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

[FrogReaver]

Whether you think he's "wrong" or not is irrelevant. That's the official interpretation. You're free to disagree and rule differently when you DM, but then it's a house rule.

LOL.
#1. Not adhering to JC's interpretation is not making a house rule. It may not be going with RAI but going against RAI is not necessarily houseruling (see below for why).

#2. RAW sometimes will provide only 1 interpretation. However, oftentimes RAW provides more than 1 possible interpretation. In this situation if a designers states the rule is intended to be played a certain way and it matches up with one of those possible RAW interpretations then all we have is a designer adding clarity and it should be taken as such.

#3. Sometimes what is claimed by a designer to be RAI doesn't match any of the possible RAW interpretations. As such they are providing a houserule or an unofficial errata or something similar. In these situations they are wrong until something official comes out.

I've reread the actual Improved Divine Smite text on PHB 85 but I'm still struggling even seeing what he is saying as a possibility. If you want to help explain how that text can mean what he is saying that's cool. I'm open to being wrong. But if it's not there as possible from that text then will you admit JC was wrong?

 

[FrogReaver]

Whatever you feel the reason is for the Champion, it's a simple subclass and shouldn't have the ceiling of its more advanced subclasses. At least give those with the acumen to build and play Battlemasters and EKs properly some mechanical reward for their doing so, is my point.

It's like balancing a fighting game. Ideally, you want the "top tier" characters to be more difficult to play, or at least more difficult to unlock their "top tier" potential. Otherwise, why put in the effort on such a character?

Why should it not have the ceiling of the other subclasses? It should be of equal strength as the EK and battlemaster at least when it comes to basic game assumptions. Sadly it isn't.

OH and DND is not anything like a fighting game....

 

[Gladius Legis]

I've reread the actual Improved Divine Smite text on PHB 85 but I'm still struggling even seeing what he is saying as a possibility. If you want to help explain how that text can mean what he is saying that's cool. I'm open to being wrong. But if it's not there as possible from that text then will you admit JC was wrong?

The part "If you also use your Divine Smite with an attack, you add this damage to the extra damage of your Divine Smite."

A LOT of people had interpreted this as the 1d8 damage also adding to the extra damage of your Divine Smite, in addition to the constant 1d8s on your melee weapon attacks. The "this damage" part is what made it confusing, however, and led just as many people to believe that it simply just reiterated that the constant 1d8 stacked with Divine Smite and that was it.

FYI, I was in the latter camp before Crawford's tweet, but I can easily see how the other ruling makes sense. After all, why would they need to reiterate the constant +1d8 on melee weapon attacks part stacking with your Divine Smite? Without that second Divine Smite-related clause, that would've seemed self-explanatory enough.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Why should it not have the ceiling of the other subclasses?

I answered that in the post you quoted.

OH and DND is not anything like a fighting game....

We're talking strictly about balance here, which is an important part of both genres of games. Same principles, strictly balance-wise, apply.

 

[DaviMMS]

Nitpick on your Paladin number here in light of Jeremy Crawford's tweet. He confirmed that IDS adds 1d8 both to your regular attack, and then 1d8 again when you Divine Smite. So the Paladin's mark here would be 10d8 + 8 [53]. A S&B Paladin would slightly outdo an S&B Fighter, though move the comparison to great weapon builds of both classes and the Fighter would indeed pull ahead.

And then this later comparison would be instead:
11th-level fighter: 6d8 + 5d10 + 24 [78.5]
11th-level paladin: 17d8 + 8 [84.5]

Again, though, switch both classes to great weapons and the Fighter pulls back ahead.

Where the those numbers are coming from. At 11th the modifiers would be +5 and dueling would be applied.

Fighter at 11th deals 1d8+5(str)+2(dueling) per attack. That averages 11.5. 11.5x6= 69 + 5d10(Superioty Dice)= 69+27.5 = 96.5

And the paladin deals
2d8+5+2+4d8=34x2=68 + 4d6 (Thundering smite as a bonus action) = 82
Even if you consider that IDS applies twice when you smite it is still behind the fighter (91 vs 96,5).

But I don't think this is the best way to compare. The best way IMO is taking the whole day resources and convert that to damage.

So:

Fighter 5
3 action surges = 6 attacks of 1d8+6= 63
12 Superioty dice = 54
Total = 117

Paladin
4 1st level Slots = 8d8 = 36
2 2nd level Slots = 6d8 = 27
Total = 63

Only the action surges have the same damage potencial of all smites

1 round Nova
Fighter 5 = (1d8+6x4)+4d8= 60
Paladin 5 = (1d8+6+3d8)x2 + 3d6= 58,5

At 11th we get

Fighter 11
Normal round = (1d8+5+2)x3 = 34.5
Nova Round = (1d8+5+2)x6+ 5d10= 96.5
Daily Resources = 1d8+7x9=103,5 + 15d10 (82,5)= 186

Paladin 11
Normal Round = 2d8+7x2=32
Nova Round = (2d8+4d8+7)×2+4d6=82 or 91 (if IDS applies twice)
Daily Resources = 121,5 or 166.5 (if IDS applies twice) and every time you use Thundering Smite to nova highter this lower a little.

So, if you consider the recommended ratio of short and long rests, the fighter is quite ahead in terms of daily potencial, has a normal round a little highter and a highter nova. If you don't consider the IDS applying twice when you use divine smite, only 1 short rest per day is enough for the fighter to become on par with the paladin.

OBS: This is a pure damage comparison, so there are a lot of things not taken into reggard. Those things mostly favor the paladin (Channel divinity and using the spells in other ways vs 1 ASI)








Sent from my SM-G900M using EN World mobile app

 

[FrogReaver]

The part "If you also use your Divine Smite with an attack, you add this damage to the extra damage of your Divine Smite."

A LOT of people had interpreted this as the 1d8 damage also adding to the extra damage of your Divine Smite, in addition to the constant 1d8s on your melee weapon attacks. The "this damage" part is what made it confusing, however, and led just as many people to believe that it simply just reiterated that the constant 1d8 stacked with Divine Smite and that was it.

FYI, I was in the latter camp before Crawford's tweet, but I can easily see how the other ruling makes sense. After all, why would they need to reiterate the constant +1d8 on melee weapon attacks part stacking with your Divine Smite? Without that second Divine Smite-related clause, that would've seemed self-explanatory enough.

After reading the ability about 100 more times I agree. I was wrong JC is right again. Dang him!

 

[LapBandit]

Thank you for your analysis, I enjoyed reading it.

OBS: This is a pure damage comparison, so there are a lot of things not taken into regard. Those things mostly favor the paladin (Channel divinity and using the spells in other ways vs 1 ASI)

This is exactly the problem. The features don't remotely add up.

 

[Flamestrike]

They seem a lot weaker than the Barbarians in my sandbox no-feats Wilderlands game, where players often set the pace. As I said in the OP, I'm not seeing 6-8 fights/day (and not interested in mangling my campaigns to force this). They have neither the durability of barbarians nor the nova power of Paladins, this change gets them closer to the latter.

Maybe in a Feats game they are more balanced though I doubt it, having played 3 levels of a Fighter with feats alongside a barbarian in Out of the Abyss. lack of reckless attack option really hurts Fighter, as does
their squishiness. Barb ant just seems vastly better IME across several campaigns.

Gritty rest variant fixes all your problems.

It also makes Warlocks and Monks competitive in a game of rocket tag like yours where you a DM cant be bothered policing the 5 minute AD.

 

[Flamestrike]

Whether you think he's "wrong" or not is irrelevant. That's the official interpretation. You're free to disagree and rule differently when you DM, but then it's a house rule.

Youre misintepreting his clarification.

He's not saying its n extra +1d8 normally, and an extra +2d8 when you smite. Its +1d8 to all attacks, including those with which you smite.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Youre misintepreting his clarification.

He's not saying its n extra +1d8 normally, and an extra +2d8 when you smite. Its +1d8 to all attacks, including those with which you smite.

He explicitly answered "yes" when asked if the feature adds 2d8 total. So +1d8 on your attack, and another +1d8 when you smite. The misinterpretation is yours.