Tier One Martials: A discussion

[Cosi]

I have yet to be shown why a T1 martial is necessary for a system to have. You don't roll a fighter or barbarian to interact with every single nuance of the game system - you do it because you want to crack skulls, and they do that. If I wanted a T1 caster's toolbox, I'd be one.

This highlights what is, in my opinion, one of the largest problems with talking about balance in the context of the tiers. The concepts of "Tier One Martial" and "Effective Martial" are distinct, but the Tiers erase that difference. The Barbarian's problem isn't that he can't fight a time-traveling multi-planar war with three layers of proxies. It's that when you put him in a room with a level appropriate monster, the monster is the one who walks out.

And what is the rogue playing? There are in fact martials built for those who want to interact more with the system, but it's important to have streamlined ones as well.

This is true. As a corollary, you also want casters that interact less with the system. If we're going to support the Barbarian who doesn't want to deal with any problem he can't solve with an axe (and we should), we should also support the Fire Mage who doesn't want to deal with any problem he can't solve with a fireball.

At risk of derailing the thread, you want three basic types of class. Some classes should be simple to play and simple to build, some classes should be simple to build and complex to play, and some classes should be complex to build and complex to play. And you want to make sure there are a variety of concepts in each of those categories. (Core) 3e's setup where all the simple/simple classes are martials and all the complex/complex classes are casters is a failure.

[Florian]

I'm not familiar with Fate so you'll have to elaborate on what you mean by "story vs. individual action" as well as which level you're talking about.

Ok, you actually managed to surprise me there.

This system does not know individual spells, pieces of equipment or special moves.
Your character has some skills, there is a "scene" or "challenge", you chose your skill you want to use for it, determine the outcome by rolling the dice and then "tell the story of how you did it".

We´re in a Mos Eisley cantina, there´re some Hutt Mafia guys, me, I have the "Smuggler" skill, you have the "Jedi" skill, let´s go for it...

Edit: A Skill of "God Wizard of the Lonely Reaches 5" is equal to "Gaisha Seductress of the Crimson Lotus 5".

[Psyren]

Ok, you actually managed to surprise me there.

This system does not know individual spells, pieces of equipment or special moves.
Your character has some skills, there is a "scene" or "challenge", you chose your skill you want to use for it, determine the outcome by rolling the dice and then "tell the story of how you did it".

We´re in a Mos Eisley cantina, there´re some Hutr Mafia guys, me, I have the "Smuggler" skill, you have the "Jedi" skill, let´s go for it...

That sounds awfully rules-light/threadbare for a concept like "tiers" to apply though. I might just be dense here but I'm not really seeing the relevance.

[Florian]

That sounds awfully rules-light/threadbare for a concept like "tiers" to apply though. I might just be dense here but I'm not really seeing the relevance.

That´s a common mistake. Fate Core is actually very rules heavy, needs a fair amount of planning and is leagues away from being light-weight. In itself, it´s on the complexity level of d20 core.

The relevant point is, that it treats everything as a skill and all skills as equal. "Might" 5 is equal to "Magic" 5 and you can simply break down skills to fit the actual game, like "Might" into "Melee", "Ranged" and "Dodge" and "Magic" into "Arcane", "Divine and "Foresight", and so on.

Point being that in context of this discussion, everything is a straw man and this situation has already been resolved.

[Vogonjeltz]

except that that MISSES the entire point of what the tier system represents.

Martials are ALREADY GREAT at attacking and doing damage. Better at it than a wizard is (though the wizard has the ability to end the combat through other means) Anything you do that improves that doesn't make them a higher tier. That includes letting them hit more often, being able to debuff the enemy with actions, buffing with actions, etc. etc. etc.

Where the martials fall short is in ANY other aspect of the game (skill challenges, social challenges, trap handling, problem solving, mystery solving, roleplay) where the wizard has one of N spells that give them boosts or overcome the challenge through a backdoor, as well as attribute dependance on the very attribute that gives you skill points. The martial doesn't. They just hit things.

Its not about giving the martials a step up in combat. They don't need that. That's not what the tier system is about!


Personal note. I agree with the above poster that keeping the party at T3 is the best solution. However, I understand the frustration of the power gamers who cry out "don't take my toys away!" I just don't agree with them.

So nebulous definitions aside, you'd want to do something along the following three things:

Succeed in combat, somehow.
Have the ability to get around obstacles, somehow.
Overcome social challenges, somehow.

Given that combat isn't an issue, and the other two are easily done through roleplay, what's the problem?

Anything you throw at them, they have a counter for.

Well, a Wizard could have a counter for it. If they always did there couldn't be a TPK with a Wizard in the party.

[Psyren]

Point being that in context of this discussion, everything is a straw man and this situation has already been resolved.

I'm afraid I still don't know what you mean and, lacking the necessary context, it doesn't seem I'm likely to.

So nebulous definitions aside, you'd want to do something along the following three things:

Succeed in combat, somehow.
Have the ability to get around obstacles, somehow.
Overcome social challenges, somehow.

Given that combat isn't an issue, and the other two are easily done through roleplay, what's the problem?

Indeed, that's the whole point - in practice, there isn't an issue. The game works even without T1 martials, and works well.

However, I'm compelled to point out that the second item ("get around obstacles") can in fact require a mechanical rather than a roleplay solution; you can't roleplay your way across a chasm if the bridge is destroyed and there's no one to roleplay with to fix it for you. But that's also why this is a team game; stuff the martials can't get past on their own can easily be done with the assistance of the party casters, which is why most parties have them, and the game actively suggests that you do so.

[Jormengand]

But that's also why this is a team game; stuff the martials can't get past on their own can easily be done with the assistance of the party casters, which is why most parties have them, and the game actively suggests that you do so.

I'm afraid that "Martials don't suck because they can get the casters to do things for them" has been done to death already. The problem is that wizards are better at doing the fighter's job, and every other job, than the fighter, to the extent that they actually have a "Win social encounter" spell and a "Win locked door encounter" spell and a "Win travel" spell.

[Psyren]

I'm afraid that "Martials don't suck because they can get the casters to do things for them" has been done to death already. The problem is that wizards are better at doing the fighter's job, and every other job, than the fighter, to the extent that they actually have a "Win social encounter" spell and a "Win locked door encounter" spell and a "Win travel" spell.

I'm not saying "martials don't suck." I'm saying "they don't need to be good at everything the casters are, because it's a team game."

I acknowledge that casters shouldn't be able to easily take over the fighter's job. They should be capable of it in a pinch, but the opportunity cost should be high enough that they have a reason to not do so and just bring the Fighter instead. 3.5 of course failed miserably at this, what with polymorph/wild shape replacing stats etc. PF did better, but casters still have too much ammunition. 5e has done the best at this so far, and there's lessons we can take back to the more textured editions of the game.

[Cosi]

I'm afraid that "Martials don't suck because they can get the casters to do things for them" has been done to death already. The problem is that wizards are better at doing the fighter's job, and every other job, than the fighter, to the extent that they actually have a "Win social encounter" spell and a "Win locked door encounter" spell and a "Win travel" spell.

Why are you replying to Psyren? He's not going to change his mind, because he is 100% entrenched in his weird world where the designers are always right, Fighters are valuable party members, and the people who think there are problems with anything are "doing it wrong". It's like trying to convince Lord Drako he's wrong about whatever he's on about. You're better off just ... not doing that. Go read a book or something.

[ryu]

Why are you replying to Psyren? He's not going to change his mind, because he is 100% entrenched in his weird world where the designers are always right, Fighters are valuable party members, and the people who think there are problems with anything are "doing it wrong". It's like trying to convince Lord Drako he's wrong about whatever he's on about. You're better off just ... not doing that. Go read a book or something.

Hey hey hey... Let's not say things we can't take back easily man. NO ONE capable of holding a conversation with complete sentences and a lack of spam pictures deserves that comparison.

[digiman619]

I'm not saying "martials don't suck." I'm saying "they don't need to be good at everything the casters are, because it's a team game."

I acknowledge that casters shouldn't be able to easily take over the fighter's job. They should be capable of it in a pinch, but the opportunity cost should be high enough that they have a reason to not do so and just bring the Fighter instead. 3.5 of course failed miserably at this, what with polymorph/wild shape replacing stats etc. PF did better, but casters still have too much ammunition. 5e has done the best at this so far, and there's lessons we can take back to the more textured editions of the game.

Ah, but there's the rub: A moderate-to-highly wizard can solo an AP. Even a TO Fighter can't even come close.

[Psyren]

My decision to put him on ignore months ago continues to be validated

If only it blocked quotes too. Ah well, can't have everything.

Ah, but there's the rub: A moderate-to-highly wizard can solo an AP. Even a TO Fighter can't even come close.

Indeed - the AP's are designed around the playtest party (healbot cleric, blaster wizard, fighter and rogue.) By this forum's standards, that would be low-op.

But the assumption there is that high-op friendly DMs can use the APs as a starting point to ramp up the challenge, while the low-op ones can run things as-is for their similarly low-op playgroups.

[Cosi]

Hey hey hey... Let's not say things we can't take back easily man. NO ONE capable of holding a conversation with complete sentences and a lack of spam pictures deserves that comparison.

I didn't say "Psyren is as incoherent as Lord Drako" or anything like that. I said "Psyren is as unwilling to change his beliefs in the face of evidence as Lord Drako". And I stand by that. Remember the "Balance to the Wizard" thread? Remember how he argued with a straight face for multiple pages that monsters using their abilities constituted an unfair advantage that raised CR? Because that is pretty much exactly what Lord Drako is doing right now.

[Gallowglass]

We've gotten to the point on this discussion where we are at the "well if we can't turn a mundane/martial into tier 1 without turning him into a spellcaster* then what can we do?"

And that leads to the same answers:


...play a different game
...nerf casters (by eliminating spells edition)
...nerf casters (by only allowing tier 3 casters edition)
...nerf casters (by modifying rulesets in some way which won't work edition)
and finally
...accept its a disparity, understand that in MOST game tables AS THE GAME IS ACTUALLY PLAYED it doesn't matter and wont' be noticed, its just an artifact of us talking about the game as a high op exercise.

Now, personally, I love me a good nerf, but that seems to be the worst dirty word of dirty words in this forum. Playing a different game isn't a good option because I like playing with the people I play with and I'm too lazy and cheap to learn new games in my dotage. So I'm left with the last which, as it happens, works really well for me.



*spellcaster here refers to all magic using or magic equivalent using classes including, but not limited to, psionics, powerwording, invoking or whatever other reskinned spellcasting you can find

[Psyren]

We've gotten to the point on this discussion where we are at the "well if we can't turn a mundane/martial into tier 1 without turning him into a spellcaster* then what can we do?"

And that leads to the same answers:


...play a different game
...nerf casters (by eliminating spells edition)
...nerf casters (by only allowing tier 3 casters edition)
...nerf casters (by modifying rulesets in some way which won't work edition)
and finally
...accept its a disparity, understand that in MOST game tables AS THE GAME IS ACTUALLY PLAYED it doesn't matter and wont' be noticed, its just an artifact of us talking about the game as a high op exercise.

Now, personally, I love me a good nerf, but that seems to be the worst dirty word of dirty words in this forum. Playing a different game isn't a good option because I like playing with the people I play with and I'm too lazy and cheap to learn new games in my dotage. So I'm left with the last which, as it happens, works really well for me.



*spellcaster here refers to all magic using or magic equivalent using classes including, but not limited to, psionics, powerwording, invoking or whatever other reskinned spellcasting you can find

I concur wholeheartedly.

To add content to this post I'll add one last option - "be okay with the 'T1/T2 martial' functionally being a spellcaster." The "ExFighter" or "Saitama" approach does appeal to some people. Not me, certainly, but some, and homebrewing it up is an option.

[digiman619]

Indeed - the AP's are designed around the playtest party (healbot cleric, blaster wizard, fighter and rogue.) By this forum's standards, that would be low-op.

But the assumption there is that high-op friendly DMs can use the APs as a starting point to ramp up the challenge, while the low-op ones can run things as-is for their similarly low-op playgroups.

Let me be blunt: You're never going to convince me that a T1 martial is the solution. Even if we collectively design a Tier 1 martial (or hopefully 3 or 4 T1 martials so you can have a choice in your overpowered martial, like you have your choice of overpowered caster), we still have the same problem: It's Tier 1, and T1 is "do everything forever until the DM fiats it away." That's not fun, at least not in any D&D game I've played, as either a player OR GM. So, no: you're never going to convince me that such a level of player power is appropriate for a D&D game. There are games where it's appropriate, mind you, but D&D is not it.

[Psyren]

Let me be blunt: You're never going to convince me that a T1 martial is the solution. Even if we collectively design a Tier 1 martial (or hopefully 3 or 4 T1 martials so you can have a choice in your overpowered martial, like you have your choice of overpowered caster), we still have the same problem: It's Tier 1, and T1 is "do everything forever until the DM fiats it away." That's not fun, at least not in any D&D game I've played, as either a player OR GM. So, no: you're never going to convince me that such a level of player power is appropriate for a D&D game. There are games where it's appropriate, mind you, but D&D is not it.

Did you mean to quote me here? Because you're actually agreeing with my stance. I have no interest in T1 martials either, as noted by my entering this discussion quoting Tippy.

[digiman619]

Did you mean to quote me here? Because you're actually agreeing with my stance. I have no interest in T1 martials either, as noted by my entering this discussion quoting Tippy.

Then it was addressed to the thread in general. I don't care. I still say Spheres of Power & Path of War to make everyone Tier 3 is the best way to play it so that everyone has interesting options while keeping the two feeling different.

[Jormengand]

I acknowledge that casters shouldn't be able to easily take over the fighter's job. They should be capable of it in a pinch, but the opportunity cost should be high enough that they have a reason to not do so and just bring the Fighter instead. 3.5 of course failed miserably at this, what with polymorph/wild shape replacing stats etc. PF did better, but casters still have too much ammunition. 5e has done the best at this so far, and there's lessons we can take back to the more textured editions of the game.

See, I find it funny that I've been told that I shouldn't argue with you because you won't change your mind, and then you acknowledged my point.

But yeah, to me, it seems like magic should be a sort of "Cheat" almost - you can pretend that you're a fighter but not for very long per day, you can do rogue things with a flick of your wrist, but only twice a day so make it count, you can grab up an ability you wish you got for your class but you have ten rounds to do it. It should be a case of "I didn't learn this the hard way, instead, I learned the cheat codes to the universe so I can pretend to be good at all these things for a short while." I don't even mind a wizard getting a moment of blowing things up better than the fighter can stab them, but that should be once a day rather than slinging fireballs all day until he realises there are better uses of spell slots than doing the fighter's job better than the fighter.

[Psyren]

Then it was addressed to the thread in general. I don't care. I still say Spheres of Power & Path of War to make everyone Tier 3 is the best way to play it so that everyone has interesting options while keeping the two feeling different.

Great, we're in alignment then

Of course, for those without access to Spheres (is it on the SRD?) there are plenty of T3 casters in the base system to choose from too.

[digiman619]

Great, we're in alignment then

Of course, for those without access to Spheres (is it on the SRD?) there are plenty of T3 casters in the base system to choose from too.

No, it's not, despite them trying to get it there for over a year now. It does have a free site with all the data here, though...

[Jormengand]

The thing that irks me about "Just play at T3" like it's some objective standard for what's the best is that it isn't. Some people like playing at T1, or T2, or T4. Some people like playing mundane characters. At least some attempt should be made, and has been made, to reconcile the two, and some people enjoy playing the results precisely because they feel like a nonmagical character who is still relevant in a world full of powerful magical characters, without the magical characters being deprived of their earth-shattering magical abilities that they, I dunno, like having access to?

[illyahr]

Core 16th level druid. Is it a tier 1? Unquestionably.
Ethereal/incorporeal creatures: No. Cant become ethereal. No specialized anti incorporeal effects. No force effects. Only better than a monk by virtue of Death Ward.
Fliers: Yes.
DR: moderate. Cant beat common DR types, but can bypass with some magical attacks. But see Below.
Social Encounters: No. Having a skill on your skill list does not a T1 make. No helpful spells.
Skill Challenges: No.
Mundane Travel: Yes
Planar Travel: No
Ally Death: Yes
Character Death (I assume this means virtual immortality/immunity to death via clone/astral projection/other): No
Surprise Rounds: No
Enemy Armies: Yes
Ally Armies (This means making them?): Medium. Get a few nice tricks like Awaken, but nothing as good as Animate dead or planar binding.
Debilitating Effects: Yes
High level enemies or groups: Yes
Extraplanar Creatures: No better than a muggle. Cant beat common DR. Best attack spells are SR yes. No specialized anti outsider spells or spells to prevent them from summoning or escaping. May struggle against things with multiple energy resistances and DR.

Ethereal/Incorporeal: Abberant Wild Shape into a Dharculus (Planar Handbook), Ghost Shroud lets you touch incorporeals
Damage Reduction: Necklace of Natural Attacks (Savage Species)
Social Challenges: Agreed. Not much a Druid can do with this one
Skill Challenges: Wild Shape gets around more than you'd think
Planar Travel: Yeah, this one is basically for Clerics and Wizards
Character Death: Craft Contingent Spell -> Reincarnation on death
Surprise Rounds: You can spend all day, every day as an Invisible Stalker, if you choose
Extraplanar Creatures: Gatekeepers Initiate (Eberron Campaign Setting) adds spells to counter Outsiders and Abberations. Adding Metalline or, even better, Transmuting to your Necklace of Natural Attacks takes care of DR

Not much causes a properly kitted Druid any discomfort, but it is doable.

Well, a Wizard could have a counter for it. If they always did there couldn't be a TPK with a Wizard in the party.

They do have a counter for it. Whether the player knows how to use it is another matter.



So, yes, a T1 martial is unnecessary. Even a T2 martial, while an interesting idea, doesn't appeal to everyone. I, personally, have a problem with T1 casters played at full power but most of the issues I have with them are the level of TO that I wouldn't allow in my games anyway. I don't like the idea of a character that can do everything. If your group comprises of Superman, Dr. Strange, Green Lantern, and The Hulk, what is there to do that is in any way a challenge? Remember, the DM needs to be having fun also and trying to make challenges for a group like that doesn't seem like much fun to me.

I'd take a group of Wolverine, Deadman, Spider Man, and Groot any day.

[Jormengand]

Ethereal/Incorporeal: Abberant Wild Shape into a Dharculus (Planar Handbook), Ghost Shroud lets you touch incorporeals
Damage Reduction: Necklace of Natural Attacks (Savage Species)
Social Challenges: Agreed. Not much a Druid can do with this one
Skill Challenges: Wild Shape gets around more than you'd think
Planar Travel: Yeah, this one is basically for Clerics and Wizards
Character Death: Craft Contingent Spell -> Reincarnation on death
Surprise Rounds: You can spend all day, every day as an Invisible Stalker, if you choose
Extraplanar Creatures: Gatekeepers Initiate (Eberron Campaign Setting) adds spells to counter Outsiders and Abberations. Adding Metalline or, even better, Transmuting to your Necklace of Natural Attacks takes care of DR

Not much causes a properly kitted Druid any discomfort, but it is doable.

Except that druids are still tier 1 in core, where they can't do nearly as much of that.

[Gallowglass]

The thing that irks me about "Just play at T3" like it's some objective standard for what's the best is that it isn't. Some people like playing at T1, or T2, or T4. Some people like playing mundane characters. At least some attempt should be made, and has been made, to reconcile the two, and some people enjoy playing the results precisely because they feel like a nonmagical character who is still relevant in a world full of powerful magical characters, without the magical characters being deprived of their earth-shattering magical abilities that they, I dunno, like having access to?

I can only speak from my experience. In my experience, it isn't a problem in real table play, only a problem in theorycraft. In real games, that guy playing the fighter seems perfectly happy to pile on his feats and do 300+ damage or whatever with a powerswing and doesn't seem to care that he can't make his own demiplane, or that he's dependant on the cleric's buffs and the wizard's teleport to get to the action, or even when the druid turns into a bear and does 300+ damage right beside him. He's still having fun.

I'm in a game right now with a 20lvl optimized conjuration wizard, a drow fighter/dualist, a sea hag gunslinger/death mage and a human ninja. A ninja. Guess who the ninja is? Me. And I have fun, contribute and enjoy myself every session even when the wizard is throwing 10 t-rexes into the fray.

Now part of the reason I'm ALLOWED to have fun is because of good DMing, and a good story, but mostly its because I enjoy my little niche of smoke bombing and flank fighting. I don't begrudge the optimized wizard even though they could wipe the floor with me and occasionally trivializes things. Because she's not my enemy.

[Jormengand]

Yes, obviously, but at the same time some people do want to play powerful characters and a game should not just incorporate your playstyle or playstyles that you can understand.

[Psyren]

No, it's not, despite them trying to get it there for over a year now. It does have a free site with all the data here, though...

Fantastic, I wasn't aware of that. Bookmarked, now I can try before buying.

I will echo Gallowglass' earlier point though - you don't have to force everyone to adhere to T3 for the game to work. T1s and T2s can coexist with weaker classes so long as their players have self-control. Occasionally, having one party member that can resolve a tough encounter using their T1 strength can be beneficial to both the game and the story as a whole.

The thing that irks me about "Just play at T3" like it's some objective standard for what's the best is that it isn't. Some people like playing at T1, or T2, or T4. Some people like playing mundane characters. At least some attempt should be made, and has been made, to reconcile the two, and some people enjoy playing the results precisely because they feel like a nonmagical character who is still relevant in a world full of powerful magical characters, without the magical characters being deprived of their earth-shattering magical abilities that they, I dunno, like having access to?

I actually agree with you as well - T3/T4 should only be forced if, like some of the folks on this forum and indeed in this very thread, the caster players are incapable of moderating themselves from overshadowing the martials' fun. This is what we commonly refer to around here as "Gentleman's Agreement." If that proves impossible, then the bannings and nerfs commence.

[digiman619]

The thing that irks me about "Just play at T3" like it's some objective standard for what's the best is that it isn't. Some people like playing at T1, or T2, or T4. Some people like playing mundane characters. At least some attempt should be made, and has been made, to reconcile the two, and some people enjoy playing the results precisely because they feel like a nonmagical character who is still relevant in a world full of powerful magical characters, without the magical characters being deprived of their earth-shattering magical abilities that they, I dunno, like having access to?

Then use the Advanced talents. That way you still get some of those earth-shattering effects (astral projection, demiplanes, fun with scrying, etc.) but still keep it balanced in that a) you can one or two of these trick, but not all of them (because they take investing, not the "cherry-pick the best of everything" the standard magic system has), and b) it usually costs spell points, a smaller pool than the 40 slots a Wizard has.

[Gallowglass]

Yes, obviously, but at the same time some people do want to play powerful characters and a game should not just incorporate your playstyle or playstyles that you can understand.

You lost me here, I can't figure out what you are saying.

[Jormengand]

Then use the Advanced talents. That way you still get some of those earth-shattering effects (astral projection, demiplanes, fun with scrying, etc.) but still keep it balanced in that a) you can one or two of these trick, but not all of them (because they take investing, not the "cherry-pick the best of everything" the standard magic system has), and b) it usually costs spell points, a smaller pool than the 40 slots a Wizard has.

Right, except I'm not trying to reduce the caster's power, versatility, or capability, because those players may not want to lose out on any of those things. Some people want to play a mundane character who can interact on that level, rather than casters who operate on the level of sorcerers and mundanes still being left in the lurch.

You lost me here, I can't figure out what you are saying.

Just because you are happy with the options given by a system doesn't mean that everyone should be told they have to be happy with them.