Why would somebody play an non-caster?

[Prince Raven]

Because I don't play to win, I play to have fun, and a Wizard/Sorcerer/Cleric/Druid super party is boring.

[Killer Angel]

I mean, casters are ridiculously broken and kick ass at anything, while mundanes got (almost) nothing that matches their power.

So why would somebody play an fighter then, if it sucks beyond belief?*

*I chose Fighter because while CW Samurai sucks more, nobody plays CW Samurai.

Where are your skills, if you use a T1? everyone is able to "win" with that.

Real optimizers use samurai.

[Dr. Azkur]

Replicate this moment as a Wizard and I might consider playing one:

Spoiler

Show

Where are your skills, if you use a T1? everyone is able to "win" with that.

Real optimizers use samurai.

Thank you. I'm trying but I can't put it better than this.

[Kelb_Panthera]

There was a quote in someone's signature that was something like that.

Playing to the Tiers is like eating: Sure, you could always go out for fine dining every night, but some times you just want to have some sushi or a cheese burger, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I remember that quote. IIRC, it goes;

"Only playing T1's is like only ever eating fillet mignon. Sometimes you just want a freakin' hamburger."

It's an apt analogy too. Playing T1 classes takes a much greater degree of skill and preparation vs the relative ease of building and operating -most- lower tier classes. Building a monk is like making a left-overs casserole it's really easy to make but, if you're not careful with what you put into it, it's going to be gross.




Anywho, I can't speak for others but, personally, I like playing non-casters for a couple reasons.

I enjoy the tactical challenges inherent in not having a solution to every problem built into a class feature.

Playing casters for too long, having a spell for every situation, dulls situational awareness for me. If I can conjure whatever terrain and obstacles I choose, I don't need to pay attention what's already there.

Getting up close and personal with foes is a helluva rush. Testing your mettle face to face, nothing but a blade or bludgeon, a few metal plates, and my wits to keep me in one piece.... Hells yeah! (The fact that those bits of metal are magically enhanced not withstanding. )

Most non-caster NPC's tend to trust other non-casters more readily than some robe-wearing weirdo that bends reality or some religious fanatic that answers to some eldritch being that you can't see and have no real hope of understanding.

Sometimes you just want a freakin' hamburger.

[Tengu_temp]

Because Tome of Battle classes, which are the best thing in DND 3e (and I will duel you at dawn if you disagree), are technically not casters.

[Juntao112]

Because Tome of Battle classes, which are the best thing in DND 3e (and I will duel you at dawn if you disagree), are technically not casters.

Challenge accepted.

[Manly Man]

Because Tome of Battle classes, which are the best thing in DND 3e (and I will duel you at dawn if you disagree), are technically not casters.

No need to duel me here.

[Eldonauran]

I've given a lot of thought to why I would play a melee / mudane character over a spellcaster.

Phenomenal cosmic power? That's a lot of responsibility and even more book-keeping, depending on the caster. That's a lot of research, in-character.

Ability to arm wrestle a storm giant without the aid of magic? Now, that's a challenge!

I like to play all manner of characters. Barbarians, Fighters, Monks (i have a special place in my heart for them), Paladins (love them too), Rogues, Rangers, etc, etc. My favorites are spellcasters. Sorcerer / Druid / Mystic Theurge is where I call myself home.

But sometimes, you just need to roll up a halfling barbarian and make the large folks eat their words when they call you pint-sized.

I'm in this game for a challenge. When I play spellcasters, it is because I am filling a role in the party that needs taken care of. I make sure I have fun doing so but a spellcaster is never my first choice.

[Togo]

Because they're good at it?

Playing a non-caster is a different sort of challenge. You need better situational awareness, you really need to understand how raising and lowering numbers effects your probabilities, and have a keen understanding of opportunity costs. Being good at a playing a caster doesn't mean you can play a lower tier well.

[Pesimismrocks]

The reason why I dislike playing casters is the same reason I don't play Pun Pun. Why would I ever want to play a character with an instant win button. I like to roleplay out campaigns, taking it slowly and grabbing the plot hooks the DM throws at us. An optimized wizard can teleport to the end of a dungeon, obliterate the boss and stride out without breaking a sweat and with no chance of breaking his nails. To me, being able to do everything is boring, and I prefer the players having deprecate areas they are good at so everyone has a chance to have fun.

[cakellene]

Because I don't like playing casters, too much bookkeeping and planning. I either play some variant of monk or a wildshape druid.

[Kaje]

Because I despise Vancian casting so very very much and I think the full-caster archetypes are dull as hell.

Of course, most of my builds still have some sort of magic, be it binding, dragonmarks, turning into a bear, or whatever.

[The Trickster]

I mean, casters are ridiculously broken and kick ass at anything, while mundanes got (almost) nothing that matches their power.

So why would somebody play an fighter then, if it sucks beyond belief?*

*I chose Fighter because while CW Samurai sucks more, nobody plays CW Samurai.

Because playing on easy mode gets boring after a while.

[BrokenChord]

I don't get it either. You're playing a game about fantasy... You want to play on easy mode, play a non-optimized caster. Whoopdie-frakkin-doo. Plus, even casters aren't on easy mode when up against other casters. Non-casting is for mooks, summons, and low-level Paladins/Rangers/Hexblades/etc. who need to wait a little while to hit their stride.

I guess this depends on what you define as casting, though. I'm including things that don't have end-all-be-all godly powers in the "casting" boat, like Invokers, Manifesters, and so on. Hell, there was a time in the past I even considered it a non-heresy to call ToB classes casters, though I have outgrown this opinion in favor of shouting "lolmeleesuxxx!!!11!1" at ToB-players too.

No, I don't actually do that.

But yeah. I love casters of all varieties much more than I could ever love a mundane. You want to play around with hitting stuff? There are so many spells and gishy classes for doing that, it hurts me to hear somebody ask about that. I mean, they've all just got a ton more flavor, too. I can't think of anything somebody would want to do with a fighter or Barbarian that they can't be extremely similar to with casters. Some spells can even just be refluffed as surpassing the limits of physical capability and somesuch.

So there's no real reason for somebody like me to play a non-caster, regardless of op-level or really any other concern. I want to tone it down, I'll play a weaker caster that doesn't, in fact, have a spell to solve every problem.

I think the core of your question, however, is something I'm much better suited to answer. What you mean, I'm guessing, is "why don't we all play overpowered things"?

And, well, that's already been answered in detail, but suffice to say, because some of us actually enjoy not breaking the game and breezing through everything. Not much point of playing if you can take everything that easily, is there?

[ZamielVanWeber]

Replicate this moment as a Wizard and I might consider playing one:

Spoiler

Show

Transformation.

I honestly enjoy gishes and paladins (along with the T3 casters) a lot. It is fun to either work within limitations, but I love having options. Also the flavor of paladin is so cool I cannot resist (plus they get a few neato prestige classes).

[Red Fel]

I see your question, and raise you an inversion: Why would somebody play a caster?

Yes, they have power and versatility on their side (well, the T1s do; lower-tier casters get a bit less versatile). But have you seen the bookkeeping involved?

Your Cleric knows all of the Cleric spells. Do you? Seriously, do you? Because I can list off the top of my head, I don't know, twenty, tops, without having to look at a document; maybe five if you actually wanted me to tell you what they did and how to roll them. And if you plan to be useful as a caster-Cleric, you want to know that you can prepare the most useful spells for the occasion - and that means knowing what spells you can prepare.

And Wizard? Wizard is even worse. Sweet molasses, have you seen the list of arcane spells dotting the 3.5 landscape? It's an accounting nightmare! And don't even get me started on the Psion.

Heck, even a gish like Duskblade, or a melee-plus class like Swordsage, gets his nice, simple list of abilities. Melee is easier for me. When I'm at work, I read mountains of paperwork; I don't want to have to do that in D&D as well. Give me my list of simple attack actions (full attack, touch attack, maneuvers, maybe some melee channeling) and let me enjoy the simplicity.

That's the great thing about non-casters. The expectations are low. "Grunt, what're you going to do?" "Grunt smash faces." "Good job, Grunt. Keep at it." If things go south, you did what you could, no hard feelings. But for a caster? There are a million things you could have done if you'd thought about it long enough. There's always that spell you could have prepared, or the one you wasted on that stupid kobold party earlier, and somehow people complain that you didn't buff enough, or should have used that area-effect spell, or shouldn't have used that area-effect spell... Who needs that kind of responsibility?

[Coidzor]

Well, binders are pretty neat, though I don't think they really count as mundanes. OTOH, they don't really feel like casters either. Same for the Totemist and Incarnate, though Incarnates do lag after around mid-level, IIRC.

Replicate this moment as a Wizard and I might consider playing one:

Spoiler

Show

Hm?

Ganondorf is a gish, though he strikes me as more of a sorcerer-gish from the powers he typically displays, call him a Paladin of Tyranny Sorcadin, even. Link also has magical power as well, though he might be more like a Suel Arcanamach or Knight of the Weave or something like a halfcaster along the lines of a Ranger/Pally/Hexblade, given he doesn't display all that much of it. Then again, he could just be another gish that went more martial heavy before PrCs became available.

[TypoNinja]

I see your question, and raise you an inversion: Why would somebody play a caster?

Yes, they have power and versatility on their side (well, the T1s do; lower-tier casters get a bit less versatile). But have you seen the bookkeeping involved?

Your Cleric knows all of the Cleric spells. Do you? Seriously, do you? Because I can list off the top of my head, I don't know, twenty, tops, without having to look at a document; maybe five if you actually wanted me to tell you what they did and how to roll them. And if you plan to be useful as a caster-Cleric, you want to know that you can prepare the most useful spells for the occasion - and that means knowing what spells you can prepare.

And Wizard? Wizard is even worse. Sweet molasses, have you seen the list of arcane spells dotting the 3.5 landscape? It's an accounting nightmare! And don't even get me started on the Psion.

Heck, even a gish like Duskblade, or a melee-plus class like Swordsage, gets his nice, simple list of abilities. Melee is easier for me. When I'm at work, I read mountains of paperwork; I don't want to have to do that in D&D as well. Give me my list of simple attack actions (full attack, touch attack, maneuvers, maybe some melee channeling) and let me enjoy the simplicity.

That's the great thing about non-casters. The expectations are low. "Grunt, what're you going to do?" "Grunt smash faces." "Good job, Grunt. Keep at it." If things go south, you did what you could, no hard feelings. But for a caster? There are a million things you could have done if you'd thought about it long enough. There's always that spell you could have prepared, or the one you wasted on that stupid kobold party earlier, and somehow people complain that you didn't buff enough, or should have used that area-effect spell, or shouldn't have used that area-effect spell... Who needs that kind of responsibility?

There are about 2500 wizard spells.

Good. Luck. With. That.

Seriously, in the one game I'm playing a pure caster in I've spent more time researching and choosing spells after games than I have playing them.

Casters are amazing. If you know your options, but if you can detail even 10% of your options off the top of your head you are a freaking savant. I can't even remember my own character's spell list off the top of my head, and I freaking picked it.

[Raven777]

Why would somebody play an non-caster?

Because most adventuring parties are more entertaining to be a part of when there are mixed roles, and this is a game I play for entertainment. Do not misunderstand, I wouldn't trade my Sorcerer for all the souls in the world, but I rather enjoy the company of barbarians and rogues. I like to think we appreciate what we each bring to the table. To sum up : I have no problem with people playing non-casters as long as it isn't me :P

PS : I wouldn't ever play a Cleric or Wizard. The book keeping, oh god the book keeping. Go Sorcerer and never look back!

[eggynack]

I actually agree, except, y'know, just for me. I like having approximately infinite choices in any given situation, with each one plausibly being the best one. I like using a mass of BFC to slow combat to a crawl before killing the opponent by having my yellow musk creeper summons musk puff them until they fail a save. I like doing massive amounts of bookkeeping, keeping track of a massive pile of forms, summons, and other stuff simultaneously, seeking out obscure spells and forms into the night. I like being able to change everything about myself from day to day, or even from round to round. I don't think everyone necessarily likes those things though.

[Phelix-Mu]

The sword-swinger is iconic. And, imho, just as valuable to the setting as the caster. If everyone was a wizard, the world would be quite strange, and there would be a dearth of non-mindraped pawns creatures out there ("there used to be some goblins up in yonder hills, but then they caught a terminal case of fireballs").

I've been playing Exalted lately, and I have to say that it is quite refreshing to have a system where the "awesome" is handed out across the board, and is just as attributable to role playing creativity as hardcore crunch synergy. I still love D&D a la 3e, but I wouldn't mind seeing some major inroads made toward leveling the playing field.

Perhaps I will set tier limits in our next D&D campaign. Funny, cause I am really the only one that really likes to milk the optimization cow in my group.

[Forrestfire]

Short version: "Because I play a character, not a class."

Long version: When I build a character, I start with a concept. This starting concept might be simple as "he's a swordsman who retired from the military" or it could go and be complex, like... "they're a quartet of souls trapped in one ghostly body, that alternate control and form, and each of them has their own personality and skillset" or "this is a woman who studied at as a combat mage at a wizard college to follow in the footsteps of her great-great aunt, and her dissertation was a unique ritual that increased her physical strength and speed, but vents raw power in the shape of a halo above her head."

In any case, I sometimes might end up being a caster, and I sometimes won't. The hypothetical swordsman might be a warblade or fighter, or something. Maybe he'll pick up some magic on his adventurers and dip into Suel Arcanamach for some versatility, but otherwise he's not really a spellcaster. The latter two are characters I played; the ghosts used the Factotum class to represent having a bunch of skillsets (including spellcasting), and the combat mage was an Illumian Swiftblade.

The important thing, though, was that the classes came after the characters, and once I'd gotten to a point where the build felt right, then I was done building. For two of those, I played a non-caster because it fit the character better, that's all.

[Stygofthedump]

A simple balance fix is for the DM to make it very difficult to rest in hostile environments, dungeons etc. casters will then need to take a back seat and conserve their spells while the fighters do the damage.

[Dr. Azkur]

Transformation.

That's... just quite not THERE. Link doesn't strike me as a Warrior 20... (Read below)

I honestly enjoy gishes and paladins (along with the T3 casters) a lot. It is fun to either work within limitations, but I love having options. Also the flavor of paladin is so cool I cannot resist (plus they get a few neato prestige classes).

Oh yes! I've been trying to pump up a Grey Guard, they're feel is just SO RIGHT, you know?!

Hm?

Ganondorf is a gish, though he strikes me as more of a sorcerer-gish from the powers he typically displays, call him a Paladin of Tyranny Sorcadin, even. Link also has magical power as well, though he might be more like a Suel Arcanamach or Knight of the Weave or something like a halfcaster along the lines of a Ranger/Pally/Hexblade, given he doesn't display all that much of it. Then again, he could just be another gish that went more martial heavy before PrCs became available.

Well yes, I was referring to Link rather than Ganon (I might enjoy playing him... in SSBB. That kind of BBEG, those who are doomed to fail every time aren't really that amusing). But yeah, we can agree he's a Gish.

Link though. Link is OBVIOUSLY a Warblade 10/Eternal Soul 10. I mean Eternal Souls even get their own freaking Navi!

[ChaoticDitz]

That's... just quite not THERE. Link doesn't strike me as a Warrior 20... (Read below)

Oh yes! I've been trying to pump up a Grey Guard, they're feel is just SO RIGHT, you know?!



Well yes, I was referring to Link rather than Ganon (I might enjoy playing him... in SSBB. That kind of BBEG, those who are doomed to fail every time aren't really that amusing). But yeah, we can agree he's a Gish.

Link though. Link is OBVIOUSLY a Warblade 10/Eternal Soul 10. I mean Eternal Souls even get their own freaking Navi!

Hey! Listen!

......

Someone said my name.

[Dr. Azkur]

Hey! Listen!

......

Someone said my name.

Correction: A Navi who has gone through steep reeducation and is now not only unannoying, but also helpful.

PD: You made me laugh.

[Pan151]

Because sometimes people want to be guy that charges into the battle head-first and gives zero cares.

Also, just because T1 classes have a higher power ceiling does not mean that in an average game a properly built lower tier character cannot stay relevant. Mundanes can also choose from a wider variety of races/templates than casters (a barbarian can afford the RHD and LA of most monsters, because in the end the racial bonuses often give a net bonus over the lost class levels. A wizard cannot afford anything that's not LA+0), can make better use of magical item than most casters (give a rogue a wand and they suddenly have lots of spells. Give a cleric a wand and they can maybe save up on a couple healing spell slots).

Fighter 20 is still a stupid thing to build, for obvious reasons, but then again give that Fighter a ring of permanent Anti-Magic Field and watch all those haughty spellcasters flee in terror

[Mithril Leaf]

Fighter 20 is still a stupid thing to build, for obvious reasons, but then again give that Fighter a ring of permanent Anti-Magic Field and watch all those haughty spellcasters flee in terror

You mean pop back to their personally demiplanes because they're just astral projections, but the sentiment isn't all too bad.

[kailkay]

The way I see it, you can be the kind of guy who erases whole genealogical lines without a second thought, or you can be the kind of guy who has songs sung about him when he valorously gives his life during an epic siege battle, so that others might have a chance to live.

Those are your choices. There is no middle ground. I pick the hero, every time. Not the sociopath.

Edit: Also, actual reason: At low levels, smash-em characters win every time. Casters get powerful in the umpteens. Warriors typically try not to let them get to that point.

[Pan151]

You mean pop back to their personally demiplanes because they're just astral projections, but the sentiment isn't all too bad.

Well, I didn't say he would ever actually do anything to them , just that he'd scare them away.