Martials suck out of combat. How to fix this?

[Spiritchaser]

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.

This doesn’t really feel like a fair comment.

Certainly the player with the barbarian can provide solutions out of combat, but the wizard or the bard can likely make it much easier for players with those characters to provide more help, probably much more, more often.

I do find, particularly at higher levels, that the utility of martials out of combat is lacking. Non-existent? Of course not. Lacking.

The campaigns I DM tend to be a bit towards the sandbox end of the spectrum, so things like travel, research, spying and such will be as desired by the PCs, and while I’ll arrange for Alternatives as and when reasonable, there’s no guarantee that whatever unpredictable lunacy the PCs try and pull off will be remotely as easy without spells as it would be with them.

[mephnick]

Play traditional D&D because that's what the system is good at. Yes, even 5e.

Combat and Exploration are all things directly in the wheelhouse of "mundane" characters. Breaking down doors, tracking a monster to its lair, slaughtering a cave of goblins and rescuing the farmers. Athletics is, by far, the best skill in traditional D&D. Perception, Stealth, Survival and Insight close behind. None of those require you to be a caster.

Keep the pressure up. Have a deadline. Enforce the adventuring day. Random encounter tables of wandering monsters as a DM tool exist solely to make resting dangerous. Use them. Don't listen to internet millennials, use them. Your Wizards will be kneeling before your Fighters with tears of thanks in their eyes after being saved from an ambush when they only have cantrips left. Stick to your guns. Kill the ****ing princess if they take too long. Get lost because you don't have someone with Survival? Dead princess. Can't clear the rubble pile because everyone dumped Strength? Dead princess. Alert 3 waves of monsters because you have to break down a door or cast Knock instead of lockpicking it? Dead characters and dead princess. Magic can help with some of these things, but no Wizard is prepping ****ing Locate Object except in white room forum battles.

1. Make martials important out of combat because the system begs for it.
2. Also make most of your sessions combat. That's what D&D is for.

[GreyBlack]

Maybe it's just me, but this entire idea stinks of white room theorycrafting.

Yes. Casters tend to have more versatility than martial characters out of combat. That doesn't make martial characters suck by any stretch of the imagination.

Let's take 3 separate examples of out of combat challenges that players might encounter: a 30 foot wall climb, having to get past a guard to enter into the city, and trying to find a trap. All examples are for tier 1-2; I'll think of stronger tier 3-4 examples later.

With the 30 foot climb example, the wizard might be willing to cast Spider Climb on themselves in order to get up the wall. Well, first of all, that's going to be at the expense of a 2nd level spell slot and it's going to leave the wizard vulnerable. Contrary to popular belief, wizards are not immortal; if they get caught in the open with no support around them, they're going you become wizard kebab rather rapidly. By comparison, the fighter or rogue are going you have a much easier time getting up that climb than the wizard; this is without using any resources at that. So, sure, you have some momentary benefit by casting it, but it leaves you with less resources and are thereby less effective than other characters will be at the same challenge.

How about entering the city? Well, sure. A wizard could cast "charm person" in order to get past the guard, but still aren't getting an auto succeed; all that does is "make the target regard you as a friendly acquaintance." You still have to persuade the guard to let you get past; are you the party face with persuasion? If you're not, then you're still not getting past the guard. Assuming the guard fails the save, you still only have advantage on the roll to get past. Or, if you're not the talkative type, you could cast invisibility to get in, but even then you still only have advantage to get past. You're not undetectable. In both circumstances, the trained martial character will generally have ways to get advantage on both of these attempts, AND be better at these checks.

And finding traps? There's literally no spell you can cast for this. Sure, you could cast "find traps" but that spell doesn't actually find traps. You're still stuck to your own eyes.

Many of these problems come from overreading spells and not actually following RAW. Martial characters are equally as useful out of combat as caster classes when you don't white room the game.

[Man_Over_Game]

An interesting conundrum I've realized is that Magic wouldn't be Magic if it fit within our laws of physics. However, Martial classes are often hindered by that limitation. Even if a Barbarian can lift more than the strongest living human, it's still bound within our laws of physics. We say that can happen because it makes sense for it to.

In instances where Mages have to worry about physics, they often have some means of dealing with it (Enhanced Ability, Bigby's Hand, Enlarge/Reduce, Tenser's Disk, etc, all as ways of dealing with weight).

Mages don't have to make sense, but Martials do.

• Magic > Physics.
• Martials = Physics.
• Magic > Martials.

The solution I'm seeing is Martials > Physics, but without some kind of boundary, it's really hard to gauge how far it should go, and how they should grow.




For example, is it enough for a level 20 Fighter to lift a mountain? A dragon? A building? What about an Ogre? If they end level 20 as Hercules, how are they fantastic at level 1?

[Misterwhisper]

It is not possible to balance them because of the way skills work in 5e.

A background can get you any skill in the game so there are no class specific skills.

There are no skill points so there is no difference between trained at level 1 and getting trained later somehow.

Every character can be just as good as any other on any skill check in the game if they want to be.

However casters have a multitude of options that will never be available to martials.

In combat is not a lot better. It is not as bad as it used to be but combat still comes down to martials always just target ac and hope to do a lot of hp damage.

Casters can target whatever weakness they have or just shut things down.

To quote mike mearls in playtest:

Player: martials lost a ton of versatility and casters feet infinite cantrips and can’t be interrupted anymore

MM: that is why every class but barbarian get a casting subclass.

Player: but what is people don’t want to play a caster.

MM: well you can’t stop boring people from playing boring classes.


I was the player he was talking to, so yes that was a real conversation.

[Toofey]

This really does sound more like a player problem than a game problem. There's everything from simply looking for ways to make your physical stats relevant to spending some of your feats to give yourself more options if you really think you need them. There's already plenty of options for this, and some of the most satisfying out of action characters I've seen have been fighters with no particular out of combat skills whatsoever, who were played with character.

I disagree with the premise of the question.

[Unoriginal]

This doesn’t really feel like a fair comment.

It's not a fair thread.

See how Man_Over_Game uses examples of things he did with Prestidigitation... except several of those examples are not possible to do with the limits of Prestidigitation.

It's always like that. Spells and casters are allowed to do whatever because magic, but martials are limited because They Suck (TM) and must be fixed. The deck is stacked like that any time this thread or its siblings show up.

My post was maybe not the most stellarly informative one I've written, but it was factual. Martials do not suck out-of-combat.

An interesting conundrum I've realized is that Magic wouldn't be Magic if it fit within our laws of physics. However, Martial classes are often hindered by that limitation. Even if a Barbarian can lift more than the strongest living human, it's still bound within our laws of physics. We say that can happen because it makes sense for it to.

[...]

Mages don't have to make sense, but Martials do.

• Magic > Physics.
• Martials = Physics.
• Magic > Martials.

Impressive. You don't even try to hide it.

I'd applaud how honest you are about your bias, but I'm too busy trying to not punch through my computer screen.


But eh, try to answer this one: if Barbarians are bound by our laws of reality, why are they allowed to fight dragons and win?

Dude with a sharp metal stick vs a flying fire-breathing, naturally armored death machine. How come the dude with the sharp stick stand a chance?

[Deathtongue]

Let's take 3 separate examples of out of combat challenges that players might encounter: a 30 foot wall climb, having to get past a guard to enter into the city, and trying to find a trap. All examples are for tier 1-2; I'll think of stronger tier 3-4 examples later.

I actually want to hear good T3-T4 challenges. A lot of these 'martials don't suck out of combat' focus on T1-T2 hypotheticals. Exploration, research, picking pockets, talking to people.

I think only the rogue really makes a case for not sucking out of combat, and that has more to do with Bounded Accuracy than the archetype itself. It's telling that The Social God thread strongly recommended you go bard, not rogue.

[Man_Over_Game]

It's not a fair thread.

See how Man_Over_Game uses examples of things he did with Prestidigitation... except several of those examples are not possible to do with the limits of Prestidigitation.

It's always like that. Spells and casters are allowed to do whatever because magic, but martials are limited because They Suck (TM) and must be fixed. The deck is stacked like that any time this thread or its siblings show up.

My post was maybe not the most stellarly informative one I've written, but it was factual. Martials do not suck out-of-combat.

None of the examples I posted with Prestidigitation were ambiguous. The badge was something that I was able to get away with because it was dark at the time, one of the explicit effects of Prestidigitation was to "Create a Sensory effect like...an odd smell". Some of them were redundant with some tools, similarly to how climbing with Athletics can often be redundant with a Climber's Kit and time (since a Climber's Kit makes it so you can't ever lose more than 20-someodd feet of progress).

There will always be examples of someone using a skill appropriately to duplicate something like Spider Climb for a niche scenario when Spider Climb wouldn't be relevant, but what about the examples of Featherfall, Minor Illusion, Find Familiar, or Enlarge/Reduce?

Mages don't ignore Spider Climb just because party's Barbarian can climb. Mages don't take Spider Climb because it's a garbage spell compared to all of the other cooler stuff that they can do.

However, for a Barbarian, Spider Climb is the best they'll ever be. An out-of-combat Barbarian is, at best, a single level 2-3 spell with a 24 hour duration. Or roughly the equivalent of a level 5 Sorcerer.

[strangebloke]

First of all you need to accept that players don't all want to have out of combat utility. I've met plenty of fighter and barbarian players who take perverse pride in what a lump their character is outside of combat. Heck, I once intentionally made my character illiterate because I thought it would be funny.

So long as the barbarian can do archetypal barbarian things like intimidate guards and lift heavy objects, they'll be happy.

And if we're being honest, this is really just a barbarian problem. All fighter subclasses except champion and pdk have out of combat bonuses and unless you're going for some horribly specialized build like ss/ea/ce or Pam/gwm/sentinel you will pretty quickly run out of useful feats/ASIs and then you'll turn to things like skulker, ritual caster, inspiring leader, etc. You can hyper specialize in combat, but then, so can warlocks, bards, and sorcerers.

Rogues dominate in skill checks so if that's relevant so are they. Paladins and rangers have spellcasting. Monks are fast and stealthy... Though after barbarians they probably need the most help.

So yeah overall is say from least to most ooc utility goes like:

1. Barbarian
2. Monk
3. Fighter
4. Paladin.
5. Everyone else.

Ultimately I think half the problem is in mindset. The party optimizer is playing a fighter in the current campaign, and he's built a big dumb hunk of steel as best he can. INT 6. Named Zog.

But yeah, they're low level and there was a wall. Just ten feet high, nothing serious. Just meant to slow them down and make dodging the patrols a little difficult. Zog just runs up and hurdles the thing. It doesn't even slow him down at all. He knew the movement rules and knew he could do it. The warlock had levitation and could achieve a similar effect, but unlike zog he had diminished his other abilities to be good at the thing zog did naturally.

Now I'm not trying to say that this means that zog here is generally useful out of combat. He isn't. I'm just saying that there fact that he knew he could do it was what allowed him to contribute. If you're clear with players that, yes, you can tame wolves and climb sheer rock faces and such, then the martials look a bit better. Not as good as casters, but maybe good enough so that nobody feels like a lump.

Also, to give the martials more combat power, run longer adventuring days.

[Unoriginal]

None of the examples I posted with Prestidigitation were ambiguous. The badge was something that I was able to get away with because it was dark at the time

Yeah? Dark enough to conceal the fact it only existed for 6 seconds? Forgetting the fact that to even attempt such a deception in a non-obvious way you'd have to have been playing a Sorcerer and used your Sorcery points to Subtle Spell your Prestidigitation.

Or the guy you "gained the trust of" after showing a medal for 6 seconds in the dark ignored you casting the spell right next to him.

[Bjarkmundur]

I second the "martial rituals idea"!

What I did in my group was change backgrounds. You might have seen this.

I like this method because it allows a player to complete alter his character's utility, and I've decided to eventually create my own "skill feats" replacement.

1. Expertise is available for everyone
2. Enhanced utility based on a skill is available to anyone
3. You can add encouragement for specific actions in the form of Inspiration
4. Because I note that each character has 1-2 ways of expending Inspiration specific to that character, it could be used to do a lot of out of combat things. Because Inspiration allows for world-altering effect, you might add to one character's sheet something like "When you meet a creature that only speaks a language you don't you can roll your inspiration dice. On a roll of 3 or 4, that creature just happens to also know a language you speak". It's not as clear as letting players choose an effect from a list, but the possibilities are pretty much endless. I do however discourage inspiration being used to enhance combat prowess. 5e has enough of that going around.

I know these solutions aren't for everyone, I just wanted to demonstrate that you're not the only one who's facing this problem, and my solution might give you inspiration (pun intended) to find your own.

[Man_Over_Game]

Yeah? Dark enough to conceal the fact it only existed for 6 seconds? Forgetting the fact that to even attempt such a deception in a non-obvious way you'd have to have been playing a Sorcerer and used your Sorcery points to Subtle Spell your Prestidigitation.

Or the guy you "gained the trust of" after showing a medal for 6 seconds in the dark ignored you casting the spell right next to him.

It was a scenario specific thing. It wasn't intended to be the focus of the list. But because it's distracting from the case I was trying to make, I think it's just best to strike it out.

[Angelalex242]

I mostly play a Paladin, and while I can't sneak for crap, I was able to contribute even in Dragon Heist mostly by being a talky noble. Charisma matters.

[stoutstien]

I think skills should work where they are completely removed from stats it would help but now we are looking at a complete system rest

[Man_Over_Game]

I mostly play a Paladin, and while I can't sneak for crap, I was able to contribute even in Dragon Heist mostly by being a talky noble. Charisma matters.

Paladins are kinda odd in this regard. I consider them as being just fine. Not only does Lay On Hands provide a lot of options for RP, but their Divine Sense does, too. The only real reason that Paladins aren't considered good for RP is because they usually use their spells for Divine Smite.

If they didn't, they'd have access to:

• Ceremony
• Detect Good and Evil
• Detect Magic
• Detect Poison and Disease
• Purify Food and Drink

Also include whatever their 3rd level Oath spells are, or what their Channel Divinity is (especially with the likes of Redemption). Not to mention that they get more spells/spellslots at level 5. Does an Eldritch Knight get the same choice as a Learned caster limited to Abjuration and Evocation?

I think Paladins work just fine out of combat. I'd imagine if they didn't have Divine Smite, they'd be a lot more interesting (if a bit weaker in combat).

[Deathtongue]

If I was going to give, say, barbarians more out-of-combat utility I wouldn't even try to compete with spells. I'd give them the ability to hijack the story in specific ways and force the DM to work around them. For example, a level 15 Bear Totem barbarian would have:

A) Larger Than Life: If the barbarian or their apparent allies haven't made an attack or initiative roll in the past minute or while this feature is being used, the barbarian can force any NPC to pay attention to them for 1 minute as long as the barbarian is doing something attention-grabbing such as boasting, taunting, or storytelling. The NPCs can't willingly end the conversation before the minute is up.

B) Juggernaut: For the next hour, as an action the barbarian automatically defeats any and every foe of their CR divided by 4 (round up) or lower they can perceive in a 30 foot radius so long as the barbarian is doing something against them that can conceivably hurt them -- this can be as general as turning over a table, kicking a log down a hill, or simply swinging a polearm. The barbarian is immune to all damage caused by such foes and ignores any effect they create that would require a saving throw or impose a condition. Any such foe that perceives the barbarian in that state can't make any ranged attack greater than 30 feet. They are taken to 0 hit points and the barbarian can decide whether they are merely made unconscious for 1d4 hours or are dead. The barbarian gains one level of exhaustion after the hour is up.

C) Reshape Terrain: Once per short rest, with a violent outcry and swing of their weapon barbarian can reshape any above-ground within 500 feet of them as long as it could be done by a significant act of natural destruction from the native biome. This might include reshaping rivers, setting the jungle on fire, blasting off the top of a mountain, or causing a snowstorm. This would not include planting trees or reversing erosion.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Let's consider an actual example.

Setup: There is an item in the possession of a powerful individual that you need. You know from research that it is stored in a locked case on the top floor of the individual's tower. You know that the tower is about 50' tall and encircled by a 15' wall set 20' from the base of the tower. The only windows are on the top floor, and they're locked. The guardian golems will alert if they perceive sound or see an intruder. If the alarm sounds, the mission is a failure as the individual will lock down the tower. You are level 13.

Variants:
1: Harder locks. The locks are reinforced with arcane lock, making them DC 25 to pick.
2: Alarm. The chamber with the item is protected by the alarm spell, keyed to the owner and the golems.
3: Time Limit. The window for retrieval is only a few minutes.

I bet that a level 13 Thief Rogue can beat all of these without significant risk of failure, especially with Expertise in Stealth (for a minimum 24 check against a passive perception of 11 for various golems). Variant 2 is the hardest, as he needs a consumable Scroll of Dispel Magic. An Arcane Trickster can do without the scroll or can use a scroll starting at much lower level (since it's on his spell list). Both can do Variant 3 basically effortlessly--the most time required is about 5 rounds. And note--that's without any particularly odd specialization. Expertise in Stealth is a really common thing for a rogue.

Now build a wizard that can do the same. I haven't seen one that can.

And there are many other scenarios that can cater to one class or type over another. Having to force open that gate for a Barbarian (or hold it closed). Something that requires endurance and multiple actions for a fighter. For example, consider the following:

A complex poison gas trap can only be disabled by entering a multi-step code on a console on the other side of a 30' room. Entering the room or starting your turn there forces a CON save or you get poisoned and take significant poison damage. Even a success means you take half damage. Disabling the trap requires two full actions and the poison takes another round to dissipate. A fighter with a large health pool and Second Wind can even without resistance get to the console and disable it in a single turn, only taking two rounds of damage (and with CON save proficiency he's got a better chance). With resistance (from protection from poison or an item), it's even easier. A wizard will take a minimum of 3 turns of damage, likely dying to the poison.

[Kyutaru]

The issue is with wizards I believe. In the older editions they've been specialists with limited spell schools effectively dividing the class into multiple subclasses, prone to DM approval before choosing spells (plus scribe failure chance), limited by verbal material and somatic components pre-metamagic, threatened by their own magic in the form of permanent aging or ability loss (plus XP costs), hampered by casting speed that allowed martials to interrupt, unable to cast more than one spell per round, extremely low health (gaining 1 hp per level), and probably other limits I'm forgetting. All of that's gone out the window in favor of making magic super newbie friendly.

Options:

1) Don't Bring a Cannon to a Gun Fight - Wizards can do what a Fighter does to an extent but he uses magic to do it. Inside an anti-magic field, or around royalty where it's prohibited, he's not the ideal candidate for performing mundane tasks. The player himself may even determine that it's irresponsible to use magic for mundane purposes and only lazy Wizards do so. Or maybe it's just overkill to spend a 5th level spell to do something the Rogue already knows how to do with silence, especially if enemies are around watching.

2) You get a Spell, You get a Spell, Everyone gets a Spell - Enable ritual casting for all players. Rituals can be such common forms of magic in the world that everyone knows how to perform them. They aren't super special wizard magic, they're mundane tropes that even the village housewife can perform the ritual to do. Maybe even tie some of them to gods like how Elder Scrolls games have a ritual that summons the Night Mother to pray for a murder. The Fighter isn't completely helpless when he knows simple rote hand signs that he learned as a kid to help with house chores and personal safety.

3) Maneuvers are Mundane Martial Magic - Just flat out give martials spells. Everyone already gets Feats, now give the classes that need them access to various Maneuvers similar to that of the Battle Master. Higher level maneuvers are stronger and have greater requirements or class levels to obtain. These wouldn't simply be for combat but would also carry acrobatic maneuvers, social salutes or flexes, feats of great deftness, or self-buffing psyche up stretches. Maybe twisting their neck and extending their arm to beckon the enemy is a powerful Taunt. We have the entirety of 4th edition for ideas.

4) Let the DM Tailor the Campaign - Martials are super awesome out of combat when it comes to exploring. They can swim, they can jump, they can climb, they can pick up rocks, they can smash through underbrush, they can survive in the desert, they can run for long distances, they can forced march, etc. If the campaign was actually geared towards doing these things then the martials will have plenty to do that the Wizard either has to complain about doing or waste magic to keep up, effectively draining his spells throughout the campaign. Heck, maybe it's even too hot to study in the desert or the howling winds disrupt concentration in the mountains. The casters may be unable to take a long rest to get their spells back which forces them to conserve more and be frugal with their casts.

5) Swiss Army Knife Fighters - Create magic items that replicate many essential effects that wizards can use. This doesn't stop wizards from using them too but it does make the effect less unique. When even a Fighter can Fly without spells, your wizard wasting his spell slots to do so is nothing to write home about. These items can have charges, per day uses, or command activation words that render martials all about equipment selection just as casters are all about spell selection. These work even better when they're on items only a martial class would be caught using. That greataxe of door opening isn't something the Wizard should be carrying around but the Barbarian will sure take it.

[Man_Over_Game]

For Pheonix's gauntlets, I'd say that a Thief Rogue is a little too specific for a climbing+stealth challenge. Although most of the problems could be resolved with good use of something like Greater Invisibility or Enlarge/Reduce (which, for some reason, can target windows according to the "What is an Object" rules).

For the poison room, would Unseen Servant or Mage Hand suffice? Many casters have Polymorph prepared, I'd just be interested if there's a low-cost way of dealing with it. If I knew beforehand, I'd prepare Wind Wall.

[NaughtyTiger]

This thread is surprisingly contentious.

I thought it was commonly agreed that magic users are the best game breakers given their abilities.
Casters/half-casters can nova harder in combat and have specific abilities to cheat outside of combat.

My imagination is poor. I am having trouble seeing a case where a barbarian can do something out of combat that a caster cant do.

[GlenSmash!]

This thread is surprisingly contentious.

I thought it was commonly agreed that magic users are the best game breakers given their abilities.
Casters/half-casters can nova harder in combat and have specific abilities to cheat outside of combat.

My imagination is poor. I am having trouble seeing a case where a barbarian can do something out of combat that a caster cant do.

For some it doesn't matter that the casters are better if the martials still have options that are viable they don't "suck."

If I want perfect balance I'll play 4e.

Which isn't to say I wouldn't want the options expanded. I for one loved the UA Scout Fighter as it got a neat and unique way to interact with the exploratory pillar of the game. It's just that nobody is complaining about this inequity at my table.

[MaxWilson]

I'd kind of like to play a 5E campaign where magic has more of a price, e.g. wizards who break promises sworn by their power lose 1/3 of their total XP each time they do whereas normals can lie with impunity (inspired by Dresden Files), or wizards always have a distinctive white streak in their hair that always identifies them to normals as spellcasters (inspired by David Eddings) and are only 0.1% of the population, and they have legal restrictions because people are afraid of them (inspired by X-Men). None of these things would affect dungeon crawling, except for making it easier to spot enemy spellcasters because of their hair, but it would make choosing to play a wizard or a mundane more of an interesting choice.

-Max

==========================

Let's consider an actual example.

Setup: There is an item in the possession of a powerful individual that you need. You know from research that it is stored in a locked case on the top floor of the individual's tower. You know that the tower is about 50' tall and encircled by a 15' wall set 20' from the base of the tower. The only windows are on the top floor, and they're locked. The guardian golems will alert if they perceive sound or see an intruder. If the alarm sounds, the mission is a failure as the individual will lock down the tower. You are level 13.

Variants:
1: Harder locks. The locks are reinforced with arcane lock, making them DC 25 to pick.
2: Alarm. The chamber with the item is protected by the alarm spell, keyed to the owner and the golems.
3: Time Limit. The window for retrieval is only a few minutes.

I bet that a level 13 Thief Rogue can beat all of these without significant risk of failure, especially with Expertise in Stealth (for a minimum 24 check against a passive perception of 11 for various golems). Variant 2 is the hardest, as he needs a consumable Scroll of Dispel Magic. An Arcane Trickster can do without the scroll or can use a scroll starting at much lower level (since it's on his spell list). Both can do Variant 3 basically effortlessly--the most time required is about 5 rounds. And note--that's without any particularly odd specialization. Expertise in Stealth is a really common thing for a rogue.

Now build a wizard that can do the same. I haven't seen one that can.

Wait, your "actual example" is a white room theorycraft that doesn't reflect actual play?

In actual play, this would probably be something more like either:

(1) The wizard casts Invisibility on the party + Seeming as a backup to make them all look like people who have been seen visiting the tower before, Druid casts Pass Without Trace on the party, Thief or Archery Fighter picks the lock with Thieves' Tools (Dispel Magic on Arcane Lock if necessary) while everybody else looks around nervously hoping there aren't any Glyphs of Warding about to kill them.

(2) Players do something completely crazy like invite the owner of the tower to a party where they get him drunk and/or seduce him while somebody else goes to the tower and gives the golems a raspberry so they chase him, then somebody else slips in behind the golems and grabs the MacGuffin. No lockdown because the tower owner is busy elsewhere.

But what it isn't going to be is a single PC soloing the tower completely on his own with no help from other PCs. That kind of thing happens, but only rarely, and only when someone has already messed up in a major way, e.g. the MacGuffin is how the solo PC prevents the other PCs from being executed at dawn by the Sheriff.

Anyway, a wizard who wanted to do this just needs decent Dex and Stealth proficiency + Thieves' Tools proficiency + Invisibility spell and/or Disguise Self. The Thieves Tools proficiency is rare for wizards but if you wanted to be that wizard it would be straightforward to create him.

[PhoenixPhyre]

For Pheonix's gauntlets, I'd say that a Thief Rogue is a little too specific for a climbing+stealth challenge. Although most of the problems could be resolved with good use of something like Greater Invisibility or Enlarge/Reduce (which, for some reason, can target windows according to the "What is an Object" rules).

For the poison room, would Unseen Servant or Mage Hand suffice? Many casters have Polymorph prepared, I'd just be interested if there's a low-cost way of dealing with it. If I knew beforehand, I'd prepare Wind Wall.

Greater Invisibility does not bypass the stealth check. Doesn't even give advantage, and wizards suck at stealth unless they build for that specifically. And it's a 4th level spell with a verbal component that only lasts a minute. Casting Enlarge/Reduce only solves one tiny bit of the problem--it doesn't get you up undetected or anything. It's also loud (verbal component again) right outside the dude's window (or at least nearby). It also doesn't open any of the locks on the case that the item's in, etc. It's also slow--a full action to cast.

The original idea came from a "rogues can't be epic" thread, so it's kinda rogue specific. But any rogue can do it almost just as well. Maybe a couple rounds slower, but still reliable and without resources. The best anyone could come up with for a caster was, IIRC, all the 4th level slots, multiple 3rd level slots, and nearly 3x as much time. Plus alerting everyone and failing.

No, because it's a complex trap that you can't simply bypass from a distance. Think a "it asks a simple question, but a different one each time" style of console. And it asks several. You can't see it across the room well enough to do it with mage hand. And you don't know before hand, and that's a major cost (both spell slot and opportunity--how many wizards even learn wind wall by default?).

[Man_Over_Game]

For some it doesn't matter that the casters are better if the martials still have options that are viable they don't "suck."

If I want perfect balance I'll play 4e.

Which isn't to say I wouldn't want the options expanded. I for one loved the UA Scout Fighter as it got a neat and unique way to interact with the exploratory pillar of the game. It's just that nobody is complaining about this inequity at my table.

Inequity can be balanced. Nobody plays an Illusion Wizard because they want to be good at combat. Nobody wants to play a Zealot Barbarian because they care about providing utility for their team.

My problem stems from the fact that the Fighter (and similar classes) are as good as the Wizard (and similar classes) in combat, but don't get nearly the same number of options out of combat.

Heck, all these examples of various Martials being able to use skills, and there's no mention of the fact that Casters get just as many skills. In fact, a caster is more likely to be better at using skills, due to being able to rely on the synergy provided by any spells they may use, but also the fact that they're less dependent on Constitution so that more of their stats are in skill dependent attributes (as there are no skills that default to using Constitution).

Put another way: If the Wizard was as bad in combat as the Fighter was out of combat, do you think anyone would play the Wizard?

For some players, being a combat junkie is enough, but adding options doesn't hurt anything. Wizards don't often use their skills, because they don't have to. A Ranger's Favored Terrain/Enemy doesn't always have to be relevant. But those options are still there for the players that DO enjoy those things. It doesn't seem like a tall order to be a Barbarian and regularly provide something out of combat, other than comedic relief or more troubles.

If you gave Fighters - all of them - Ritual Caster from the start, would anybody really care?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Inequity can be balanced. Nobody plays an Illusion Wizard because they want to be good at combat. Nobody wants to play a Zealot Barbarian because they care about providing utility for their team.

My problem stems from the fact that the Fighter (and similar classes) are as good as the Wizard (and similar classes) in combat, but don't get nearly the same number of options out of combat.

Heck, all these examples of various Martials being able to use skills, and there's no mention of the fact that Casters get just as many skills. In fact, a caster is more likely to be better at using skills, due to being able to rely on the synergy provided by any spells they may use, but also the fact that they're less dependent on Constitution so that more of their stats are in skill dependent attributes (as there are no skills that default to using Constitution).

Put another way: If the Wizard was as bad in combat as the Fighter was out of combat, do you think anyone would play the Wizard?

Wait, what? Casters are more dependent on CON than melee. Smaller hit dice, concentration, lower armor...

And except for bards, caster skill lists are...not great. Sure, that wizard gets all the INT skills. But the rest of them (social, most exploration)? Not unless you burn a background choice. Clerics are heavily stat dependent (STR + CON + WIS most of the time) and none of those are in great skill ones. Sorcerers can do social skills, but not much else. Etc.

And there isn't really good synergy with spells in this edition, at least if you don't let spells work outside their stated parameters.

On the other hand, Fighters are almost entirely SAD (STR or DEX, minor CON), have more ASIs to pump other stats or room for feats, plus have great hit die and action surge.

You're still so stuck in the 3e "Fighters suck" mentality that you're manufacturing reasons that are disconnected from actual game play. I have yet to see casters dominate anything in any game I've been in of 5e. They're good at some things, bad at others. And unless you're Shroedinger's wizard, you don't have all those spells and skills in the same build. Opportunity cost is a real thing, and it bites casters hard. Plus the fact that all their special stuff sucks down resources like nobody's business. Ain't nobody got piles of spell slots to burn, unless you're running the 1-encounter days.

[NaughtyTiger]

Let's consider an actual example.

Setup: There is an item in the possession of a powerful individual that you need. You know from research that it is stored in a locked case on the top floor of the individual's tower. You know that the tower is about 50' tall and encircled by a 15' wall set 20' from the base of the tower. The only windows are on the top floor, and they're locked. The guardian golems will alert if they perceive sound or see an intruder. If the alarm sounds, the mission is a failure as the individual will lock down the tower. You are level 13.

Variants:
1: Harder locks. The locks are reinforced with arcane lock, making them DC 25 to pick.
2: Alarm. The chamber with the item is protected by the alarm spell, keyed to the owner and the golems.
3: Time Limit. The window for retrieval is only a few minutes.

I bet that a level 13 Thief Rogue can beat all of these without significant risk of failure, especially with Expertise in Stealth (for a minimum 24 check against a passive perception of 11 for various golems). Variant 2 is the hardest, as he needs a consumable Scroll of Dispel Magic. An Arcane Trickster can do without the scroll or can use a scroll starting at much lower level (since it's on his spell list). Both can do Variant 3 basically effortlessly--the most time required is about 5 rounds. And note--that's without any particularly odd specialization. Expertise in Stealth is a really common thing for a rogue.

Now build a wizard that can do the same. I haven't seen one that can.

Transmutation wiz - spider climb, dispel magic, minor alchemy
Conjuration wiz - spider climb, dispel magic, invis, steal the whole case, flee.
any wiz - spider climb, dispel magic, lemund's tiny hut, knock
anyone with +5 in dex, proficient with stealth and thieves tools

[Rukelnikov]

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:

1. Just as versatile as Casters in terms of non-combat options, OR
2. 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?

There's a conundrum here, option 1 requires martials to effectively do magic, when you consider the kind of things magic can do like turning someone into a dinosaur, it will be pretty hard to explain that without magic in the middle.

Option 2 requires eliminating every buff spell in the game, since if buffs are available casters are relevant once again cause they make their martials better than the enemy martials. Also remove every summon, animate, charm and domination spell from the game, since otherwise the caster could get martial minions to fight for him, aka, matching the martial in combat. You may also need to remove illusions, or give the martial some kind of invulnerability to them. Basically, you would need to strip magic down to mostly evocation.

As long as magic is magic, and martials are superhuman but not casters (ie Gourry, not Naruto), the versatility gap can't be closed. What can be done is slow the process a bit, over the past editions caster have been getting buffs which slowly but surely ended up negating their weakness which was low lvl play, is that wrong? Hmm I haven't decided yet, but if their floor has risen, then their ceiling should be lowered a bit to compensate, so, slow spell progression, which is the direct reason of the imbalance. Maybe make it something like so (highest spell lvl only):

1 - 1 1st
2 - 2 1st
3 - 3 1st
4 - 1 2nd
5 - 2 2nd
6 - 3 2nd
7 - 1 3rd
8 - 2 3rd
9 - 3 3rd
10 - 1 4th
11 - 2 4th
12 - 3 4th
13 - 1 5th
14 - 1 5th
15 - 2 5th
16 - 2 5th
17 - 1 6th
18 - 1 6th
19 - 2 6th
20 - 2 6th

[Man_Over_Game]

Wait, what? Casters are more dependent on CON than melee. Smaller hit dice, concentration, lower armor...

And except for bards, caster skill lists are...not great. Sure, that wizard gets all the INT skills. But the rest of them (social, most exploration)? Not unless you burn a background choice. Clerics are heavily stat dependent (STR + CON + WIS most of the time) and none of those are in great skill ones. Sorcerers can do social skills, but not much else. Etc.

And there isn't really good synergy with spells in this edition, at least if you don't let spells work outside their stated parameters.

On the other hand, Fighters are almost entirely SAD (STR or DEX, minor CON), have more ASIs to pump other stats or room for feats, plus have great hit die and action surge.

You're still so stuck in the 3e "Fighters suck" mentality that you're manufacturing reasons that are disconnected from actual game play. I have yet to see casters dominate anything in any game I've been in of 5e. They're good at some things, bad at others. And unless you're Shroedinger's wizard, you don't have all those spells and skills in the same build. Opportunity cost is a real thing, and it bites casters hard. Plus the fact that all their special stuff sucks down resources like nobody's business. Ain't nobody got piles of spell slots to burn, unless you're running the 1-encounter days.

I've been in about 3 campaigns over the last couple years:

Ancestral Guardian Barbarian with Athlete

Warlock/Rogue Swashbuckler with Mask of Many Faces.

Arcane Trickster Rogue with Ritual Caster.

There was a major disconnect with my Barbarian on the whole 'roleplaying' aspect. Rather, it felt like an uphill battle to provide anything. Eventually, it became a game of "waiting until I was relevant".

I used to hate relying on magic to make things interesting, but I decided to give it another shot. Ever since then, I stopped "waiting" to be relevant, and I just was. I was the one guiding the team towards success, getting information, doing one-man operations against great odds. When it got around to the Arcane Trickster, I actually felt bad for hogging so much of the spotlight. Between my familiar, my Investigation Expertise, and my Mage Hand Legerdemain, there wasn't much that my team needed to assist me on, and it just felt like they waited for me to make the plays so that they could get a chance to play after me.

I played a Barbarian, and I waited to be relevant. Then I played a caster, and then everyone else waited on me to be relevant. It doesn't seem coincidental.

I've played 3.5 once. All my biases are based on 5e.

[NaughtyTiger]

My problem stems from the fact that the Fighter (and similar classes) are as good as the Wizard (and similar classes) in combat, but don't get nearly the same number of options out of combat.

this is the point.