a shield, and there are few Dex builds that implement shields. You'd have to get creative with the whip to get the most value out of it. Horizon Walker is a good example.