D&D 5E Class Analysis: Fighter and Bard

[Jack the Lad]

Just for clarity, which are the overpowered classes and which are the hopelessly underpowered ones? Wizards, bards, and clerics are overpowered, while fighters are underpowered. I guess rogues, rangers, monks, barbarians, and paladins are all trash too? How about sorcerers, who certainly aren't using many of the 15 spells they'll ever know on Knock or Jump? Certainly not warlocks, right?

I'm a bit confused by the change in your tone and attitude since your post a couple of pages back, which I felt was both reasonable and constructive. I'd like to keep this thread from descending into snark and sniping if possible, and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on my reply.

I'll be replying to everyone in more detail this evening, and I plan to look at the Monk and Barbarian math (and possibly the Paladin and Ranger if I have time, though those are obviously trickier).

I've already done the Fighter and Rogue, which I include below.

Fighter (I can't find the version of my chart that includes levels 1-4 but I will post it later for completeness' sake):

Rogue:

 

[Andor]

Really? You should look at a few non-d20 systems. Oneshotting someone with a stool is super easy in Fate Core, for example, with the math still being balanced. As for Boromir defeating dozens of orcs...that was possible in 3e and 4e, but with bounded accuracy, even a dozen orcs can be incredibly deadly for a fighter. A high level champion would go out like a chump in such a situation. A high level wizard would cast meteorswarm or forcecage or teleport or...well, you get the point.

Really? Fine, let's look at the math.

Worst Case scenario.

Boromir, Human Fighter-Champion. No Feats. Level 15
Fighting Styles - Great Weapon & Defense

Str 20, Con 20.
Hit Points: 10 + (6*14) + (15*5) = 169 (+ 20 points from 2nd wind)
AC: 19 (Plate + Defense)

Attack: +11 Greatsword 2d6+5 (Crit 18-20) Mean damage vs AC 13 = 12

3 Attacks per round kill 1.5 Orcs

Orcs
HP: 15
AC: 13
Attack +5 for 9 damage (Crit 20) Mean Damage vs AC 19 = 3.45

The orcs need 54 attacks to bring down Boromir. Melee attacks. With their Javelins the number becomes 82.

Mind you, we are allowing the Orcs to deal fractional damage, but not Boromir. We're also ignoring magic items, terrain, tactics and his action surge.

Compared to a generic Guard the Orcs have worse AC, but better hitpoints, attack rolls and damage.

Tell me again how Boromir, or any high level fighter is not worth a dozen lesser men, or Orcs?

And of course if we allow poor Boromir access to the optional feat system he drops an orc with every hit, potentially killing 6 on an action surge. He also drops incoming damage by 3 per hit meaning the Orcs will need 76 attacks to drop Bormir. In melee, where he is killing 2 + a round. At range they are barely touching him. Still haven't given the poor guy a magic item though.

Powerful. The kind of fighter that can, as you say, be worth dozens of lesser men in combat. Two dozen guys with simple weapons could easily overwhelm a fighter. The kind who can chop a warhorse in a single blow. A highlevel fighter does 2d6+5 damage on a hit, averaged at 12. A warhorse has 19 hp. The kind of fighter who can jump off a building without even slowing down. Any fall of 10 feet or greater inflicts damage and knocks you prone. In every single one of your examples, you name something that a wizard can do (fireball, sorching ray, featherfall) but a fighter can't. That's...that's kind of impressive, in a weird way.

The Champion chops a warhorse in half on a crit (which he get on 18-20), or with every blow if we allow feats. Jumping off a 2 story building does 11`damage to our example Boromir, out of his 169 total. It's not even worth wasting a second wind on. This is slowing him down how exactly? The guard who followed him is out and making death saves.

The cinematic Captain America who can take down a science fiction warplane in a single round? Yeah, I wouldn't mind playing any of those guys.

Yes, yes, if you give the fighter magic items, he can almost do things like a wizard. This is silly.

I'm confused, are we accounting for Caps unique artifact level weapon in this discussion? Does the fighter get one too?

This forced analogy that magic is equal to technology is ridiculous. It's an analogy whose premise is challenged immediately, and if all parties can't agree on that, it really doesn't have any weight in an argument.

Well, actually I've brought it up several times and you're the first person to challenge it. Would you can to explain where the analogy breaks down? D&D magic is learnable, transferable, it serves as tools for communicaton, transportation, force multiplication, healing, etc. The only thing it does not do is subject itself to industrialization. (In default D&D, in Eberron it obviously does.) Given that there is no industrial, assembly line style technology of any kind in the pseudo-medieval default technology of most D&D worlds I'm not clear on how the analogy fails. Why is the blacksmith employing technology when he smelts the iron and forges the sword, but not when he inscribes runes into it? Why is a ranger employing technology when he tans a hide, but not when he speaks to an animal?

And to be clear, not all magic is learnable or transferable. A warlock, for example, is granted in his spells and probably doesn't understand them. Except for the Tome pact guy who can inscribe new spells in his book, clearly he has some grasp of it. And the fluff does indicate that not everyone can learn or perform magic, although that obviously doesn't apply to PCs. So what? Not everyone can fly a plane either. Color blindness will limit your ability to be a good electronics technician, but it's still only technology.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

D&D magic is learnable, transferable, it serves as tools for communicaton, transportation, force multiplication, healing, etc.

Er, not quite.

It may be thus in your setting, but this is setting-specific stuff. Many settings require you to be born a Wizard or the like, and further, Wizards, the only ones able to "Learn" and "Transfer" spells, can't heal (for example. It doesn't appear that you can just "decide" to be a Cleric, necessarily, in most settings, either.

Magic is not technology.

 

[Andor]

Er, not quite.

It may be thus in your setting, but this is setting-specific stuff. Many settings require you to be born a Wizard or the like, and further, Wizards, the only ones able to "Learn" and "Transfer" spells, can't heal (for example. It doesn't appear that you can just "decide" to be a Cleric, necessarily, in most settings, either.

Magic is not technology.

Bards can heal, as well as learn any spell. Divine casters can't transfer spells because they don't need to.

There are settings where arcane magic requires a gift. In systems intended to portray such settings you either start with arcane magic or with a marker indicating the ability or you cannot learn it. Ars Magica for example.

In D&D there is no such marker. Magic can be restricted by races (dwarves in 1e, Karsites in 3e) but aside from that when learning new classes is an option (1e and 2e humans, everyone in 3/4/5e) there has never been a marker to indicate who can and cannot learn magic.

You can point to that as PC exceptionalism, but your drifting into house rule territory.

And even if that's the case it's still technology. The fact that not everyone can do something is irrelevant to the fact that it is learnable and transferable. Few people can design cars, but most people can drive one, although not all, my wife can't. Does that mean cars aren't technology? Likewise few people can craft a magic sword, but most can swing it. Where is the disconnect?

It may not be taught or understood using scientific methodology and the associated trapping we associate with technology today, but so what? Chinese alchemists had all kinds of crazy beliefs and rituals and prayers associated with their alchemy. They could still make gun powder.

And to reiterate something I said in my original post, not all D&D magic is technology. Clerical magic is probably not, although a Clerically crafted magic item might be.

 

[Capricia]

Really? Fine, let's look at the math.

Worst Case scenario.

Boromir, Human Fighter-Champion. No Feats. Level 15
Fighting Styles - Great Weapon & Defense

Str 20, Con 20.
Hit Points: 10 + (6*14) + (15*5) = 169 (+ 20 points from 2nd wind)
AC: 19 (Plate + Defense)

Attack: +11 Greatsword 2d6+5 (Crit 18-20) Mean damage vs AC 13 = 12

3 Attacks per round kill 1.5 Orcs

Orcs
HP: 15
AC: 13
Attack +5 for 9 damage (Crit 20) Mean Damage vs AC 19 = 3.45

The orcs need 54 attacks to bring down Boromir. Melee attacks. With their Javelins the number becomes 82.

I notice you're not factoring in critical hits, but it doesn't change the math too terribly much. Also, Boromir doesn't get the final +1 from his proficiency bonus till level 17.

Mind you, we are allowing the Orcs to deal fractional damage, but not Boromir. We're also ignoring magic items, terrain, tactics and his action surge.

Well...yes? Boromir's biggest problem when up against an orc horde is that he's going to need two hits to take out most of them. So if he hits one orc and drops it to one hp, then crits it, all that extra damage is wasted.

Compared to a generic Guard the Orcs have worse AC, but better hitpoints, attack rolls and damage.

Tell me again how Boromir, or any high level fighter is not worth a dozen lesser men, or Orcs?

Hold on. Dozen? Singular? I thought we were talking dozens before. 24 of these orcs--the bare minimum of what was asserted before--can still reliably take Borimor out.

And of course if we allow poor Boromir access to the optional feat system he drops an orc with every hit, potentially killing 6 on an action surge. He also drops incoming damage by 3 per hit meaning the Orcs will need 76 attacks to drop Bormir. In melee, where he is killing 2 + a round. At range they are barely touching him. Still haven't given the poor guy a magic item though.

Feats can definitely have a big impact. Of course, taking a -5 penalty means that you're going to miss a lot more. And even with heavy armor master, the orcs are able to overcome Borimor. Ranged attacks aren't an issue as long as the orcs are willing to take step in and withdraw, since Borimor is limited to one AoO reaction per round. Even if he was guarding a narrow gate they could still pull that off. This is of course backed up by the DM Guidelines. 24 orcs against a single character is 12000xp, while a Deadly encounter for a level 15 is at 6400.

The Champion chops a warhorse in half on a crit (which he get on 18-20), or with every blow if we allow feats. Jumping off a 2 story building does 11`damage to our example Boromir, out of his 169 total. It's not even worth wasting a second wind on. This is slowing him down how exactly? The guard who followed him is out and making death saves.

On a crit. Yes. So about 8% of the time. As for how 11 damage slows down a fighter...

Being knocked off your feet tends to slow a guy down in the literal sense.

I'm confused, are we accounting for Caps unique artifact level weapon in this discussion? Does the fighter get one too?

Captain America has an indestructable shield and it's very handy, yes. But in the same way that Fighter's have indestructable shields because 5e doesn't have sundering. It's not the weapon, it's what he's capable of doing with it or any other weapon on hand...including his hands. If you think that the only thing that separates Captain America from your typical elite soldier is a round shield, I don't know what to say.

Well, actually I've brought it up several times and you're the first person to challenge it. Would you can to explain where the analogy breaks down? D&D magic is learnable, transferable, it serves as tools for communicaton, transportation, force multiplication, healing, etc. The only thing it does not do is subject itself to industrialization. (In default D&D, in Eberron it obviously does.) Given that there is no industrial, assembly line style technology of any kind in the pseudo-medieval default technology of most D&D worlds I'm not clear on how the analogy fails. Why is the blacksmith employing technology when he smelts the iron and forges the sword, but not when he inscribes runes into it? Why is a ranger employing technology when he tans a hide, but not when he speaks to an animal?

And to be clear, not all magic is learnable or transferable. A warlock, for example, is granted in his spells and probably doesn't understand them. Except for the Tome pact guy who can inscribe new spells in his book, clearly he has some grasp of it. And the fluff does indicate that not everyone can learn or perform magic, although that obviously doesn't apply to PCs. So what? Not everyone can fly a plane either. Color blindness will limit your ability to be a good electronics technician, but it's still only technology.

If you want to properly use the "technology = magic" analogy, you can't say that magic is equal to training. It's not flying a plane or learning to shoot a gun when everyone has planes and guns lying around. It's getting planes, guns, lightning cannons, time-machines, clone factories, jetpacks, x-ray goggles, shink and growth rays, nuclear weapons, teleporters, and hundreds of other amazing things while everyone else gets sharp sticks.

 

[Andor]

I notice you're not factoring in critical hits, but it doesn't change the math too terribly much. Also, Boromir doesn't get the final +1 from his proficiency bonus till level 17.

I did actually. At a prof +6 attack bonus the crits exactly balance out the miss chances. You're right I got the bonus wrong, want me to recompute?

Hold on. Dozen? Singular? I thought we were talking dozens before. 24 of these orcs--the bare minimum of what was asserted before--can still reliably take Borimor out.

Don't move the goal posts. My claim was that a D&D fighter in a similar situation would have a similar ending. Lots of dead orcs, halfings get away, fighter dies eventually. You claimed the champion would "Go out like a chump." Others were claiming it took only a few rounds to drop him. I realize we're using theatre of the mind but you still can't use medium creatures to mob someone with dozens of attacks around. You have spacing issues. If Boromir gets his back to a tree he cuts out one or two attacks a round and swings the math to his benefit. If he's surrounded he can use his action surge to cut down half the orcs around him and it will be well worth taking a few AoO to reposition to a better place.

Try actually gaming out the scenario rather than thinking 24 orcs = 24 melee attacks per round.

Feats can definitely have a big impact. Of course, taking a -5 penalty means that you're going to miss a lot more. And even with heavy armor master, the orcs are able to overcome Borimor. Ranged attacks aren't an issue as long as the orcs are willing to take step in and withdraw, since Borimor is limited to one AoO reaction per round. Even if he was guarding a narrow gate they could still pull that off. This is of course backed up by the DM Guidelines. 24 orcs against a single character is 12000xp, while a Deadly encounter for a level 15 is at 6400.

I know, I accounted for the math. Would you like me to post the spreadsheet? And again, I never claimed he would win. Boromir died. I said he would do what he did in the book which I stand by. Frankly I don't have a problem with someone dieing at 24 to one odds.

Being knocked off your feet tends to slow a guy down in the literal sense.

It also took him an action to jump off the roof. You're parsing for pedantic flaws rather than trying to grasp what I'm saying. Although a DC 10 Acrobatics check will allow him to land on his feet, and even if he's unskilled Remakable Athelte will help.

Captain America has an indestructable shield and it's very handy, yes. But in the same way that Fighter's have indestructable shields because 5e doesn't have sundering. It's not the weapon, it's what he's capable of doing with it or any other weapon on hand...including his hands. If you think that the only thing that separates Captain America from your typical elite soldier is a round shield, I don't know what to say.

As I recall the scene from the movie the fighter went down because the engine ingested an indestructible object. It's also what let's him survive hits from Thor and the Hulk. Without he dies several times per film.

Yet oddly enough our high level fighter is expected to equal caps performance with a pointy stick. Interesting.

If you want to properly use the "technology = magic" analogy, you can't say that magic is equal to training. It's not flying a plane or learning to shoot a gun when everyone has planes and guns lying around. It's getting planes, guns, lightning cannons, time-machines, clone factories, jetpacks, x-ray goggles, shink and growth rays, nuclear weapons, teleporters, and hundreds of other amazing things while everyone else gets sharp sticks.

The point of the magic = technology argument is that the fighter is actively refusing to get that training and then complaining he never gets nice things. A high level fighter without any magic, is that way becuase he chose to be that way. From level 3 in the base game. At every stat advance if you use feats. At every level past first with multiclassing allowed, the Champion chose to avoid learning how to dip into that grab bag of tricks. Presuambly becuase the player was having fun that way.

So why do you want to strip the player of his ability to make that choice? If he wanted to fly all he had to do was pick a Monk or Barbarian instead...

 

[LapBandit]

Andor,


It seems you've distilled your position in this argument to "If the fighter wanted power he should have chose to have magic"
So if I want to be powerful and choose a non-magical class I'm playing the wrong game?

 

[Andor]

Andor,

It seems you've distilled your position in this argument to "If the fighter wanted power he should have chose to have magic"
So if I want to be powerful and choose a non-magical class I'm playing the wrong game?

Maybe? It depends on what you consider powerful. If you want Boromir level power you're set. If you want Chu Cullainin (who was a Sidhe trained berserker) then you probably need to be a magic using and weilding berserker, like he was. Totem Path Barbarian and a couple of magic items ought to do it. The debate is not particularly about combat power, even a glance at Jacks tables will show you that a fighter is deadly. It's about the non-hp related paths to victory that a spell-caster can employ that a fighter does not have hard-coded into the system. If you want access to reality warping power, the system will make you admit you are using reality warping power. I fail to see the issue.

But as I said, there are no magicless classes. Not a one. There are only magicless subclasses. Path of the Berserker, Champion, Battle Master, Assasin, Thief, that's it. And even the thief still has Use Magic Device.

Now the level of mojo the other classes and sub-classes grant is not equal. Nothing a Totem Barbarian or Arcane Trickster can do will ever be the equal of a Wish. But they have enough tricks to make sure you don't miss out on all the fun. And fun is the point of the game.

If you want to play anime levels of power, while claiming not to use magic, I'd suggest Iron Heroes maybe? Plenty of systems will let you bring the WaHoo but things like Exalted or even the Hero system will plainly label it as "Not mere mortal muscle" which seems to be the sole objection to how 5e is organized.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but is there any argument against the Champion as it stands that doesn't boil down to "I want magic, but I don't want to call it magic" mixed with a healthy dose of niche protection?

 

[Uskglass]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but is there any argument against the Champion as it stands that doesn't boil down to "I want magic, but I don't want to call it magic" mixed with a healthy dose of niche protection?

There is no 'magic'. Magic is flavor. There are just mechanics, and what a number of people here is asking for is having mechanics which are specific to each class allowing all characters to stand roughly on equal ground along progression.
I know this is not an issue for everyone, and that's fine, but it is so for a non-negligible part of the playerbase, and if in front of that the only option D&D has to offer is 'go play another game', well, then that would be disappointing indeed.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I'm a bit confused by the change in your tone and attitude since your post a couple of pages back, which I felt was both reasonable and constructive. I'd like to keep this thread from descending into snark and sniping if possible, and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on my reply.

Sorry for the tone - I was feeling a bit snarky at that point. But there's an honest question in there: warlocks and sorcerers have spells known restricted enough that it seems to me that they ought not be very problematic in terms of "utility" spells.

Anyway, I won't go point by point back through our list, because we basically agreed like 75% of the time. (I'll add forcecage to the list of poorly though out high level spells too.)

I do think that magic weapons will be a big factor in how martial classes stand up in actual play. Give a monk a flaming quarterstaff that does +2d6 fire damage and you almost double his dpr; as far as I can tell, there's nothing in the game that will have such an extreme effect for spellcasters. Buff and debuff effects will also often favor martial classes more than casters, meaning that a fighter's share of the damage dealt in a well-rounded party will be higher than most solo dpr calculations indicate. So I fully expect that in combat, fighters will feel plenty useful. We're mostly talking about two separate situations: exploitable spells that trivialize certain kinds of combat and utility spells that allow casters to dominate outside of combat.
(I'll add more later.)