D&D 5E My tweak to make (Champion) Fighters decent

S'mon said:

Here's what I have now - thanks to everyone who made useful and constructive input.

So here's what I have now:

Second Wind
You have a limited well of stamina that you can draw on to protect yourself from harm. On Your Turn, you can use a Bonus Action to regain hit points equal to 1d10 + your fighter level.
Once you use this feature 3 times you must finish a Long Rest before you can use it again.

Action Surge
Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On Your Turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible Bonus Action.
Once you use this feature 3 times you must finish a Long Rest before you can use it again.
At 17th level you may use this feature an additional 3 times before finishing a Long Rest.

Ability Score Improvement
When you reach 4th level, and again at 6th, 8th, 12th, 14th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two Ability Scores of your choice by 1. As normal, you can’t increase an ability score above 20 using this feature.
Action Hero: The Level 8, 12, and 14 Ability Score improvements may each be replaced by one additional use of Action Surge per Long Rest.
Unlimited Might: The level 16 & 19 Ability Score improvements may raise an Attribute above 20, but not above 24.

__________________

I think that puts the Champion Fighter on par with the Barbarian. They remain less durable but have very strong striking power for a limited duration.

Click to expand...

I like it!

Flamestrike said:

Then ask yourself why you are not using the gritty realism rest variant?

Click to expand...

Personally, I like PCs to be able to use their class abilities, and wizards taking a week to get their spell slots back doesn't feel very D&D to me. I think in a typical Gygaxian setup where PCs can rest up in town between dungeon expeditions, long rest periods will mean the PCs spend longer in town (not a bad thing) but it doesn't mean they will go back to the dungeon at less than full resources. So I prefer to balance around 1-3 fights between long rests since that is the dynamic I see emerge naturally from play in every edition of D&D.

S'mon said:

Personally, I like PCs to be able to use their class abilities,

Click to expand...

So do I.

6 encounters per [long rest] is ample time for class abilities to be used. Even assuming a 7th level party thats:

Wizard: 2 spells per encounter [4 x 1sts, 3 x 2nds, 3 x 3rds, 1 x 4th plus arcane recovery of 3 levels worth of spells]
Barbarian: 4 x rages. Enough to rage for 2/3 encounters.
Paladin: 4 x 1st level spell/smites, 3 x 2nd level spell/smites. 17d8 worth of smite damage to dole out over those 6 encounters, with 1 x smite per encounter.

If a paladin is smiting on every attack that lands, a Barbarian is raging on round 1 of every combat, and the Wizard is casting spells starting with his highest level spell and working down, that's boring as bat poo.

There is no decision point for the player (do I use this smite/ rage/ spell now, or do I save it for later?) and those abilities dont stand out. With longer 'adventuring days' those abilities have much more narrative and dtramatic impact when used at the table.

If it takes a Wizard 1 month to recover a 9th level slot, then when the player chooses to cast a 9th level spell, it's a big deal (both for the player and the narrative). If the party have to deal with 10 encounters before long resting, then the barbarian choosing when to rage (and when not to) is equally vital, and when those abilities get used they stand out more as special.

Wizards taking a week to get their spell slots back doesn't feel very D&D to me.

Click to expand...

Thats an entirely different issue.

Personally I use a system where a Long rest is still 8 hours, but you only get back 1 slot of each of levels 1-5, plus 1 slot of 6th level or higher (or a single arcanum). This makes full casters (and paladins) much more conservative with spellcasting/ smiting.

I think in a typical Gygaxian setup where PCs can rest up in town between dungeon expeditions, long rest periods will mean the PCs spend longer in town (not a bad thing) but it doesn't mean they will go back to the dungeon at less than full resources.

Click to expand...

The thing is though that a full week to recover long rest resources means you (as DM) have a lot more wriggle room with time pressures on your quests.

You should be imposing a time limit or time pressure on all your quests. If an NPC has to be stopped from completing a ritual or a NPC has to be rescued, a macguffin has to be destroyed/ recovered/ located/ or an NPC's lair has to be assaulted or whatever.... it has to be done be [time X].

If you're not imposing time limits on quests or PC objectives you're failing as a DM. There is no pressure on the players to do their task and it becomes a boring 'take as much time as we want and there are no consequences'.

When its a week long break to get back long rest resources it does two things:

1) The players conserve those resources in the knowledge that it'll be a week before the get them back
2) It gives you a lot more creative freedom in imposing time constraints. Instead of 'destroy the macguffin by midnight' it becomes 'destroy the macguffin within 4 weeks'. Now the players know that they have enough time for a long rest or two to complete the quest (destroying the macguffin) within that time you only need a dozen or so encounters (over the course of an entire month) to hit the balance mark.

So I prefer to balance around 1-3 fights between long rests since that is the dynamic I see emerge naturally from play in every edition of D&D.

Click to expand...

I would find 1-3 fights then falling back to long rest extremely weird in every edition of DnD (whcih have revolved around dungeons with a half dozen or more encounters per dungeon level).

I mean; thats essentially entering a dungeon, killing the monsters in the first room or two, then falling back overnight to rest.

That is super weird pacing and poor management of the adventuring day by the DM. Its no wonder why your table probably feaures [full casters/ barbarians/ paladins] being super strong and [fighters/ monks/ warlocks] being super weak.

The decsions you make with lowering the number of ecnoutners per long rest down to 1-3 (when the game is balanced around 6-8) thats causing this disparity in the power of those classes.

Flamestrike said:

If you're not imposing time limits on quests or PC objectives you're failing as a DM.

Click to expand...

No, if you can't understand that there are different sorts of D&D campaigns, such as the Gygaxian megadungeon campaign I mentioned, then you're failing as a forum poster. You should take a long hard look at yourself.

Flamestrike said:

I would find 1-3 fights then falling back to long rest extremely weird in every edition of DnD (whcih have revolved around dungeons with a half dozen or more encounters per dungeon level).

I mean; thats essentially entering a dungeon, killing the monsters in the first room or two, then falling back overnight to rest.

That is super weird pacing and poor management of the adventuring day by the DM.

Click to expand...

I find your GMing weird and dysfunctional. I certainly wouldn't want to play in your game.

IME PCs seek to retire whenever they are significantly below full resources. That's true in every edition. Typically that's 1-3 encounters unless the battles are trivially easy.
Of course sometimes that is not possible, but then the chances of PC fatalities & TPK increases greatly, and everyone knows this. It's very poor GMing to impose the same artificial "you must complete 6-8 fights before
resting" paradigm in every session, every adventure, and every campaign.

Edit: Fighter does seem weak (hence this thread). Warlock is marginal. Monk seems fine, albeit my
Monk player is quite a powergamer. His Shadow Monk sneaks everywhere (& so do rest of party thanks to his ability to Pass Without Trace them), passive-spots everything, then stuns everything with his Ki points.

S'mon said:

I find your GMing weird and dysfunctional. I certainly wouldn't want to play in your game.

Click to expand...

I run my games (mechanically) according to the recommendations in the DMG (average adventuring day features 6-8 encounters, and around 2-3 short rests).

I also impose time limits on my quests. Examples include:

1) Stop the BBEG from completing the ritual by midnight or else CR (lots) demon is released into the world.
2) Rescue NPC from lizardfolk before she geats eaten in the victory ceremony.
3) Escape from the dungeon before the boat leaves in 3 days time, marooning you on the island
4) Save the children captured by the Kobolds before they get sacrificed
5) Recover the artifact for NPC before rival adventurers recover it
6) The evil archmage returns to the dungeon in 4 hours. Recover the three items before then or else you become his prisoners!
7) The town is beset by a plague. Locate a cure within 3 days and you get paid a bonus; dozens of townsfolk die daily.

etc etc

In my games, I police the adventuring day a part of quest and encounter design. Its part of the job of being a DM - to frame the quest/ adventure/ mission within a narrative the players can explore. My players know the objective, they know how much time they have to complete it, and they know the consequences for failure.

Within that framework they attempt to complete the quest (rescue the NPC, stop the ritual, escape the dungeon, find a cure. save the children etc) within the allotted time, conserving resources to achieve the end goal. Going Nova on encounter 1 will make encounters 2-7 much harder.

Encounters in 5E are not the ends in and of themselves. They are a smaller chunk of a larger puzzle (the adventuring day/quest).

IME PCs seek to retire whenever they are significantly below full resources. That's true in every edition.

Click to expand...

Of course they do. But its your job as DM to ensure that they most often cant.

You should be structuring your quests (these are simple dungeon hacks, but the same applies to every quest) along the lines of :

'The PCs need to locate and destroy the BBEG by midnight to stop his evil ritual, and he's in a typical dungeon, populated by 6-8 [medium-hard] encounters, and its currently 9pm (giving them enough time for 2 short rests, and an hour of adventuring)'.

'The PCs need to locate a macguffin for their NPC patron so he can present it to the King on his coronation, 3 days hence (3 level dungeon with around 6 encounters per level)'

If the PCs nova encounter 1, good on them. They now have no resources left to complete the quest. They fall back to rest, they fail (and incur narrative consequences). On a standard/ default 6-8 encoutner adventuring day they are required to marshal rand manage resources over the entire quest/ adventuring day, instead of a the boredom of managing resources over a single encounter.

It's very poor GMing to impose the same artificial "you must complete 6-8 fights before resting" paradigm in every session, every adventure, and every campaign.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree, and no-one is suggesting you force every adventuring day into having 6-8 encounters and 2-3 short rests.

You should be aiming for round 50 percent strike rate (enough so the players self regulate resource usage). At that frequency the players will naturally self regulate and adjust to the expectation that they are more likely than not going to get several more encounters before being allowed to long rest. They will hold back on Nova strikes, as they never know when another encounter is around the corner. Also; at that frequency nova 'builds' wont occur at the table. Characters will be built for marathons (built to be effective for 6 encounter/ 2 short rest days), not built for 1-2 round bursts of damage (the assassin 3/ fighter 2/ paladin 2/ sorcerer Nova builds).

Most days* will feature around half a dozen encounters, and opportunity for 2 or so short rests.

Some days* will be one or two encounter days (where long rest dependent classes like Wizards, Paladins and Barbs will shine).

Some days* will feature several encounters in waves, with little chance to rest at all, favoring rogues and champion fighters.

Some days* will feature a half dozen or so encounters, and plenty of short rests (one after every encounter that day) giving Monks, Warlocks and Fighters the chance to shine.

*'Day' in this context meaning [the time between long rest resource recharge]. It can be any period of time you as DM desire.

Also; I note youre conflating 'session' with 'long rest'. They are not the same thing. Get used to players long resting only every second or third session. Your game will be better for it.

Flamestrike said:

In my games, I police the adventuring day a part of quest and encounter design. Its part of the job of being a DM - to frame the quest/ adventure/ mission within a narrative the players can explore.

Click to expand...

I'm more about creating a world simulation for the players to explore. I try to minimise the artificial structures you appear to revel in.

S'mon said:

I'm more about creating a world simulation for the players to explore. I try to minimise the artificial structures you appear to revel in.

Click to expand...

+1 to this, I certainly want my players to feel more like they are living in my world than they are playing a game. I can see ambushing them every now and then, if they choose to bed down for the night in a place known for being unsafe, but I wouldn't dream of doing it even once because they tried to rest before hitting 2-3 encounters. Any issues my players encounter in my world will be their own fault, and smart play can easily avoid an issue like getting ambushed. True, there may be times that they want to ration their resources, but I will leave that up to them. My job is just to set the scene, and narrate what happens, not police their gameplay, IMO.

There will be other times when they are on a time crunch, but not by any means will every single quest be set up like that. Sure, most probably will want to be completed before a year has passed, but I can't see attaching a world-ending countdown timer to a quest for some magical fruit to make wine. Sounds just like refusing to tip the pizza guy for being 5 minutes late.

S'mon said:

I'm more about creating a world simulation for the players to explore. I try to minimise the artificial structures you appear to revel in.

Click to expand...

What 'artificial structure'?

Here is my most recent adventure for my PCs:

The town the PCs are in is attacked by Orc horde and Tanarruks (Fiend-Orcs). The PCs defeat the Orcs and find out from an Orc prisoner that they are led by a being known as 'the Pale Master'. This being is planning a ritual in 2 days time at midnight on the winter solstice... to open a rift to the abyss and gate in an army of demons. The PCs also learn that NPCs friendly to the PCs have been captured during the attack on the town, and the Orcs plan on sacrificing them to complete this ritual.

The PCs learn the Orcs are encamped at a ruined keep previously explored by the PCs about 2 days ride from the town.

Encounter 1 is the town siege (a deadly+ combat encounter, staged in three waves with no chance to rest). This is followed by 2 days travel (and a possible random encounter), followed by the assault on the lair (a ruined keep and its dungeon level).

The lair contains 7 [medium-hard] combat encounters (orcs, eyes of gruumsh, orogs, Orc champions, Orc warlords, Taanaruuks, vrock demons, and the 'Pale master' - an albino Glabreezu with enhanced spellcasting!). There is a chance to short rest between defeating the orcs in the exterior encampment and the keep itself, and before descending into the ruins.

If the PCs fail the quest, the NPC allies of the PCs are killed, and a demonic horde is summoned laying waste to the surrounding area. The town is attacked again; and this time in addition to the Orcs there are Vrock and Hezrou demons and a towering CR 17 Gloristro!

What about that is 'artificial'?

Thats an adventure that will keep the PCs entertained for several sessions. It sets them up with a thrilling race against time to save several NPCs from a demon horde/ orc alliance, with consequence for failure added in.

That (to me) is much better adventure design then NOT turning your mind to a temporal constraint and simply having the PCs [nova one encounter] fall back to rest for a day [nova another encounter] rinse and repeat.

Flamestrike said:

What 'artificial structure'?

Here is my most recent adventure for my PCs:

The town the PCs are in is attacked by Orc horde and Tanarruks (Fiend-Orcs). The PCs defeat the Orcs and find out from an Orc prisoner that they are led by a being known as 'the Pale Master'. This being is planning a ritual in 2 days time at midnight on the winter solstice... to open a rift to the abyss and gate in an army of demons. The PCs also learn that NPCs friendly to the PCs have been captured during the attack on the town, and the Orcs plan on sacrificing them to complete this ritual.

The PCs learn the Orcs are encamped at a ruined keep previously explored by the PCs about 2 days ride from the town.

Encounter 1 is the town siege (a deadly+ combat encounter, staged in three waves with no chance to rest). This is followed by 2 days travel (and a possible random encounter), followed by the assault on the lair (a ruined keep and its dungeon level).

The lair contains 7 [medium-hard] combat encounters (orcs, eyes of gruumsh, orogs, Orc champions, Orc warlords, Taanaruuks, vrock demons, and the 'Pale master' - an albino Glabreezu with enhanced spellcasting!). There is a chance to short rest between defeating the orcs in the exterior encampment and the keep itself, and before descending into the ruins.

If the PCs fail the quest, the NPC allies of the PCs are killed, and a demonic horde is summoned laying waste to the surrounding area. The town is attacked again; and this time in addition to the Orcs there are Vrock and Hezrou demons and a towering CR 17 Gloristro!

What about that is 'artificial'?

Thats an adventure that will keep the PCs entertained for several sessions. It sets them up with a thrilling race against time to save several NPCs from a demon horde/ orc alliance, with consequence for failure added in.

That (to me) is much better adventure design then NOT turning your mind to a temporal constraint and simply having the PCs [nova one encounter] fall back to rest for a day [nova another encounter] rinse and repeat.

Click to expand...

I like your adventure! Good job!