D&D 5E Would this fix Champion?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[smbakeresq]

I found it, it was in app not in general settings on desktop

 

[Tony Vargas]

How about this: what's wrong with the Champion fighter and why does it need to be changed? Why not just play one of the other variants?

Obviously, if there is one of the other sub-classes that appeals, and it's available in the campaign, as a player, you just play that. By the same token, if there's an improved champion available in the campaign, and, as a player, you despise it, you wouldn't play it.

From the DM PoV, there are certain sorts of players and play styles that make the comparative desirability of the various player options (like sub-classes) very important. So a DM might power up or nerf one sub-class or feat or spell or other player option or another, to keep them all close enough to equally-desireable that they remain real choices to those sorts of players, playing in those sorts of styles.

It's a matter of keeping choices available, in that sense.

Don't give me spells as a Fighter.

The Eldritch Knight looks hurt....

(please read as special abilities that can only be used by using a resource that you are unable to use otherwise)

I know that primordial D&D established that magic tended to work n/day, and non-magical things tended (not quite always) to work 'all the time' (not really, because context matters). It's long been summed up, 'the magic user can only cast that spell once, the fighter can swing his sword all day.' It's never really been true, though. The fighter can swing his sword all day (for lack of any rules for fatigue), but it accomplishes nothing if there's no enemy w/in his melee reach, and he's not gauranteed to hit. Spells had an arbitrary 1/day mechanic, but when the player invoked that mechanic, they always happened. Originally, the rationalization of that mechanic was memorization (nicked from a Jack Vance science-fiction classic), it changed to preparation (not sure where that came from, but it was a lot like the rationale of the Delay modifier in Fantasy Hero), and now it's completely-undefined/abstracted 'slots.' Slots might be anything. Oddly quantum-stepped units of fatigue or mana. Mystical factors like heavenly configurations, local ethyric vibrations, relative metaphysical karma balances, space in the caster's aura, etc... It boils down to the caster can do certain magics, sometimes, and sometimes he can't, and it depends on player-management of an abstract game resource with no solid justification in the fiction that could be rationalized any number of ways depending on how you care to think of magic.

That's not really very different from CS dice. The BM can do certain maneuvers, some of the time, if he has a CS die handy. What does that represent? Could be fungible/uniform units of determination, heroic effort, or fatigue. Could be tactical factors like 'conditioning' or surprising an opponent, or gaining 'momentum' or 'the upper hand' momentarily. Could be other things I'm not up on, but that fans or practitioners of martial arts could go on at contentious length about. Ultimately that'd be at least as arcane to armchair nerds as hypothetical or traditional laws of magic. It boils down the BM can do certain sometimes, and sometimes he can't, and it depends on player-management of an abstract game resource with no solid justification in the fiction that could be rationalized any number of ways depending on how you care to think of medieval combat.

So, yeah, in that sense, you've got your BM & EK both using abstract resource management mechanics to more interestingly and playably model complex, highly variable aspects of action in the heroic fantasy genre. 'Casting spells' works as shorthand for that only because, for most of D&D history, that kind of interesting/playable resource-management was exclusive to magic.

If there were at will versions of the Superiority Dice maneuvers, and they gained a greater effect when you used the resource, I would be fine with that as well.

That's an interesting take. I could see that working very well as a magic system, too (in a way, not that different from casting a lower-level spell in a higher level slot - if all spells had a cantrip basis, and were just powered up by expending slots on them, for instance).

I guess that'd be 'spellcasters using maneuvers.'

 

[DaedalusX51]

Obviously, if there is one of the other sub-classes that appeals, and it's available in the campaign, as a player, you just play that. By the same token, if there's an improved champion available in the campaign, and, as a player, you despise it, you wouldn't play it.

From the DM PoV, there are certain sorts of players and play styles that make the comparative desirability of the various player options (like sub-classes) very important. So a DM might power up or nerf one sub-class or feat or spell or other player option or another, to keep them all close enough to equally-desireable that they remain real choices to those sorts of players, playing in those sorts of styles.

It's a matter of keeping choices available, in that sense.


The Eldritch Knight looks hurt....I know that primordial D&D established that magic tended to work n/day, and non-magical things tended (not quite always) to work 'all the time' (not really, because context matters). It's long been summed up, 'the magic user can only cast that spell once, the fighter can swing his sword all day.' It's never really been true, though. The fighter can swing his sword all day (for lack of any rules for fatigue), but it accomplishes nothing if there's no enemy w/in his melee reach, and he's not gauranteed to hit. Spells had an arbitrary 1/day mechanic, but when the player invoked that mechanic, they always happened. Originally, the rationalization of that mechanic was memorization (nicked from a Jack Vance science-fiction classic), it changed to preparation (not sure where that came from, but it was a lot like the rationale of the Delay modifier in Fantasy Hero), and now it's completely-undefined/abstracted 'slots.' Slots might be anything. Oddly quantum-stepped units of fatigue or mana. Mystical factors like heavenly configurations, local ethyric vibrations, relative metaphysical karma balances, space in the caster's aura, etc... It boils down to the caster can do certain magics, sometimes, and sometimes he can't, and it depends on player-management of an abstract game resource with no solid justification in the fiction that could be rationalized any number of ways depending on how you care to think of magic.

That's not really very different from CS dice. The BM can do certain maneuvers, some of the time, if he has a CS die handy. What does that represent? Could be fungible/uniform units of determination, heroic effort, or fatigue. Could be tactical factors like 'conditioning' or surprising an opponent, or gaining 'momentum' or 'the upper hand' momentarily. Could be other things I'm not up on, but that fans or practitioners of martial arts could go on at contentious length about. Ultimately that'd be at least as arcane to armchair nerds as hypothetical or traditional laws of magic. It boils down the BM can do certain sometimes, and sometimes he can't, and it depends on player-management of an abstract game resource with no solid justification in the fiction that could be rationalized any number of ways depending on how you care to think of medieval combat.

So, yeah, in that sense, you've got your BM & EK both using abstract resource management mechanics to more interestingly and playably model complex, highly variable aspects of action in the heroic fantasy genre. 'Casting spells' works as shorthand for that only because, for most of D&D history, that kind of interesting/playable resource-management was exclusive to magic.

That's an interesting take. I could see that working very well as a magic system, too (in a way, not that different from casting a lower-level spell in a higher level slot - if all spells had a cantrip basis, and were just powered up by expending slots on them, for instance).

I guess that'd be 'spellcasters using maneuvers.'

I actually started working on the Battle Master idea in another thread.
Now that you mention it, I would really love to see a Spellcaster version of this system as well.
That may be a little too in depth for me right now, but if someone started it, I would love to contribute.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I actually started working on the Battle Master idea in another thread.

I saw that, you're becoming quite prolific!

Now that you mention it, I would really love to see a Spellcaster version of this system as well.
That may be a little too in depth for me right now, but if someone started it, I would love to contribute.

I suppose it could be as simple as putting existing spells in 'trees' with a cantrip at the base. Or it could be the foundation of a completely different magic system.
Just a random thought.

 

[Eubani]

If I had any real beef with the Champion other than the basic/simple fighter should of been it's own class is that increased crit range is a poor way to give extra damage and remarkable Athalete is a tad wonky.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I’ve had concerns with a few specific subclasses that seemed underpowered compared to other subclasses, and the Champion vs. Battle Master was one of them.

After extensive analysis, I determined that my concerns regarding the Champion were unnecessary, and that overall it could be considered insignificantly inferior in effectiveness to the Battle Master.

This is in contrast to the other subclasses I examined, which I concluded really were unacceptably weak (the Berserker insultingly so, because it also committed the error of penalizing the playstyle that the class/subclass theme implied).

(I should point out that I do not consider simplicity of play vs. another subclass to be a valid defense for mechanical weakness. Those are two separate considerations which should have no bearing on each other.)

The basic results of my examination were that with 2 short rests and 9 rounds of combat in a day the Battle Master comes out slightly ahead on DPR at most levels.

However, if you include GWM, and/or increase the rounds of combat between short rests (which I slanted in favor of the Battle Master as you can see), the Champion generally pulls equal or ahead. GWM is especially favorable to the Champion at high levels.

Some points of interest:
1) The benefits to alternate/improvised actions from Remarkable Athlete are rarely going to come into play in combat. This is because Champion probably already has Athletics proficiency, which will cover almost everything he might do. If he has Acrobatics too, that will cover all the rest of your typical Strength/Dexterity actions.
2) Constitution checks (as opposed to saves) are rare and highly dependent on the DM, but in the right campaign he can get some benefit out of it, as well as out of the increase to jumping distance.
3) The bonus to Strength checks to which no proficiencies apply (like pure acts of pushing, lifting, bending) can be useful, as can the bonus to the Dexterity skills the fighter may not have, like Stealth.

Those features of Remarkable Athlete are exploration pillar abilities, comparable to the Battle Master’s non-combat abilities.

4) The Champion gains a modest ‘hidden’ damage increase from Remarkable Athlete’s initiative bonus. This is a cool little thing that is easy to miss.
5) The Champion will probably have a +1 AC at higher levels due to his additional fighting style, which is a pretty big thing in 5e.
6) It goes without saying that his high level regeneration is amazing. Starting every battle with a minimum of half your hit points and regenerating means you will get taken out of the fight less often and use less healing resources from teammates. It also further supports the playstyle of long days of monster chopping.

Those need to be taken into account when considering overall combat effectiveness.

7) The Battle Master’s damage assumes he uses all of his superiority dice between each short rest. This means he isn’t necessarily using them to best effectiveness (as far as riders are concerned). If your Battle Master prefers to hold on to some of his dice for when he really needs them, he will most likely start most short rests without having spent at least one of them. Now, it might just be my playing style, but that’s something that will actually come up for me and my fellow players, reducing the real damage output of the Battle Master.
8) The Battle Master’s high level ability to regain a superiority die at the start of each combat increases his damage significantly, and mitigates the effects of point 7, making it hard for the Champion to keep up in pure damage output.

This means that the Battle Master’s raw numbers can (IMO) be more misleading than the Champion’s raw numbers (to both the Battle Master’s detriment and benefit).

9) The Champion benefits more from GWM. If this is in play, it can significantly shift things in its favor.
10) The Champion benefits more from advantage. If the party setup grants it easy and regular advantage, this can be a huge benefit.
11) The Battle Master’s maneuvers give it a lot of flexibility, some of which can be great support for the rest of the party.

This means that the Champion benefits more from feats, while both Champion and Battle Master can have their effective contribution significantly enhanced based on party composition and playstyle. They’d probably make great buddies in the same party.

12) It goes without saying that the longer you go between short rests, the more and more effective the Champion becomes. This can be a strong support for AD&D playstyles, which tended to include more encounters in a day.
13) The Battle Master, of course, shines if you have lots of short rests. This supports a 4e style fairly well.

Both subclasses mechanically favor/reward the playstyle that they thematically imply.

Primarily because the Battle Master’s maneuvers give it a lot of flexibility, because of the number of rounds of combat that tend to actually happen between short rests for most groups, and because feats cannot be assumed, I give the Battle Master a slight advantage overall.

However, this slight imbalance is, IMO, well within the range of the unavoidable imbalances that occur when classes use different mechanics. This is in contrast to a couple other subclasses that bother me so much I’d need house rules to play them.

So as someone who is both imbalance sensitive, and weighs thematic playstyle support highly, I’m excited about playing both Champion and Battle Master, and consider any imbalance that may situationally appear between them to be well within the acceptable range.

 

[Parmandur]

I usually play Wizards or Sorcerers; playing a Champion was a delight. Sure, not many choices mechanically, but effective; and skills and background provide plenty of fodder for roleplaying. The subclass as-is is perfect, no need of a "fix."

 

[smbakeresq]

I saw that, you're becoming quite prolific!
I suppose it could be as simple as putting existing spells in 'trees' with a cantrip at the base. Or it could be the foundation of a completely different magic system.
Just a random thought.

I always thought that spells should be in trees so that to know spell x to know spell Y, like in Dragon Age for example. Of course the trees could be short like that, 3-4 spells, or a cantrip could lead to multiple things, like Fire Bolt could lead to all evocation spells, etc. Wizards study magic, so it would be a formalized regime. This benefits sorcerers some, as it wouldn't apply to them. So Wizards get more variety, but down certain paths, sorcerers can pick freely but are more limited. This makes the classes more divergent, which is good IMO.

 

[smbakeresq]

I’ve had concerns with a few specific subclasses that seemed underpowered compared to other subclasses, and the Champion vs. Battle Master was one of them.

After extensive analysis, I determined that my concerns regarding the Champion were unnecessary, and that overall it could be considered insignificantly inferior in effectiveness to the Battle Master.

This is in contrast to the other subclasses I examined, which I concluded really were unacceptably weak (the Berserker insultingly so, because it also committed the error of penalizing the playstyle that the class/subclass theme implied).

(I should point out that I do not consider simplicity of play vs. another subclass to be a valid defense for mechanical weakness. Those are two separate considerations which should have no bearing on each other.)

The basic results of my examination were that with 2 short rests and 9 rounds of combat in a day the Battle Master comes out slightly ahead on DPR at most levels.

However, if you include GWM, and/or increase the rounds of combat between short rests (which I slanted in favor of the Battle Master as you can see), the Champion generally pulls equal or ahead. GWM is especially favorable to the Champion at high levels.

Some points of interest:
1) The benefits to alternate/improvised actions from Remarkable Athlete are rarely going to come into play in combat. This is because Champion probably already has Athletics proficiency, which will cover almost everything he might do. If he has Acrobatics too, that will cover all the rest of your typical Strength/Dexterity actions.
2) Constitution checks (as opposed to saves) are rare and highly dependent on the DM, but in the right campaign he can get some benefit out of it, as well as out of the increase to jumping distance.
3) The bonus to Strength checks to which no proficiencies apply (like pure acts of pushing, lifting, bending) can be useful, as can the bonus to the Dexterity skills the fighter may not have, like Stealth.

Those features of Remarkable Athlete are exploration pillar abilities, comparable to the Battle Master’s non-combat abilities.

4) The Champion gains a modest ‘hidden’ damage increase from Remarkable Athlete’s initiative bonus. This is a cool little thing that is easy to miss.
5) The Champion will probably have a +1 AC at higher levels due to his additional fighting style, which is a pretty big thing in 5e.
6) It goes without saying that his high level regeneration is amazing. Starting every battle with a minimum of half your hit points and regenerating means you will get taken out of the fight less often and use less healing resources from teammates. It also further supports the playstyle of long days of monster chopping.

Those need to be taken into account when considering overall combat effectiveness.

7) The Battle Master’s damage assumes he uses all of his superiority dice between each short rest. This means he isn’t necessarily using them to best effectiveness (as far as riders are concerned). If your Battle Master prefers to hold on to some of his dice for when he really needs them, he will most likely start most short rests without having spent at least one of them. Now, it might just be my playing style, but that’s something that will actually come up for me and my fellow players, reducing the real damage output of the Battle Master.
8) The Battle Master’s high level ability to regain a superiority die at the start of each combat increases his damage significantly, and mitigates the effects of point 7, making it hard for the Champion to keep up in pure damage output.

This means that the Battle Master’s raw numbers can (IMO) be more misleading than the Champion’s raw numbers (to both the Battle Master’s detriment and benefit).

9) The Champion benefits more from GWM. If this is in play, it can significantly shift things in its favor.
10) The Champion benefits more from advantage. If the party setup grants it easy and regular advantage, this can be a huge benefit.
11) The Battle Master’s maneuvers give it a lot of flexibility, some of which can be great support for the rest of the party.

This means that the Champion benefits more from feats, while both Champion and Battle Master can have their effective contribution significantly enhanced based on party composition and playstyle. They’d probably make great buddies in the same party.

12) It goes without saying that the longer you go between short rests, the more and more effective the Champion becomes. This can be a strong support for AD&D playstyles, which tended to include more encounters in a day.
13) The Battle Master, of course, shines if you have lots of short rests. This supports a 4e style fairly well.

Both subclasses mechanically favor/reward the playstyle that they thematically imply.

Primarily because the Battle Master’s maneuvers give it a lot of flexibility, because of the number of rounds of combat that tend to actually happen between short rests for most groups, and because feats cannot be assumed, I give the Battle Master a slight advantage overall.

However, this slight imbalance is, IMO, well within the range of the unavoidable imbalances that occur when classes use different mechanics. This is in contrast to a couple other subclasses that bother me so much I’d need house rules to play them.

So as someone who is both imbalance sensitive, and weighs thematic playstyle support highly, I’m excited about playing both Champion and Battle Master, and consider any imbalance that may situationally appear between them to be well within the acceptable range.

All of this is true, and as a DM I always run with more encounters and much longer work days then the assumption. BY the time you get to the end encounter at least half of your resources will be gone. A healers kit with the feat is a big thing when I run it. But that's just me.

The Champion though is back loaded, the BM is front loaded, to me that's the biggest issue. The Champ just needs a few things up front to give it more flavor, things that are exclusive to the Champion, to separate it out. I got to play as opposed to DM a champion, and adding Tide of Iron from 4e (using 5e rules of course) added something that was flavorful but not OP. Pushing people around is just fun even if it has little effect on that combat. It just feels like you are doing something. Come and Get it at 7th level was same way (giving up all your attacks to do so.) Marking was great, but we used it only for Champ. Feats that only a fighter class would take would help too given greater feat access.

Regeneration is great, but LBH, who is running 17th level plus campaigns? What is needed is more from 3-12. What makes Human Variant click is you can get a build defining feat right from the get go, GWM, Pole Arm, or shield shenigans or dual weapon.

Look at all the UA stuff they have releases for fighter chassis, its all cool things to do.