The final word on DPR, feats and class balance

[Zardnaar]

I've never hit the issue. Making combats more difficult normally just takes better tactics, monsters that take advantage of environment, fight intelligently and don't attack in fireball formation, etc. In addition the DM decides how much XP to grant, I always discuss with my players how quickly they want to advance. The DM also has final say on optional rules, items and build options.

D&D shouldn't ever escalate to an arms race. If you feel like it is, work with your players to tone it down to something that works for everyone.

P.S. this advice is for anyone else reading this thread. No offense Z, but I know where you stand.

None taken its more form what I have observed with other DMs (not me). Inexperienced DMs the game tends to spiral out of control as they cant deal with it or the arms races starts. Myself I can deal with it in other ways and often be subtle about it.

For example say I have 2 PCs using the -5/+10 feats, one uses a bow the other uses a greatsword. The 3rd PC might use a weapon finesse battlemaster. A flaming shortsword might turn up in treasure, the greatsword user is luck to find a +1 weapon while the bow user gets some magical arrows or a magical +0 bow that glows in the dark. Something like the elemental weapons in PotA can also drop with things like weapon finesse +2 spears. Throwing a chain shirt on an ogre and not giving out more xp for it is also something I would do.

Although to be fair I want a featless game now interestingly the players also seem to be coming to this realisation (5E is to easy, well how bout we don't use feats). That or we might alternate 5E with other D&D's/clones or other games. If I am playing in a new group I tone things down or just play whatever the party needs.

 

[Tony Vargas]

You've moved the pea. The post I quoted was taking about how sorc's only best fighters or of they were dumping resources far more useful in other ways.

I think "far more useful" sums it up. If the Sorc bests the fighter in DPR by wasting far-more-useful-for-other-stuff resources on DPR, then, yeah, when - situationally, not philosophically - DPR grinding is all that matters, he 'wastes' those resources. When it's not, he uses them, well, more usefully - he no longer beats the fighter at now-hypothetical DPR, but, in a situation where DPR is of secondary importance (if it matters at all).

The closer DPR is to 'King,' the better that comparison looks for the fighter, FWTW. Depending on the relative importance of DPR in the campaign, the fighter may need a larger advantage in it to make up for his relative lack of versatility.

 

[Caliban]

Houserule though which is more or less a plaster over the cracks and doesn't address the orignal problem.

That's adorable.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I think "far more useful" sums it up. If the Sorc bests the fighter in DPR by wasting far-more-useful-for-other-stuff resources on DPR, then, yeah, when - situationally, not philosophically - DPR grinding is all that matters, he 'wastes' those resources. When it's not, he uses them, well, more usefully - he no longer beats the fighter at now-hypothetical DPR, but, in a situation where DPR is of secondary importance (if it matters at all).

The closer DPR is to 'King,' the better that comparison looks for the fighter, FWTW. Depending on the relative importance of DPR in the campaign, the fighter may need a larger advantage in it to make up for his relative lack of versatility.

I can't follow your shifting arugments. Just above, you said that comparing the fighter to the sorc in a pure DPR-off had the sorc showing the fighter up, which takes almost all of the sorc's resources to do. Now, though, you're saying that the closer you get to a DPR-off, the better the fighter looks?!

You also say that when a sorcerer is using slots for other-than-DPR, this also shows up the fighter, but just above you poo-pooed fighter non-DPR contributions because they really didn't have any. If that's the case, the Sorcerer using his slots in fields the fighter is already weak in (ad argumentum) doesn't really continue to show up the fighter, does it.

You seem more interested in preserving the conclusion that discussing the premises. My argument is that in a holistic review, fighter does very well on DPR because it has the class features to stick in and deliver it consistently, while a few other class builds can, on paper, outgun the fighter, they do so by ignoring their own niche and abilities and so degrade the party ability to succeed in a rounded adventure setting. A slavish focus on DPR would leave you twiddling your thumbs in much of my games and even, at times, find yourself frustrated in combat because the objective wouldn't be to reduce hitpoints as fast as possible.

 

[Zardnaar]

I can't follow your shifting arguments. Just above, you said that comparing the fighter to the sorc in a pure DPR-off had the sorc showing the fighter up, which takes almost all of the sorc's resources to do. Now, though, you're saying that the closer you get to a DPR-off, the better the fighter looks?!

You also say that when a sorcerer is using slots for other-than-DPR, this also shows up the fighter, but just above you poo-pooed fighter non-DPR contributions because they really didn't have any. If that's the case, the Sorcerer using his slots in fields the fighter is already weak in (ad argumentum) doesn't really continue to show up the fighter, does it.

You seem more interested in preserving the conclusion that discussing the premises. My argument is that in a holistic review, fighter does very well on DPR because it has the class features to stick in and deliver it consistently, while a few other class builds can, on paper, outgun the fighter, they do so by ignoring their own niche and abilities and so degrade the party ability to succeed in a rounded adventure setting. A slavish focus on DPR would leave you twiddling your thumbs in much of my games and even, at times, find yourself frustrated in combat because the objective wouldn't be to reduce hitpoints as fast as possible.

A Sorlock that picked a few utiity spells and focused on EB spam would still be fine in games like yours and they would have access to 6 cantrips and you could do the EB spam thing and focus all of your known spells on non combat things.

At that point you are basically playing an archer with spell utility but you would have the option of knowing a fireball or whatever as the occasion demands. A Dragon sorcerer has hit points equal to a fighter so you could play that instead of a fighter in the archer roll. You could have a wizard and a Sorlock in the same party no problem.

The classic party might be something like

Fighter
Cleric
Rogue (or Bard or Monk)
Wizard (or Warlock, Sorcerer, some clerics and Druid)

but you could also do it like this

Warrior
Support
Skirmisher
Artillery

5E class roles are not that rigid by other editions standards. You probably want some amount of healing in a group but that could be a Paladin and a wizard with the healer feat vs a cleric. Sorlock can fit in the artillery role, be played as an archer, or skirmisher using spells like GFB and shield an deal something like Rogue level damage with Rogue level AC to boot and spells over skills for the skill monkey part. Difference is you would be sacrificing spell slots to quicken GFB over eldritch blast or using hex+ GFB or hex+GFB+ quicken GFB if you used the bonus action to move hex the previous turn. The skirmisher role is not critical in 5E anyway.

I have seen Dragon sorcerers on the front line in the warrior role as well with the clerics being the artillery. Mountain Dwarf Sorcerer+ light cleric role reversal. instead of action surging you quicken haste or whatever.

 

[Ovinomancer]

A Sorlock that picked a few utiity spells and focused on EB spam would still be fine in games like yours and they would have access to 6 cantrips and you could do the EB spam thing and focus all of your known spells on non combat things.

At that point you are basically playing an archer with spell utility but you would have the option of knowing a fireball or whatever as the occasion demands. A Dragon sorcerer has hit points equal to a fighter so you could play that instead of a fighter in the archer roll. You could have a wizard and a Sorlock in the same party no problem.

The classic party might be something like

Fighter
Cleric
Rogue (or Bard or Monk)
Wizard (or Warlock, Sorcerer, some clerics and Druid)

but you could also do it like this

Warrior
Support
Skirmisher
Artillery

5E class roles are not that rigid by other editions standards. You probably want some amount of healing in a group but that could be a Paladin and a wizard with the healer feat vs a cleric. Sorlock can fit in the artillery role, be played as an archer, or skirmisher using spells like GFB and shield an deal something like Rogue level damage with Rogue level AC to boot and spells over skills for the skill monkey part. Difference is you would be sacrificing spell slots to quicken GFB over eldritch blast.

Whoa, slow your roll, what level split are your talking with your sorlock and how the heck do your get d6+1+con = d10+con? Ave rolls are 5+Con per level vs 6+Con per level with starting of 7 plus con vs 10 plus con. By 10th, the difference in hitpoints is 52 sorcerer vs 64 for fighters, and fighters are more likely to prioritize CON and go with heavy armor while the Dragon Sorcerer is sitting at AC 13+DEX. DEX is far more important to the sorcerer than to the Fighter.

As for the split, even a 2/X split just to dip EB plus agonizing sets the sorlock back 2 levels on spell level. The fighter gets 3 attacks a round the same level the sorlock just gets their second ASI and 4th level spells. For this, they get a few extra 1st level slots, a slightly better cantrip option that firebolt (which, as a dragon sorc, they get to add their CHA to anyway), and a few more hitpoints. You can't twin an EB, so that option is out. The dragon sorc, for your purposes, is really better off going straight sorc -- warlock really nets them nothing useful and slows down their spell progression.

To sum up, you have a sorcer with 58 hitpoints at 11th level getting EB for 3d10+15 (31.5) or twinned FB for 6d8+10 (37) and AC 13+DEX vs the Fighter at 71 hitpoints, AC 18, with a greatweapon doing 6d6+15 (40 - average on 6d6 with GWF is 25 instead of 21). The fighter is ahead of even the spam best cast (twinned firebolt) and has the benefit of being able to do it all to 1 target and take hits better. Oh, and also has a free ASI. This is without ANY fighter subclass, of which most will increase the basic DPR calculation for the fighter, against the best case subclass for sorcerer.

Even in a narrow DPR race, the fighter's doing well without feats and using the worst of the fighting styles.

For sword and board, the fighter's at 3d8+21 or 34.5, which is comparable. AC is 20, still has free ASI. Going with a PAM GWF build, it's 3d10r2+15+d4+5 or 41 damage. An archer is 3d8+15 x 110% (for the extra accuracy) or 31.35, which is the first below EB spam, but it's awful close.

I think you're making that build out to be far more than it is. If you go warlock, which is a caster class that focuses on cantrip damage and limited other spellcasting, you're on par to slightly below. If you go with Dragon Sorcerer and focus on cantrip damage, using your other spells to fuel twinning cantrips (bleh), then you can slightly outpace the fighter so long as you're okay with splitting the damage up between two creatures. If that bothers you, ban metamagic from cantrips and the problem solves itself nicely. Or up the cost for cantrips from 1 sorcery point to 2. Or accept that the player that wants to play a sorcerer and just spam twinned firebolts all day long is going to be slightly more effective as a baseline fighter. I really don't see how that's a huge problem when they could be actually using their spells to do things rather than burning them to fuel twinned firebolts. I'd honestly be much more upset about the boring character than the damage they do.

 

[Zardnaar]

Whoa, slow your roll, what level split are your talking with your sorlock and how the heck do your get d6+1+con = d10+con? Ave rolls are 5+Con per level vs 6+Con per level with starting of 7 plus con vs 10 plus con. By 10th, the difference in hitpoints is 52 sorcerer vs 64 for fighters, and fighters are more likely to prioritize CON and go with heavy armor while the Dragon Sorcerer is sitting at AC 13+DEX. DEX is far more important to the sorcerer than to the Fighter.

As for the split, even a 2/X split just to dip EB plus agonizing sets the sorlock back 2 levels on spell level. The fighter gets 3 attacks a round the same level the sorlock just gets their second ASI and 4th level spells. For this, they get a few extra 1st level slots, a slightly better cantrip option that firebolt (which, as a dragon sorc, they get to add their CHA to anyway), and a few more hitpoints. You can't twin an EB, so that option is out. The dragon sorc, for your purposes, is really better off going straight sorc -- warlock really nets them nothing useful and slows down their spell progression.

To sum up, you have a sorcer with 58 hitpoints at 11th level getting EB for 3d10+15 (31.5) or twinned FB for 6d8+10 (37) and AC 13+DEX vs the Fighter at 71 hitpoints, AC 18, with a greatweapon doing 6d6+15 (40 - average on 6d6 with GWF is 25 instead of 21). The fighter is ahead of even the spam best cast (twinned firebolt) and has the benefit of being able to do it all to 1 target and take hits better. Oh, and also has a free ASI. This is without ANY fighter subclass, of which most will increase the basic DPR calculation for the fighter, against the best case subclass for sorcerer.

Even in a narrow DPR race, the fighter's doing well without feats and using the worst of the fighting styles.

For sword and board, the fighter's at 3d8+21 or 34.5, which is comparable. AC is 20, still has free ASI. Going with a PAM GWF build, it's 3d10r2+15+d4+5 or 41 damage. An archer is 3d8+15 x 110% (for the extra accuracy) or 31.35, which is the first below EB spam, but it's awful close.

I think you're making that build out to be far more than it is. If you go warlock, which is a caster class that focuses on cantrip damage and limited other spellcasting, you're on par to slightly below. If you go with Dragon Sorcerer and focus on cantrip damage, using your other spells to fuel twinning cantrips (bleh), then you can slightly outpace the fighter so long as you're okay with splitting the damage up between two creatures. If that bothers you, ban metamagic from cantrips and the problem solves itself nicely. Or up the cost for cantrips from 1 sorcery point to 2. Or accept that the player that wants to play a sorcerer and just spam twinned firebolts all day long is going to be slightly more effective as a baseline fighter. I really don't see how that's a huge problem when they could be actually using their spells to do things rather than burning them to fuel twinned firebolts. I'd honestly be much more upset about the boring character than the damage they do.

Dragon Sorcerers get +1 HP and get a d8 hit dice. Funtionally the same as a fighter, 5.5 average per level 9 vs 10 at level 1 so only slightly less. THe Sorlcock has less but doesn't generally go near the fornt line unless its a fiendpact one probably MCed ( eg Fighter 1/Warlock XYZ)

The front line gish sorcerer I saw was a Mountain Dwarf in medium armor. AC 15 or 16 IIRC. Otherwise you use spells to up AC (haste, shield etc) or to impose disadvantage (greater invisibility). Had somethign like 18 or 20 strength, 16 charisma

If you want to spam, cantrips all day by level 10 or so you can sacrifice spell slots to get sorcery points functionally quicken Eldritch Blast or Green Flame blade most of the time, by level 15 or so IIRC its functionally at will. You don't spam firebolt lol.

The Sorlcok once they get 3 bolts from Eldritch blast can quicken it a lot more than a fighter can action surge, gives them 6 bolts, charsima to damage and bonus action hex casting as well which is good for boss fights (hex+ EB followed up with 2 EBs the following round).

And at higher levels you have 8 rays essentially at will + spell slots left over, each bolt is dealing at least 1d10+5 often 1d10+5+1d6 (hex).

The hit point difference isn't that much either and can be negated via things like shield spells so you take less damage. Even the gish sorcerer is not better than say a fighter most of the time (nova it can be) but its close enough and you have other options that a fighter doesn't have. For example you don't have to sacrifice your spell slots to abuse GFB but you can haste yourself for example and quicken GFB which is decent damage even at level 6. In melee as a sorcerer. By level 8 you can do this most fights upcasting haste if you have to into level 4 slots or you can sacrifice spell slots to spam GFB. If you come across a ranged enough well you still have the option of fireball, lightning bolt, firebolt etc etc etc.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Dragon Sorcerers get +1 HP and get a d8 hit dice. Funtionally the same as a fighter, 5.5 average per level 9 vs 10 at level 1 so only slightly less. THe Sorlcock has less but doesn't generally go near the fornt line unless its a fiendpact one probably MCed ( eg Fighter 1/Warlock XYZ)

The front line gish sorcerer I saw was a Mountain Dwarf in medium armor. AC 15 or 16 IIRC. Otherwise you use spells to up AC (haste, shield etc) or to impose disadvantage (greater invisibility). Had somethign like 18 or 20 strength, 16 charisma

If you want to spam, cantrips all day by level 10 or so you can sacrifice spell slots to get sorcery points functionally quicken Eldritch Blast or Green Flame blade most of the time, by level 15 or so IIRC its functionally at will. You don't spam firebolt lol.

The Sorlcok once they get 3 bolts from Eldritch blast can quicken it a lot more than a fighter can action surge, gives them 6 bolts, charsima to damage and bonus action hex casting as well which is good for boss fights (hex+ EB followed up with 2 EBs the following round).

And at higher levels you have 8 rays essentially at will + spell slots left over, each bolt is dealing at least 1d10+5 often 1d10+5+1d6 (hex).

The hit point difference isn't that much either and can be negated via things like shield spells so you take less damage. Even the gish sorcerer is not better than say a fighter most of the time (nova it can be) but its close enough and you have other options that a fighter doesn't have. For example you don't have to sacrifice your spell slots to abuse GFB but you can haste yourself for example and quicken GFB which is decent damage even at level 6. In melee as a sorcerer. By level 8 you can do this most fights upcasting haste if you have to into level 4 slots or you can sacrifice spell slots to spam GFB. If you come across a ranged enough well you still have the option of fireball, lightning bolt, firebolt etc etc etc.

Sorcerers got d6 last time i checked... maybe I have to look it up again. I do think the basich fighter is much more robust than the sorcerer. Heavy armor and shield is such a consistent base that you don't habe to worry. And with AC 20 and maybe HAM you won't go down easily.

 

[dco]

I feel as though your thesis is roughly the same as Sacrosanct's, and I feel like I've already engaged with it.

What can I say, if I see class using ideal conditions and most of his features to improve DPR compared against another class using normal attacks I think it is a worthless comparison.

1- comes out even worse for the poor fighter. DPR is his thing, the class's features are overwhelmingly committed to or readily put into DPR, if he can't compete there (and, worse case, he's generally just being matched, not shown up), what chance does he have when those pesky non-combat pillars come up?
2 - They wouldn't want to, unless, for some reason, grinding out high DPR for 6 encounters that day seemed as good or better than casting the high-level spells they know. Admittedly, even with the Sorcerer's limited spells known, that might never happen - but the premise of the fighter being balanced with the sorcerer (never mind the Tier 1 casters) is that it /does/ happen, regularly.
3 - All classes are just varied collections of class features. When comparing two or three classes, the existence of other classes doesn't really make a huge difference, unless there's some synergies being taken into consideration, of course.

1- He can also have far more durability with improved AC, HPs, autoheals using a BA and better saving throws.
Not sure how a fighter deals less damage using action surge and their specific sub-class features.
2- It's not only about casting high level spells, you also have to defend yourself, when I played a sorcerer I burned a lot of slots on shield, blur, mirror image, etc. You also want your area spell, perhaps a teleportation spell, buffs...
3- Yes, but don't compare a sorcerer that can not be attacked fully buffed expending all their sorcery hit points, metamagic extra damage from class, etc to a fighter only using his normal attacks.

Its more the mid levels. A Sorlock can more or less quicken Agonizing Blast around the mid levels for most if not all of the day. IN effect it becomes their best spell most of the time and they have the optin of dropping a fireball or whatever.

If your DPR is hihg enough fights are often 1-2 rounds instead of 3 and I think most tables use less than the 6-8 assumptions. Even if you do the RAW 6-8 encounters the encounters are so easy dealing lots of single target damage is really good as RAW do not really support hordes of critters anyway with 2-6 critters being more the norm.

The Sorlock is also fine not quickening agonising blast its just one optiuon that tend to put it over the top. Functionally its almost at will action surging by the mid levels. At higher levels you can easily do 24 rounds a day (3 rounds, 8 encounters).

The Paladin/Sorcerer is mostly theory crafting the Sorlock is playable level 1 (as a single classed PC of course) a it weak level 2, becomes good at level 3 and gets better from there. Once you start dealing 1d10+1d6+5 6 times a round for 75%+ of the combats you're kinda golden.

If you allow multiclassing you can also be a fightlock, warter or whatever is called. Or a sorlockter and the fighter will be happily another part of your combos.

 

[Zardnaar]

What can I say, if I see class using ideal conditions and most of his features to improve DPR compared against another class using normal attacks I think it is a worthless comparison.


1- He can also have far more durability with improved AC, HPs, autoheals using a BA and better saving throws.
Not sure how a fighter deals less damage using action surge and their specific sub-class features.
2- It's not only about casting high level spells, you also have to defend yourself, when I played a sorcerer I burned a lot of slots on shield, blur, mirror image, etc. You also want your area spell, perhaps a teleportation spell, buffs...
3- Yes, but don't compare a sorcerer that can not be attacked fully buffed expending all their sorcery hit points, metamagic extra damage from class, etc to a fighter only using his normal attacks.


If you allow multiclassing you can also be a fightlock, warter or whatever is called. Or a sorlockter and the fighter will be happily another part of your combos.

We had a fighter 1/warlock xyz fiend pact. Iirc the player
named her creation the fiend blade.

Another mc build that works well at low levels. It's good but not as a usable as the Sorlock. Great tank though.