D&D 5E Buffing the Champion Fighter

[Coroc]

In recent threads about class balance, inevitably someone shows up and laments the poor Champion Fighter and it's place in the world. So, let's discuss it.

The Champion appeals to an old school style. That's fine. But it should still be comparable to the other Fighters. I'm not entirely convinced that the low level battle master is balanced against the Eldritch Knight, but I think that issue falls away at Tier 2.

So, the Champion is easier to compare against the battle master:

Level 3
Improved Critical vs Combat Superiority and Student of War.

Improved Critical is nifty. It feels good. I've heard of it being used in "crit fishing" builds, but those are multiclassers with Paladin. Student of War is a ribbon, so I'll table that.

Combat Superiority gives, at a minimum, 4d8 extra damage, no chance of miss, per Short Rest. Let's ignore the other effects of the basic "damage+effect" maneuvers, and the other maneuvers that are harder to compare and will just end with the battle master looking better.

Let's say the two are using Greatswords. Improved Critical is an extra 5% for an extra 2d6 damage (7). Combat Superiority is an extra 4d8 damage (18).

X * 7 * 0.05 = 18
X = 51.4

So, counting action surge, the Champion needs to make 52 attacks per short rest to equal the Battle master just in damage, and the battle master is getting trips or knock backs or disarms or frighteneds or other effects on these attacks. This isn't counting that battle master maneuvers do get bumped on crits too. Even if the fighters are getting opportunity Attacks every round, that's 25 rounds before their damage is balanced. And the Champion has nothing else.

Now, maybe the Fighters are half-orcs and they're using great axes instead. So it's an extra 5% for 2d12 damage (13) vs an extra 4d8 (18).

X * 13 * 0.05 = 18
X = 27.7

That's still a long time before damage is balanced. Even if the Champion gets an opportunity Attack every round, that's still 13 rounds of combat doing nothing but making attacks before they're balanced between short rests.

Okay, maybe the battle master is just OP at 3rd level (an argument I've made, see my thread on Eldritch Knight vs Battle Master).

At 5th level, the fighters get Extra Attack. At needing 52 or 28 attacks to be balanced, with action surge, that cuts us to 25 rounds, or 13 rounds for the half-orc. 17 or 9 if you're getting an opportunity Attack every round. I'm being hyperbolic with the OA's, but you should be able to see the issue.

At 7th level, the Champion gets Remarkable Athlete. At worse, this is a small bump to raw Str and Initiative checks (if they somehow had all proficiencies). At best, it's a small bump to 6 kinds of checks (raw Str, athletics, acrobatics, stealth, slight of hand, initiative) and a bunch of tools. Neat. The Battle Master gets Know Your Enemy, of which the utility is going to be based on the nature of your game. The Battle Master also gets another Superiority die, to 5d8 (22.5).

Not Half-Orc
X * 7 * 0.05 = 22.5
X = 64.3 (32 rounds, 21 with OAs every round)

Half-Orc
X * 13 * 0.05 = 22.5
X = 34.6 (17 rounds, 11 with OAs every round)

At 10th, things get more difficult to compare. The Champion, best case scenario, is picking up Defensive for +1 AC. The two characters are, from then on, much harder to compare because they aren't nearly identical. But let's push. The Battle Master's Superiority dice increase to d10s. 5d10 is 27.5.

Not Half-Orc
X * 7 * 0.05 = 27.5
X = 78.6 (39 rounds, 26 w/OAs)

Half-Orc
X * 13 * 0.05 = 27.5
X = 42.3 (20 rounds, 14 w/OAs)

11th level brings 3 attacks. That changes not half-orc to 26/19, and the half-orc to 14/10 rounds.

At 15th, the Champion gets Superior Critical, for crits on 18. The Battlemaster gets another Superiority Die, and recovers 1 at the start of combat if they're empty. Optimally, they now have 7d10 per short rest (38.5).

Not Half-Orc
X * 7 * 0.1 = 38.5
X = 55 (18 rounds, 13 with OAs)

Half-Orc
X * 13 * 0.1 = 38.5
X = 29.6 (9 rounds, 7 with OAs)

Remember, the optimal Champion has +1 AC at this point. Somewhere in here, between 10th and 15th, the characters are more or less balanced.

I'm not even going to look at 18th level. The Battle Master gets d12s, the Champion gets regeneration.

So, high level champions and Battle masters are more or less balanced. The moral seems to be "fight for advantage" and "get a weapon with extra damage dice" if you're a champion. Or "be a half-orc".

Maybe the Champion could use a ribbon at 3rd level to compare to the Battle Master's artisan's tools. Improved Critical is not worth a feat, so it should come with more. I've seen people suggest allowing Remarkable Athlete to stack with Proficiency, but not Expertise, so all Champions get the same benefits. I support that.

But this has just been a look at damage. Remember, the Battle Master's simple damage maneuvers have extra effects. The Riposte maneuver possibly adds more damage than the "smites".

Also, this does further convince me that the Battle Master has too many Superiority dice at low levels. But I'd hate to take away from them.

And as a last note, I am still thinking about Casters vs Non-Casters. That's a side thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The fighter and its subclasses definitely do not need any buffs in 5E. It is all about preferences.
Some people want the action economy of a BM and some people (I got one of these in my group) just want to play a simple fighter because they do not want to delve to deep into any game mechanics. The shtick of the champion is he got his tricks available all the time and that is it. The EK is perfect if you want to mimic the D&D basic elf class.

 

[schnee]

I thought I had, i rarely pass up an opportunity..

I wonder if the Bardic 'Jack of all Trades' like thing would be good.

As in, at a certain level, they get half proficiency on all saves (or more of them).

Maybe combined with another full save proficiency. Or some other flavorful thing.

I don't know exactly, just spitballing here.

But, I do think the one problem of 'my thing is doing melee damage' is *getting to the thing to do damage*, and at high level, the main blocker of this is spells and spell-like effects. I like the idea of a fighter just having such indomitable will that they cut through that stuff like a hot knife through butter.

 

[Xeviat]

I wonder if the Bardic 'Jack of all Trades' like thing would be good.

As in, at a certain level, they get half proficiency on all saves (or more of them).

Maybe combined with another full save proficiency. Or some other flavorful thing.

I don't know exactly, just spitballing here.

But, I do think the one problem of 'my thing is doing melee damage' is *getting to the thing to do damage*, and at high level, the main blocker of this is spells and spell-like effects. I like the idea of a fighter just having such indomitable will that they cut through that stuff like a hot knife through butter.

Considering the monk gets proficiency in all saves at one point (worth functionally 2 feats, though likely one since only Dex, Con, and Wis saves are so valued), something like this wouldn't be out of hand. It could fit into the Extra Fighting Style at level 10, since that isn't a full level's ability on its own anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tony Vargas]

I wonder if the Bardic 'Jack of all Trades' like thing would be good.

As in, at a certain level, they get half proficiency on all saves (or more of them).

Half-proficiency seemed underwhelming, IMHO, for 'Remarkable' Athlete,' so I couldn't get too excited about it.

Maybe combined with another full save proficiency. Or some other flavorful thing.

I don't know exactly, just spitballing here.

I really would like the non-casting sub-classes to partake more of the highest-level 1e fighters' remarkable (note lack of ironic scare quotes) saves.

But, I do think the one problem of 'my thing is doing melee damage' is *getting to the thing to do damage*, and at high level, the main blocker of this is spells and spell-like effects. I like the idea of a fighter just having such indomitable will that they cut through that stuff like a hot knife through butter.

Yes, that is a very good way of putting it.

I'm still stuck on emulating 1e with this thought, but what if the Fighter got an alternate minimum bonus to all saves that scaled from 0 to 12, with the Champion simply always using that bonus?

 

[Coroc]

Half-proficiency seemed underwhelming, IMHO, for 'Remarkable' Athlete,' so I couldn't get too excited about it.

I really would like the non-casting sub-classes to partake more of the highest-level 1e fighters' remarkable (note lack of ironic scare quotes) saves.

Yes, that is a very good way of putting it.

I'm still stuck on emulating 1e with this thought, but what if the Fighter got an alternate minimum bonus to all saves that scaled from 0 to 12, with the Champion simply always using that bonus?

If you use feats a fighter will eventually get GWM or PAM and he is prof. in Con saves.
So what is missing? maxing Str / Dex Con and get some resilience for Wis and eventually Dex save via feats, there you go. You got it all covered without breaking BA.

 

[Ashkelon]

If you use feats a fighter will eventually get GWM or PAM and he is prof. in Con saves.
So what is missing? maxing Str / Dex Con and get some resilience for Wis and eventually Dex save via feats, there you go. You got it all covered without breaking BA.

You can only take resilient once. So at best a fighter can get proficiency in 3 saves. Compare that to a monk with proficiency in all saves and the ability to spend a ki to reroll a failed save.

Also, in 2e, a high level fighter would succeed at most saves on a roll of 4+. In 5e, a level 17 fighter with a 10 wisdom and proficiency in Wisdom saves still only succeeds on Wis saving throws against the fear of an adult red dragon on a 13+. That's hardly being remarkable at saving throws. Even if the high level fighter had double proficiency to all saves by level 20 they would still be worse off than their 2e predecessors.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If you use feats a .. You got it all covered without breaking BA.

No need to break BA, just line the sub class up to be more resilient w/o needing system mastery.

The fighter and its subclasses definitely do not need any buffs in 5E.

They certainly don't need more DPR.

It is all about preferences.

It does seem to be about linking certain preferences. The preference for a mechanically simple character is liked to the preference for a mundane character concept is linked to a preference for participating primarily in the combat pillar.

The shtick of the champion is he got his tricks available all the time and that is it.

Except Action Surge, 2nd Wind, & Indomitable...

... but, schnee had a good point, that applies here as well: 'always available,' hinges on the Champion, himself, being available too, thus good AC & hps, but bad saves can undermine that, especially at higher levels as DCs rise, unanswered.

 

[Coroc]

You can only take resilient once. So at best a fighter can get proficiency in 3 saves. Compare that to a monk with proficiency in all saves and the ability to spend a ki to reroll a failed save.

Also, in 2e, a high level fighter would succeed at most saves on a roll of 4+. In 5e, a level 17 fighter with a 10 wisdom and proficiency in Wisdom saves still only succeeds on Wis saving throws against the fear of an adult red dragon on a 13+. That's hardly being remarkable at saving throws. Even if the high level fighter had double proficiency to all saves by level 20 they would still be worse off than their 2e predecessors.

Where do you read that you can take resilience only once for only one attribute?

In the feat description it says to choose one attribute,
But nowhere in the PHB it is stated that you can take resilience only once.
Also in the short introduction paragraph on feats it does say nothing about it that you generally can take a feat only once. Ok with some feats it would not make sense anyway but e.g. magic initiate could be a feat taken multiple times as well as resilience.

You also cannot compare the 2e and 5e combat systems just based on one saving throw.
There is so much more to the full picture that I don't want to start here.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Where do you read that you can take resilience only once for only one attribute?

General rules for feats. Second paragraph on PHB 165, "You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise."

There's exactly one feat that you're allowed to take more than once: Elemental Adept.

 

[Tony Vargas]

General rules for feats. Second paragraph on PHB 165, "You can take each feat only once, unless the feat's description says otherwise."

There's exactly one feat that you're allowed to take more than once: Elemental Adept.

How 'bout the interpretation that different save proficiencies are different feats?

Seems plausible, and the point of the thread is house rules, anyway..

You also cannot compare the 2e and 5e combat systems just based on one saving throw..

Not one save, but across the board. In the classic game, not just its final incarnation, 2e, saves got much better at high level, particularly for the fighter who scaled faster than other classes. 3.0 changed that, apparently forever, since even 4e didn't entirely un-do the indirect power-up of anything that forced a save. 5e continues the 3.0 issue, with characters starting out bad at 2/3rds of saves, and getting relatively worse with level as DCs scale faster than bonuses (when they scale at all).

And, no bonus ASIs aren't a solution. Not only are feats optional, the fighter's two bonus feats, one of them at 14th level, are continually offered as solutions to at least three issues - DPR which can be maximized with feats & maxed attack stat, lack of OoC abilities which can be supplemented with feats or tertiary stat boosts, and, of course, saves via the feats in question. With 3 issues vis-a-vis other classes with comparable combat power, greater flexibility, more OoC abilities, and superior saves, each of those issues, individually needing 2-4 feats to address, the position that two bonus ASIs make everything OK is indefensible.