Martial Power!!! (Give the martials something to do other than "attack again")

[PhoenixPhyre]

There were two wonderful tags in 3.P for indicating the presence of magical abilities that aren't spellcasting. They were called (Su) and (Sp).

The biggest issue with 3.5 is that it didn't use these nearly enough - the expectation was that you would PrC out of your base class, so they didn't care to ensure that the high levels of martial base classes began incorporating magic, or even be all that interesting in general. Pathfinder did a much better job of this with things like Rogue Talents and Rage Powers and archetypes tending to be more magical as you climbed, but they still didn't set that expectation as well as they could have.

Personally I would look to PrCs as examples for abilities that high-level martials should be expected to have baseline. Like a rogue gets high enough, they should be able to do things like jump from shadow to shadow, or briefly turn incorporeal like a child of night. A barbarian gets high enough and they can start tattooing certain powers onto themselves or cutting through magic, etc.

I don't like those tags, because they cause air-breathing mermaid issues and reinforce the idea that "not magical" means "boring and limited".

Instead, I'd say the default is everything is fantastic (ie su at lowest). From level 1, from the get go. Your fantastic nature sets you apart from the common herd and from mundane things. Mundane is not an option. From that perspective, the whole "Guy at the Gym" goes away, because expectations are set differently. Expectations are more powerful than explicit features, because they're much less limited. Giving them su options without changing the expectation of the baseline reinforces the dichotomy, which is something I want to go away entirely.

Note that there's a bit of a lie in things like dispel magic and anti-magic field--those don't affect magic as much as spells and magic items.

Edit: And I think there's a bit of a misconception that fantastic must mean "over the top" (and thus high level). I want things to be fantastic at all levels, so the scaling isn't nearly that extreme. Instead of going from Average Joe (ie nobody) at level 1 to Demigod at level 20, I want to go from "Action Hero" (ie normal++) to "low-end superhero" for everyone, wizards included. So the whole "rewrite reality at will" trope for wizards? Doesn't belong in any form of D&D I want to play. Which means that the scope and silliness for martials is similarly limited. No need to (as a baseline) crack mountains with a blade (or any of those other mythical feats) or cut holes in reality. Yes, that means that spells need refactoring. But they've needed that for a long time, because they're inherently unbalanceable even within themselves.

[Ignimortis]

There were two wonderful tags in 3.P for indicating the presence of magical abilities that aren't spellcasting. They were called (Su) and (Sp).

The biggest issue with 3.5 is that it didn't use these nearly enough - the expectation was that you would PrC out of your base class, so they didn't care to ensure that the high levels of martial base classes began incorporating magic, or even be all that interesting in general. Pathfinder did a much better job of this with things like Rogue Talents and Rage Powers and archetypes tending to be more magical as you climbed, but they still didn't set that expectation as well as they could have.

Personally I would look to PrCs as examples for abilities that high-level martials should be expected to have baseline. Like a rogue gets high enough, they should be able to do things like jump from shadow to shadow, or briefly turn incorporeal like a child of night. A barbarian gets high enough and they can start tattooing certain powers onto themselves or cutting through magic, etc.

No, no, no. The greatest achievement of 3e was having (Ex) abilities, which were 100% non-magical and still broke the laws of physics, as the developers themselves stated when defining them.

Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical, though they may break the laws of physics. They are not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training.

These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field.

These are the real MVPs, despite getting so little attention. These deserved to be expanded upon. Sheer non-magical talent and might which still, in a fantastic fashion fit for a fantastic world, break the laws of physics as we know them. It's a shame so many borderline abilities and talents got shoehorned into (Su) or even the despicable (Sp), which was one step away from being a spell other than not being cast out of a spell slot.

[Ralanr]

Wow, right there we have a way to describe supernatural class features at higher levels. And we don't?

Why?

[Morty]

I don't think that's quite true. Zealot, Beast, and Storm Herald Barbarians are pretty overtly magical, as are baseline monks. Even Totem Barbarians can do things like fly. Fighters have arcane archers and rune knights (and echo knights) while rogues have the ghost subclass. Then too you have the soulknife and the psi warrior, which are sorta magical but sorta not.

Basically its not really true that you have to be a spellcaster to have "magic," its more the case that the way spell lists work with new releases means that the spellcasting options always end up being better in the long run no matter how overtuned the other options are upon release. For example the BM was considered at one point to be the gold standard for a DPR-focused fighter but that became a lot less true with EK's eventually getting BB and shadow blade.

True, but the baseline subclasses for fighters and rogues remain explicitly non-magical, with the attendant consequences. And yes, it does mean there's an increasing lack of coherence in just how "high magic" D&D is supposed to be. And all these abilities indeed can't quite cut it compared to spells.

Also, these subclasses generally slap outright supernatural powers on a character from the get-go. I feel like it'd be better if lower level martial classes did have the option to refrain from using "magic", with high levels introducing the "so good that it becomes supernatural" kind of abilities. Since as it is, either you're magical from the moment you pick your subclass, or stay "mundane" for good.

[strangebloke]

to take the champion as an example, one would hardly call a high level champion a 'normal' person. They can heal from any wound, they've probably acquired the blessing of a god, they're stronger than massive 10-foot tall monsters, they can hit something 9 times in six seconds, etc. etc. They're the 'average joe' of DND but nothing about them is really mundane in any sense.

And I would guess that nobody who likes playing champions would object to them getting tuned upward by a fair margin, particularly in latter tiers. Something like a tenth level ability that allows them to improve their stats to a cap of 24 for example.

[PhoenixPhyre]

to take the champion as an example, one would hardly call a high level champion a 'normal' person. They can heal from any wound, they've probably acquired the blessing of a god, they're stronger than massive 10-foot tall monsters, they can hit something 9 times in six seconds, etc. etc. They're the 'average joe' of DND but nothing about them is really mundane in any sense.

Right. Heck, Action Surge allows any fighter to act more than any normal creature can. To break the rules that apply to everyone else. And that's what, level 2?

Sure, they're less flashy about their extraordinary nature, but it's there.

And a thief that can trick a Holy Avenger into letting them wield it and gain power from it? That's not extraordinary? A thief that is literally undetectable by the average person (expertise in Stealth + Reliable Talent means their minimum check is > 20, so even a nat 20 on a Wisdom (Perception) check can't find them). A thief that can dodge a point blank fireball in a bare room and come out without a singe? That's not extraordinary?

[Ralanr]

Right. Heck, Action Surge allows any fighter to act more than any normal creature can. To break the rules that apply to everyone else. And that's what, level 2?

Sure, they're less flashy about their extraordinary nature, but it's there.

And a thief that can trick a Holy Avenger into letting them wield it and gain power from it? That's not extraordinary? A thief that is literally undetectable by the average person (expertise in Stealth + Reliable Talent means their minimum check is > 20, so even a nat 20 on a Wisdom (Perception) check can't find them). A thief that can dodge a point blank fireball in a bare room and come out without a singe? That's not extraordinary?

A barbarian can literally break the limits of strength and con that only upper tier monsters can, and it's not extraordinary?

It's not impossible to give these classes extraordinary abilities. It's more a problem in how those abilities scale into the later tiers. Action surge on fighters is great, it's so great that it's given to them early (too early IMO because of how easy it makes people dip into them). And they don't get an upgrade until level 17, in which they're given kind of an empty area in tier three.

Honestly you could even make indomitable into legendary resistance and it'd still work out as an extraordinary ability.

[Psyren]

No, no, no. The greatest achievement of 3e was having (Ex) abilities, which were 100% non-magical and still broke the laws of physics, as the developers themselves stated when defining them.



These are the real MVPs, despite getting so little attention. These deserved to be expanded upon. Sheer non-magical talent and might which still, in a fantastic fashion fit for a fantastic world, break the laws of physics as we know them. It's a shame so many borderline abilities and talents got shoehorned into (Su) or even the despicable (Sp), which was one step away from being a spell other than not being cast out of a spell slot.

'm aware of and perfectly okay with the Ex designation - but I think certain abilities should still interact with magic in some way, e.g. teleporting through shadows.

Something like Action Surge would be fine as (Ex).

[Dr.Samurai]

Personally, my preferred solution is to do both. Give martials a few more things (but not on the wuxia scale) and tone down magic tremendously. Mostly by chopping out most of the spells and making them available to anyone who wants to learn them.

I am okay with this elevator pitch so far.

As for "non-magic martials", I'm of the opinion that, in a magical fantastic world, everyone should have access to magic. But not everyone should be casting spells (or spells lightly disguised as not-spells, ie ToB) as their primary interactions. Magic =/= spells. Spells are one way to access magic.

I don't mind if everyone has access to magic. It's more the assumption that "no magic" must equal "low level" or "different game", and so if I want to play a high level warrior, I must submit to having supernatural abilities. I want the option to not be magical.

Bard killed a full blown dragon with a bow and arrow (and some intel lol). But in these conversations, it's always "Well, how is a high level fighter supposed to kill a dragon that's flying 15 miles in the sky and nuking him with high level spells and terrifying him with his Frightful Presence and is lairing in an impenetrable volcano with walls of force and interdimensional pathways?"

And the answer is always "well, the fighter should be able to teleport up to the dragon and if the dragon hides in his lair the fighter should be able to spin so fast that his boots bore through the earth and he can drill his way into the tunnels below, I mean come on he is superhuman at this point".

But why can't we just let warriors be equally deadly in melee combat and in ranged combat? Why are the guys duking it out face to face with monsters more susceptible to being afraid of them than the guys in the back lobbing magic from a distance?

If LotR were D&D, Smaug would have killed everyone and it would have taken Gandalf to put him down. The Witch-King would have never set down on the Pelennor Fields because bad tactics and he would have just kept doing fly-by attacks and casting spells from the air. Eowyn would have to have tanked nazgul attacks and Witch-King magic while only getting a single readied action attack in return.

But a barbarian can be magic, without casting spells--his rage channels primal power so he literally hulks out some. His damage resistance isn't just ignoring pain, it's his skin literally hardening and he's damping blows with his muscles and aura. A fighter's action surge lets him do more than most because he's literally tapping into built-up energy to accelerate his actions. That's also why both of those are limited--that takes built-up energy that takes time and rest to recover. A rogue dodges a fireball (evasion) by literally wrapping the shadows around him, shunting the explosion into somewhere else. Etc. Playing on that, and changing most of the utility spells to things that anyone can access (ie not spells, but more classical incantations and real rituals) would do most of the work.

I think things are more abstract than that though. I don't need to explain the logic of Action Surge because I don't think the fighter is literally moving twice as fast as everyone else. When I narrate my turn, I always try to ground it in realism (as much as can be) because I like that context more than "and now I'm attacking exactly six times instead of exactly three times because I am moving like a blur..."

So I don't think we need to explain away all abilities as some sort of supernatural thing.

[PhoenixPhyre]

A barbarian can literally break the limits of strength and con that only upper tier monsters can, and it's not extraordinary?

It's not impossible to give these classes extraordinary abilities. It's more a problem in how those abilities scale into the later tiers. Action surge on fighters is great, it's so great that it's given to them early (too early IMO because of how easy it makes people dip into them). And they don't get an upgrade until level 17, in which they're given kind of an empty area in tier three.

Honestly you could even make indomitable into legendary resistance and it'd still work out as an extraordinary ability.

Barbarians are literally, explicitly superhuman from level 1. The class description says they are, even. So I left them out of the list.

And yeah, I can see room to give them better scaling. It was the idea that they were some how mundane because they didn't cast spells that I was opposing there.

As I've said before, I'm in favor of having a relatively grounded model for everyone. No Bleach-style (or worse) anime fighters chopping the sun in half, but also no "alter the universe at will" casters, either. Effectively raise the (effective) concept of what level 1 is to Action Hero and lower the effective concept of what level 20 is to Mid-range Super Hero (and not the golden age "throw planets around" nonsense either). If you're taking out demigods for lunch, that's too much. I'd say anything CR 20+ should be a challenge, even for level 20s with gear. Taking on a Kraken shouldn't be "one of three such fights in an average day", it should be something you build up to and have to work for.

I don't mind if everyone has access to magic. It's more the assumption that "no magic" must equal "low level" or "different game", and so if I want to play a high level warrior, I must submit to having supernatural abilities. I want the option to not be magical.

There's magic and then there's spells. In a fantastic world, everyone who matters is fantastic; not everyone who matters casts spells. However you want to describe that, they're doing things that regular people (either in setting or on Earth) cannot. And that's what I'm calling magic. Magic (or fantastic) being "the things that cannot be done on Earth but can be done in the fictional universe." Yes, that makes most of Star Wars and Star Trek fantastic. It's the things that set the fictional universe apart from Earth.

I want to remove the equation of "magic" and "spells". And I agree with you about the overly-gonzo, assumption of meta-high-op-as-norm attitudes that a lot of people have, that take the worst abuses of spells and make that the new baseline against which everything is compared.

[Ralanr]

I am okay with this elevator pitch so far.



But why can't we just let warriors be equally deadly in melee combat and in ranged combat? Why are the guys duking it out face to face with monsters more susceptible to being afraid of them than the guys in the back lobbing magic from a distance?

Because D&D limits ranged and melee combat to different stats (except when it doesn't, like finesse) and throwing weapons don't have the same distance as bows and crossbows (also you have to keep track of them, whereas DMs will be like "I won't have you track nonmagical arrow"). Granted, Javelins have good range, but I keep thinking about how odd it is to carry like, over 10 javelins in combat.

[Dienekes]

A barbarian can literally break the limits of strength and con that only upper tier monsters can, and it's not extraordinary?

It's not impossible to give these classes extraordinary abilities. It's more a problem in how those abilities scale into the later tiers. Action surge on fighters is great, it's so great that it's given to them early (too early IMO because of how easy it makes people dip into them). And they don't get an upgrade until level 17, in which they're given kind of an empty area in tier three.

Honestly you could even make indomitable into legendary resistance and it'd still work out as an extraordinary ability.

In fairness here, I'm pretty sure the feats of strength the rules outline for a character with a Strength of 24 are actually well within the limits of human capability. Like their maximum lift capacity is only 720 lbs. Though I will admit, moving about unencumbered with 360 lbs on you is quite a feat.

It's just one of those weird things with the game, like technically the rules for gorillas are hilariously weak.

[Ralanr]

In fairness here, I'm pretty sure the feats of strength the rules outline for a character with a Strength of 24 are actually well within the limits of human capability. Like their maximum lift capacity is only 720 lbs. Though I will admit, moving about unencumbered with 360 lbs on you is quite a feat.

It's just one of those weird things with the game, like technically the rules for gorillas are hilariously weak.

Yeah, and this also reminds me how Trolls in shadowrun with 14 strength (the unaugmented max in 5e) couldn't even throw cars. Or a dodge scoot.

I really think these games need to change the formula for strength scaling. Especially so higher strength monsters are as strong as we think they are.

[Willie the Duck]

In fairness here, I'm pretty sure the feats of strength the rules outline for a character with a Strength of 24 are actually well within the limits of human capability. Like their maximum lift capacity is only 720 lbs. Though I will admit, moving about unencumbered with 360 lbs on you is quite a feat.

It's just one of those weird things with the game, like technically the rules for gorillas are hilariously weak.

The maximum lift rules are borked, as usual*. Encumbrance is better in that there's some inherent vagaries in there (it not being the most you can carry, so much as the most you can keep on carrying). The instant they start using real numbers, it goes haywire. For my money, I don't think that much matters. I, as a DM, don't have it planned out realistically how heavy the statue is before I place it in front of the passage the players will want to get through, just that it is 'A Lot of Weight' (and since the party barbarian can lift 'A Whole Lot of Weight,' they should be fine). Jumping distance, IMO, is where things get dicey, as I do have an idea about how far platform 1 to platform 2 are (unless I'm specifically picturing them as too far to leap between).
*IIRC, the max press for 18/00 STR bitd was mapped to world records which were surpassed multiple times in the intervening years.

Yeah, and this also reminds me how Trolls in shadowrun with 14 strength (the unaugmented max in 5e) couldn't even throw cars. Or a dodge scoot.

I really think these games need to change the formula for strength scaling. Especially so higher strength monsters are as strong as we think they are.

I think, in the end (and pertinent to this conversation), these games need to come to a solid decision about how cinematic they think they want to be, and also how heroic character-of-power-level-X is supposed to be. Of all of them, I think only Marvel FASERIP ever set out something along the line of 'this is the maximum a regular mortal human should be able to do,' and then tune everything to that benchmark (mostly likely because they had an multiple iconic characters where 'exactly at the mortal maximum' as their whole schtick). Even systems like GURPS and Hero System (which supposedly both had everything mapped out in real world terms) had dissonance because designers kept ignoring or changing guidelines or the like.

[Ralanr]

I think, in the end (and pertinent to this conversation), these games need to come to a solid decision about how cinematic they think they want to be, and also how heroic character-of-power-level-X is supposed to be. Of all of them, I think only Marvel FASERIP ever set out something along the line of 'this is the maximum a regular mortal human should be able to do,' and then tune everything to that benchmark (mostly likely because they had an multiple iconic characters where 'exactly at the mortal maximum' as their whole schtick). Even systems like GURPS and Hero System (which supposedly both had everything mapped out in real world terms) had dissonance because designers kept ignoring or changing guidelines or the like.

Yes, but designers seem to think that they can keep magic options separate from this. Which annoys me because then magic breaks what conventions you can do, so people without it are left behind.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yes, but designers seem to think that they can keep magic options separate from this. Which annoys me because then magic breaks what conventions you can do, so people without it are left behind.

Right. The designers need to set those limits for everyone. spells represent one way of reaching those limits, not a way to break the setting limits on "what can be done by mortals".

[Wildstag]

It's just one of those weird things with the game, like technically the rules for gorillas are hilariously weak.

I don't think any game designer knows how gorillas work. Pathfinder still seems to think gorillas get to be 8 feet tall and weigh 400 pounds (large creature). And somehow only with 15 strength. Like, a riding dog is somehow tougher (higher con, same dex/str).

Their average height is only around 6' tall, even when standing upright.

[strangebloke]

I am okay with this elevator pitch so far.

I don't mind if everyone has access to magic. It's more the assumption that "no magic" must equal "low level" or "different game", and so if I want to play a high level warrior, I must submit to having supernatural abilities. I want the option to not be magical.

Bard killed a full blown dragon with a bow and arrow (and some intel lol). But in these conversations, it's always "Well, how is a high level fighter supposed to kill a dragon that's flying 15 miles in the sky and nuking him with high level spells and terrifying him with his Frightful Presence and is lairing in an impenetrable volcano with walls of force and interdimensional pathways?"

And the answer is always "well, the fighter should be able to teleport up to the dragon and if the dragon hides in his lair the fighter should be able to spin so fast that his boots bore through the earth and he can drill his way into the tunnels below, I mean come on he is superhuman at this point".

But why can't we just let warriors be equally deadly in melee combat and in ranged combat? Why are the guys duking it out face to face with monsters more susceptible to being afraid of them than the guys in the back lobbing magic from a distance?

If LotR were D&D, Smaug would have killed everyone and it would have taken Gandalf to put him down. The Witch-King would have never set down on the Pelennor Fields because bad tactics and he would have just kept doing fly-by attacks and casting spells from the air. Eowyn would have to have tanked nazgul attacks and Witch-King magic while only getting a single readied action attack in return.

I think things are more abstract than that though. I don't need to explain the logic of Action Surge because I don't think the fighter is literally moving twice as fast as everyone else. When I narrate my turn, I always try to ground it in realism (as much as can be) because I like that context more than "and now I'm attacking exactly six times instead of exactly three times because I am moving like a blur..."

So I don't think we need to explain away all abilities as some sort of supernatural thing.

I feel like there are two things going on here that you're attacking seperately.

The first is that the implementation of martials as a concept is at times weak for no particular reason. Wisdom saves are the best example. Logically you'd assume that the 'ard as nails d12+5 barbarian is more brave than the d6+1 wizard but that isn't the case mechanically. Its far and away the opposite, even while the d6+1 wizard will usually more cowardly in their tactics in a practical sense because they have to be to survive. You could probably also bring up how hard it is for a martial to be truly effective at both melee and ranged combat given the reliance on feats, magic items, and dexterity OR strength but not both.

But then your second half is basically arguing that high level DND shouldn't be high level, that the game would be improved if things were closer to LOTR. And that's where I disagree. LotR is a fantasy series I like a lot, but if you want an example of martials and casters on equal footing its a terrible place to look. Consider for a moment the balrog, which literally could only be effected by gandalf's magic, or the witch-king, who could only be hurt by eowyn because of the presence of a dagger of westernesse, or Shelob, a giant monster from primordial times whose webs could only be cut because Sting had been particularly designed for that and who was only repelled by the magic item Sam had.

Are these "good" adventures for players to engage in? Hell no. It's been pointed out that LOTR if viewed as a DND campaign is a basic railroaded plotline. That's not a criticism of it as a story, but its a worthwhile point to bring up when people are viewing it as something DND should try to emulate.

[Willie the Duck]

I don't think any game designer knows how gorillas work. Pathfinder still seems to think gorillas get to be 8 feet tall and weigh 400 pounds (large creature). And somehow only with 15 strength. Like, a riding dog is somehow tougher (higher con, same dex/str).

Their average height is only around 6' tall, even when standing upright.

I don't know. I think this is right along with the old 3e issue of dogs having a higher dex than cats (IIRC) -- it isn't that the designers don't know something, it seems more that the stats are mostly an afterthought (especially for Strength for a creature unlikely to be a steed or pack animal). They have a CR they want to put the thing at, and will give it stats to match that point. Even though the 5e designers reserved the right to disassociate melee attack and damage values from monster Str, they do it so rarely that I assume a gorilla's Str score was back-converted from where they wanted to to-hits and damage to be.

[Psyren]

Wasn't the Black Arrow Bard used magical?

In PF, Barbarians and Fighters are similarly will-impaired, but they both get boosts vs. fear (Rage and Bravery respectively) because let's be honest, the big frontliner who wades into melee with untold horrors being easier to frighten than the casters hiding in the back behind them just doesn't make sense. 5e dumped both of those and I consider it worse off for having done so.

[strangebloke]

Wasn't the Black Arrow Bard used magical?

In PF, Barbarians and Fighters are similarly will-impaired, but they both get boosts vs. fear (Rage and Bravery respectively) because let's be honest, the big frontliner who wades into melee with untold horrors being easier to frighten than the casters hiding in the back behind them just doesn't make sense. 5e dumped both of those and I consider it worse off for having done so.

tbf a lot of subclasses give some kind of bonus to those saves and most fighters will end up getting resilient and/or lucky by mid-to-high levels. Also Indomitable is a feature, if a weak one for the intended purpose. It's just weird that its an "eventual" feature rather than an early one.

EDIT: yes, the arrow was magical, and was wielded by a DMpc. Suffice to say, not something to be emulated.

[Ralanr]

I don't think any game designer knows how gorillas work. Pathfinder still seems to think gorillas get to be 8 feet tall and weigh 400 pounds (large creature). And somehow only with 15 strength. Like, a riding dog is somehow tougher (higher con, same dex/str).

Their average height is only around 6' tall, even when standing upright.

"A single gorilla can rip your arm out of your socket in a split second."

15 strength.

I know that RPGs are rarely meant to be life sims, but man do I find this hilarious. Designers really need a better math multiplier for strength, even if that does make 10 strength much stronger than it should be irl. I'd buy that a peasant in a fantasy world is stronger than me. They're up in the morning moving hay and other harsh labors. Meanwhile, I'm sitting in a chair most of the day.

[Dr.Samurai]

I feel like there are two things going on here that you're attacking seperately.

The first is that the implementation of martials as a concept is at times weak for no particular reason. Wisdom saves are the best example. Logically you'd assume that the 'ard as nails d12+5 barbarian is more brave than the d6+1 wizard but that isn't the case mechanically. Its far and away the opposite, even while the d6+1 wizard will usually more cowardly in their tactics in a practical sense because they have to be to survive. You could probably also bring up how hard it is for a martial to be truly effective at both melee and ranged combat given the reliance on feats, magic items, and dexterity OR strength but not both.

Yes, this is accurate, and I agree I am touching on two different issues as well.

But then your second half is basically arguing that high level DND shouldn't be high level

Not quite. I'm arguing that "high level" doesn't have to mean "everything leaves the Earth and all combats take place in the air and every character needs to be able to teleport and plane shift and change the landscape with a gesture to be relevant".

At least, I don't think that should be the default standard.

that the game would be improved if things were closer to LOTR. And that's where I disagree.

Well, I used LotR as an example of warriors fighting flying things and supernatural things; I don't mean to say that D&D should be like LotR. Similarly, Bellerephon is able to engage the Chimera because he captured and tamed a flying mount.

LotR is a fantasy series I like a lot, but if you want an example of martials and casters on equal footing its a terrible place to look. Consider for a moment the balrog, which literally could only be effected by gandalf's magic, or the witch-king, who could only be hurt by eowyn because of the presence of a dagger of westernesse, or Shelob, a giant monster from primordial times whose webs could only be cut because Sting had been particularly designed for that and who was only repelled by the magic item Sam had.

I think I like this because it emphasizes deeds, over raw supernatural power. Yes, Sam had a light that offended Shelob, and he had Sting. But Sam still had to have the courage to stand between Frodo and a massive spider demon queen. That's what is so compelling about warriors or "mundanes". If Sam just punched Shelob in the face and cracked her exoskeleton because "he's superhuman now", and then kicked the side of the mountain so the cave entrance caved in on her and she was crushed, it would have a completely different tone. The accomplishment would be different.

I'm not saying it has to be "exactly" like LotR. I don't like the idea that "only this thing can harm them", and that's not what I'm focusing on. I'm focusing on the idea of normals fighting supernatural monsters without having to be superheroes. I'm using the visuals as examples. Assume the witch-king could be hurt by anyone with any weapon; he is still a mage on a flying mount vs a warrior.

Compare to casters that are not slugging it out with monsters but rather throwing down battlefield control or nuking them with evocation. It's a different feel, often monsters are on the defensive against casters vs the other way around. And I think you start going more in that direction when you make mundanes supernatural. Super-Sam having the strength to cave the mountain in around Shelob is much more like a caster trapping her in a Forcecage and killing her with an AoE than it is to normal Sam fighting her armed with Sting, if that makes sense.

[Man_Over_Game]

The maximum lift rules are borked, as usual*. Encumbrance is better in that there's some inherent vagaries in there (it not being the most you can carry, so much as the most you can keep on carrying). The instant they start using real numbers, it goes haywire. For my money, I don't think that much matters. I, as a DM, don't have it planned out realistically how heavy the statue is before I place it in front of the passage the players will want to get through, just that it is 'A Lot of Weight' (and since the party barbarian can lift 'A Whole Lot of Weight,' they should be fine). Jumping distance, IMO, is where things get dicey, as I do have an idea about how far platform 1 to platform 2 are (unless I'm specifically picturing them as too far to leap between).

Would be nice if items/objects just had a single Weight number.

If you want to carry stuff unburdened, the combined Weight number of things you're carrying can't be more than your Strength attribute.
If you want to throw something with ease, it can't have more Weight than your Athletics Bonus. Maybe add rules that you can double your throwing capacity by expending movement, BA, Reaction, etc., maybe allowing it to double multiple times by spending multiple resources.
1 Weight roughly translates to about 10 lbs.

With something like that, an 18 Strength Fighter would be able to throw a badguy weighing about 200 lbs. by spending both his Reaction and all of his movement for the throw. Adding in his Bonus Action would increase his throwing capacity to 400 lbs., and maybe a Barbarian could double all of those values with Rage (with Bear Totem doubling it further).

Sounds pretty reasonable and fun. The tricky part would be whether the DM would recognize the difference between a 200 lb. object or a 400 lb. one. Weights are weird and guessing how heavy an object actually is isn't a skill most of us have experience with (which is probably why WOTC shifted most of these kinds of effects to revolve around size, thinking about it).

[Aimeryan]

It doesn't. And it especially doesn't let you play anything higher than Captain America, who is still pretty low on the "powers" scale, since all he has is...somewhat super strength (so STR 20, which is also above human peak by definition), durability (any Fighter gets that by default, because HP scaling), and...undefined martial skill, which is represented by proficiency.

Frankly, Captain America is represented by a Champion Fighter just fine, except a bit higher level than Bronn (who might actually be a Battle Master, too). People who like to play Bronn already have their thing — it's called Fighter levels 3 to 7. People who like to play Captain America can do that at levels 7+, too. And we basically stop there. We never graduate from being a non-descript barely-superhuman into anything else.

The issue with Fighter is that so much of its' budget is locked into its' chassis, which eventually gets a whole four attacks per turn (which the designers consider a very strong feature, despite the fact that you almost never see it in play, like any other level 20 capstone). Like, most of Fighter's power goes into eventually getting more free attacks than anyone else, better numbers (through ASIs) and Action Surge. Everything else is an afterthought.

And all the subclasses are like this! They aren't character-defining most of the time, you're always playing a Fighter first and a subclass second. You cannot give Fighter a Warblade subclass, because to be Warblade, you need more budget than a Fighter subclass. The same extends to all the classes, generally — probably the only subclasses that try and shake up the general dynamic of the base class are caster subclasses that push them into gish territory, like Hexblade, War Cleric, Stone Sorc. And even then their spell choices generally impact things more than their subclass.

Your example upthread of a 3.5 Samurai is flawed, because that's the worst possible example. 3.5 also has the generally much better received classes: ToB classes, Binder, limited casters like Beguiler and Warmage, a lot of ACFs for classic classes that somehow manage to be more impactful than some 5e archetypes (Penetrating Strike does more for Rogue in the 3.5 paradigm than Assassin ever does in the 5e paradigm, for example), etc. PF1e managed to make archetypes that 1) can be combined 2) can turn the base class upside down, with something like Gun Tank or Vivisector. 5e doesn't do that, it goes for the safest, least exciting route of all, every time.

Cannot express how strongly I agree with all of this post. The only thing I want to add here, and really it was already pretty much laid out, the martial classes are essentially just getting stat boosts as they level. The level 1 Barbarian is about as interesting to play as the level 20 Barbarian - except you have been doing the same thing for 20 levels at this point instead of 1 level. I like cake, but after my 4th cake in a row I want something else.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Personally, my preferred solution is to do both. Give martials a few more things (but not on the wuxia scale) and tone down magic tremendously. Mostly by chopping out most of the spells and making them available to anyone who wants to learn them.

As for "non-magic martials", I'm of the opinion that, in a magical fantastic world, everyone should have access to magic. But not everyone should be casting spells (or spells lightly disguised as not-spells, ie ToB) as their primary interactions. Magic =/= spells. Spells are one way to access magic. But a barbarian can be magic, without casting spells--his rage channels primal power so he literally hulks out some. His damage resistance isn't just ignoring pain, it's his skin literally hardening and he's damping blows with his muscles and aura. A fighter's action surge lets him do more than most because he's literally tapping into built-up energy to accelerate his actions. That's also why both of those are limited--that takes built-up energy that takes time and rest to recover. A rogue dodges a fireball (evasion) by literally wrapping the shadows around him, shunting the explosion into somewhere else. Etc. Playing on that, and changing most of the utility spells to things that anyone can access (ie not spells, but more classical incantations and real rituals) would do most of the work.

I'd say that ToB is a good example of abilities that are not spells but still Extraordinary/Supernatural. Surely they are structured in 9 levels like spells and restricted by level, but that's where similarities end - they are not tied to a resource system, they have a "refresh" mechanic instead, they are learned differently (have prerequisites), etc. If you mean "spells" just as "a selectable action with pre-determined effect" then I'd say that's a bit too broad, and would say that that's a perfectly fine way to package martial abilities, probably cause that's one of the few ways you can actually add diverse abilities that open up character options.

A video game example is FFXIV. Everyone there, martial or not, manipulates aether. That's how you do cool things in that setting. The samurai job, for instance, concentrates aether in their sheath for their big ice attack. Ninjas use mudras to do magic. Etc. And the main character, the Warrior of Light, is blessed with an overflowing abundance of aether (for spoliery reasons). Which lets him[1] fight and defeat the closest things that there are to manifested gods. Solo (canonically, although in game you have between 3 and 7 companions, a fact that is sometimes lampshaded).

FFXIV is pretty tied to its own lore though, and aether manipulation is pretty important in pretty much every aspect of the game. Plus there are Garleans that are unable to manipulate aether, so they use magitek toys instead. Also I would say that Machinist is also not about manipulating the aether, it's basically a job that uses cool gadgets. Oh, and Gunbreaker according to one spoilery character seems to rely on tools and "magic" cartridges instead.

So, you don't necessarily need everyone to have access to magic for them to use Cool Stuff, you just need to design the abilities properly, and maybe give some toys to play with.

[SharkForce]

Wasn't the Black Arrow Bard used magical?

it's a bit hard to say, as LotR doesn't quite do magic the same way... but it was certainly supernatural in some way. it was also being wielded by a local legend who was a descendant of a long line of heroic figures (who had special training from his family to use that specific arrow, as far as we can tell), who also as a bare minimum possessed a magical ability to speak with birds, which were also the subject of legend.

frankly, "magical" abilities are pretty common for stories about real life warriors too.

or perhaps you haven't heard that davy crockett could ride lightning bolts?

[Ralanr]

it's a bit hard to say, as LotR doesn't quite do magic the same way... but it was certainly supernatural in some way. it was also being wielded by a local legend who was a descendant of a long line of heroic figures (who had special training from his family to use that specific arrow, as far as we can tell), who also as a bare minimum possessed a magical ability to speak with birds, which were also the subject of legend.

frankly, "magical" abilities are pretty common for stories about real life warriors too.

or perhaps you haven't heard that davy crockett could ride lightning bolts?

John Henry, Paul Bunyan, Cuhullan. Lots of famous warriors/folk heroes with supernatural abilities.

And yet people think things need to be 'realistic' in D&D.

[Dr.Samurai]

I see my analogies are not working as intended.

Yes, a bird told Bard where to aim. No, the black arrow wasn't magical in any overt way.

The bird could easily be replaced by a wizard that divined the information, or a rogue that tricked it out of the dragon's lackey.

The (not)magic arrow could be replaced by a magic bow or just regular hits/hp damage.

The point is that bard was (mostly) a regular guy shooting arrows at a dragon. You'll note that people don't suggest "speaking with animals" as an upgrade for high level martials, so I'm not sure it's all that relevant.

[Man_Over_Game]

Personally, my preferred solution is to do both. Give martials a few more things (but not on the wuxia scale) and tone down magic tremendously. Mostly by chopping out most of the spells and making them available to anyone who wants to learn them.

As for "non-magic martials", I'm of the opinion that, in a magical fantastic world, everyone should have access to magic. But not everyone should be casting spells (or spells lightly disguised as not-spells, ie ToB) as their primary interactions. Magic =/= spells. Spells are one way to access magic. But a barbarian can be magic, without casting spells--his rage channels primal power so he literally hulks out some. His damage resistance isn't just ignoring pain, it's his skin literally hardening and he's damping blows with his muscles and aura. A fighter's action surge lets him do more than most because he's literally tapping into built-up energy to accelerate his actions. That's also why both of those are limited--that takes built-up energy that takes time and rest to recover. A rogue dodges a fireball (evasion) by literally wrapping the shadows around him, shunting the explosion into somewhere else. Etc. Playing on that, and changing most of the utility spells to things that anyone can access (ie not spells, but more classical incantations and real rituals) would do most of the work.

A video game example is FFXIV. Everyone there, martial or not, manipulates aether. That's how you do cool things in that setting. The samurai job, for instance, concentrates aether in their sheath for their big ice attack. Ninjas use mudras to do magic. Etc. And the main character, the Warrior of Light, is blessed with an overflowing abundance of aether (for spoliery reasons). Which lets him[1] fight and defeat the closest things that there are to manifested gods. Solo (canonically, although in game you have between 3 and 7 companions, a fact that is sometimes lampshaded).

If I remember correctly, WOTC was planning on having Spell Slots be a universal resource that almost anyone would use for their Long Rest features, but the players at the time hated the idea. That's essentially why Rangers use slots and Battlemasters don't, even though they play very similarly.

Personally, I love the idea of people learning to utilize magic in their natural movements. It'd be pretty cool if a high Stealth roll literally made you invisible or something. As-is, we're kinda stuck with the "Guy At the Gym" mentality for skills, which is all that some classes get.