D&D 5E What does it mean to you for a character/class to be "good in melee"?
MiraMels
Explorer
Defenses have been mentioned before in this thread, but defenses go beyond 'high AC/high HP'. Most melee classes have something that helps with saving throws as well, and that's very important for front line resilience. Paladins have their Aura, Fighters have Indomitable, Barbarians have advantage on some saves, Berserkers are immune to some conditions, Rogues have evasion, etc. Condition immunity and/or enhanced saving throws is something that I consider necessary for a character to be "good in melee".
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
Tony Vargas
Legend
Able to engage in melee, contribute non-trivial DPR, and not face near-certain death that same round, at a minimum.
I think that's a low enough bar.
You prettymuch have to be a dedicated archer in a game without feats, or a 10 CON wizard (not bladesinger) with no spells that don't require an attack roll, to completely fail at melee in 5e. Between spells being casually usable in melee, ranged weapons being so with a feat, decent AC being available to all, and whack-a-mole healing, no one should be scared of being adjacent to an enemy now and then. Not the way any sane low-level wizard would've been back in the day.
Sorry, non-proficient WIS saves, WIS as a dump stat, every little thing that inflicts Frightened will scare the stereotypical melee fighter. Been a problem since 3.0, really. Only good WILL saves and high WIS (clerics, for instance) get to be brave, mechanically. Everyone else has to settle for bravado.
Last edited:
Sacrosanct
Legend
Add me to the list of saying it's a mix of offense and defense. Not necessarily DPR or damage reduction, but can be manifested in a lot of ways: avoiding attacks in the first place, damage sponge, DPR, controlling the enemy, etc. Only need one from each category. For example, a PC that is really good at avoiding damage and can lock down an opponent via maneuvers (tripping, disarming, etc) can be good at melee even if they don't have a ton of HP or do a lot of damage.
Everyone is saying damage and durability make one good at melee, but honestly I think those are some of the least important factors that make a class good at melee combat.
In my mind a class is good st melee if it has these capabilities:
1) Mobility. All too often does the melee warrior spend a turn wasted having to move up to his target while the ranged attacks can fight on at full effectiveness. Mobility is also highly important for a skirmishing melee warrior who wants to break through enemy lines and attack specific targets such as spellcasters.
2) Battlefield Control. Being able to lock down a small portion of the battlefield makes a tanky warrior truly feel powerful in melee. When enemies can easily run circles around the warrior or attack their allies without fear of retiribution, you get warriors who are no better at defending their allies than ranger characters or spellcasters.
3) Battlefield utility. Being able to push, knock prone, and grapple really isn't enough. Especially when fighting creatures of huge or larger size who are immune to such effects. There are many other conditions that can contribute significantly to overcoming melee combats that any competent melee warrior should be capable of inflicting.
I would gladly trade a few DPR, some AC, or a handful of HP for mobility, utility, and battlefield control.
In my mind a class is good st melee if it has these capabilities:
1) Mobility. All too often does the melee warrior spend a turn wasted having to move up to his target while the ranged attacks can fight on at full effectiveness. Mobility is also highly important for a skirmishing melee warrior who wants to break through enemy lines and attack specific targets such as spellcasters.
2) Battlefield Control. Being able to lock down a small portion of the battlefield makes a tanky warrior truly feel powerful in melee. When enemies can easily run circles around the warrior or attack their allies without fear of retiribution, you get warriors who are no better at defending their allies than ranger characters or spellcasters.
3) Battlefield utility. Being able to push, knock prone, and grapple really isn't enough. Especially when fighting creatures of huge or larger size who are immune to such effects. There are many other conditions that can contribute significantly to overcoming melee combats that any competent melee warrior should be capable of inflicting.
I would gladly trade a few DPR, some AC, or a handful of HP for mobility, utility, and battlefield control.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Above, I essentially said that everyone was good in melee, I believe you may have just said that no one is.
I think we have the bases covered. Next question!
FormerlyHemlock
Hero
Eh. It's subjective, but generally I'd consider "good in melee" to apply to anyone who can both tank in a chokepoint if necessary (so, defenses comparable to heavy armor or better) and do reasonable damage (say, on par with a featless, fighting style-less fighter with a rapier). Those are the guys whom you want to push forward.
It helps if they have some local control ability such as good grappling and/or large size. Anything that lets them physically isolate the party's ranged component from melee threats.
Ideally, you want everyone in the party to be good in melee and excellent at ranged combat. It doesn't often happen that way but it's nice when it does.
Zardnaar
Legend
Generally multiple attacks a combat style and defensive and offensive class features. Generally this means hunter rangers fighters, paladins and barbarians.
Some things are ok at melee such as most clerics, valor bards etc that might be heavily min maxed to equal a non min maxed fighter for example.
Some things are ok at melee such as most clerics, valor bards etc that might be heavily min maxed to equal a non min maxed fighter for example.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Hadn't thought of it that way, but, yeah, in 5e that'd be ideal. (In modern RL, too, thanks to firearms.)
I suppose that, ideally, you also want to be well-defended-from and/or able to degrade the enemy's ranged capability...
Similar Threads
