D&D 5E Fixing the Champion

[ChrisCarlson]

Yes, the Battlemaster does rely on superiority dice and many of his abilities will add the number depending on the dice rolled. However, the Battlemaster will always add at least a +1 to whatever maneuver they may be using (often to either the attack roll or damage roll, but sometimes to their AC). But in addition to this bonus, most maneuvers also provide an additional effect. This might include making an additional attack, disarming the opponent, providing temp HP... the list goes on. Not all of these effects even rely on or require the superiority dice to be rolled.

Additionally, yes, I grant you that some of these abilities rely the battlemaster to first successfully strike the opponent (not all maneuvers, but some).

Is there even one example of a maneuver use that cannot be invalidated by the outcome of a die/dice rolls? I can't think of one. Help me out here. Provide one. Just one will do.

However, it is much more likely that a battlemaster will hit an opponent (by a lot) than for a champion to score a critical hit.

This is not always the case, no. I do not believe you can provide universally applicable math to prove such a claim.

Also, when your BM's four dice have been expended, but the champion is still able to crit on 19+ indefinitely, when does the former become the trap option? Champions don't need to take a nap to reset their crit bonus.

On a related aside, why do people keep fixating only on the champion's crit bonus? That's not their only subclass feature.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

On a related aside, why do people keep fixating only on the champion's crit bonus? That's not their only subclass feature.

It seems likely to me because the few folks that have brought up complaints against the other features of the subclass haven't had their points directly argued against.

For example, I haven't gotten into the Remarkable Athlete portion of things on account of the complaints made that I've seen being such that they require an entirely complicated reply to address them with my opinion, and I lack the motivation to make such a long-winded argument when I suspect I'll just be dismissed as out of my gourd for saying that a Champion should put their skill proficiency choices in skills associated with Int, Wis, and Cha because the combination of their likely higher physical ability scores and Remarkable Athlete will make them plenty adept at those physical tasks, meaning a more potently function character in more pillars of the game.

And the only complaints made against the additional fighting style, what few I saw, just aren't worth the words to argue against because basically no one has been foolish enough to consider it not a worthy bonus.

Lastly, the only complaint I've seen about Survivor is that it doesn't happen sooner... and I actually think that is a valid complaint, even though such a potent ability being earlier in the game might appear too powerful.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not seeing how your reply has anything to do with my post that you quoted.

1) Your post used examples to make the point that the variability of the dice is so great that it trumps the mechanical features of the class in terms of the final result, and that players focused on class features ignore the far more pertinent results of the dice rolls in favor of analyzing and debating class features that are fairly trivial in comparison.

2) My rebuttal is trying to succinctly point out that while I, as a powergamer/optimizer, acknowledge my attempts to min/max builds will often be compromised by the dice, I still prefer to try to gather as many advantages in my character build as I can to weather any possible dice storms that may affect me in play.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

Is there even one example of a maneuver use that cannot be invalidated by the outcome of a die/dice rolls? I can't think of one. Help me out here. Provide one. Just one will do.

Let's take the example of Maneuvering Strike. The BM gets to decide to use it after the attack is successful, so there is no chance that you will expend the superiority dice and it be wasted. (Yes, this requires the BM to hit, which relies on statistics. But once again, with bounded accuracy of 5e and most monsters having an AC of 13-16, with a BM strength bonus of at least +3 and a proficiency bonus of +3, that brings the hit likelihood to around 50%, give or take. Much higher than the 10% chance to score a crit of a champion without advantage). The BM in this situation will at least do +1 damage to this monster. In addition, an ally can make a move without drawing AoOs, potentially positioning him to allow the party rogue to get in their sneak attack or what have you.

This is not always the case, no. I do not believe you can provide universally applicable math to prove such a claim.

It is always much more likely for a player to hit a creature than to score a critical, especially in this addition where the very highest AC is around 25 for a Tarrasque. Taking into consideration proficiency bonus and strength/dex modifiers, and that most monsters will have an AC between 11-19, you are statically much more likely to hit before you score a critical. Why else would they call it a critical?

Also, when your BM's four dice have been expended, but the champion is still able to crit on 19+ indefinitely, when does the former become the trap option? Champions don't need to take a nap to reset their crit bonus.

On a related aside, why do people keep fixating only on the champion's crit bonus? That's not their only subclass feature.

For me personally, I just don't like the expanded critical. Yes, Remarkable Athlete sucks as written, but is much easier to fix. The expanded critical somehow seems different.

 

[TwoSix]

On a related aside, why do people keep fixating only on the champion's crit bonus? That's not their only subclass feature.

Because that's the one that affects max DPR, of course.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

For example, I haven't gotten into the Remarkable Athlete portion of things on account of the complaints made that I've seen being such that they require an entirely complicated reply to address them with my opinion, and I lack the motivation to make such a long-winded argument when I suspect I'll just be dismissed as out of my gourd for saying that a Champion should put their skill proficiency choices in skills associated with Int, Wis, and Cha because the combination of their likely higher physical ability scores and Remarkable Athlete will make them plenty adept at those physical tasks, meaning a more potently function character in more pillars of the game.

I think this is a good point. I think people often compare it to the bard's Jack of All Trades or Expertise, and want something similar, which is why it's brought up.

And the only complaints made against the additional fighting style, what few I saw, just aren't worth the words to argue against because basically no one has been foolish enough to consider it not a worthy bonus.

I've actually considered this, as most fighting style are not synergistic. However, but there are some that can work well together, such as defense or protection. I don't know, I've mulled over it, but I don't know what else I might suggest instead.

It might also function more like a greater ribbon ability, similar to the BM's Know Your Enemy ability or the EK's Arcane Charge. Each of them does something and could be useful, but they all seem like lesser abilities that won't come into play as often.

Lastly, the only complaint I've seen about Survivor is that it doesn't happen sooner... and I actually think that is a valid complaint, even though such a potent ability being earlier in the game might appear too powerful.

Yea, I don't know. The more I think about the Champion, the more my head just hurts.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

1) Your post used examples to make the point that the variability of the dice is so great that it trumps the mechanical features of the class in terms of the final result, and that players focused on class features ignore the far more pertinent results of the dice rolls in favor of analyzing and debating class features that are fairly trivial in comparison.

2) My rebuttal is trying to succinctly point out that while I, as a powergamer/optimizer, acknowledge my attempts to min/max builds will often be compromised by the dice, I still prefer to try to gather as many advantages in my character build as I can to weather any possible dice storms that may affect me in play.

Ah... so I was correct that your reply had no relationship to my post.

I was not talking about people ignoring that the d20 has more influence in matters than class features do - but about people that seem to act as though dice always behave exactly at their statistical averages (i.e. the average of a string of d20 rolls will be 10.5, not 10.55, 9.35, or 14, and exactly 1 d20 roll in 20, not anywhere from 0 to 20, will be a natural 20).

See, I too like to do what I can to stack the odds as much in my character's favor as I can - I'm just not going to forget that, for an example from another thread entirely, bless is a bonus 1d4, which is not functionally identical to +2 (.5) to every attack because that's not actually how dice work.

 

[Lehrbuch]

True enough, but there are ways to do this without relying on the rest of the party. The Shove action is right there waiting for anyone to knock anyone prone...

Yes, Shove is great for a champion, especially (as you say) once the champion has extra attacks.

For me, the most reliable, consistent way for the champion to get advantage is to have a retainer/follower/hireling. The idea being that they stand alongside you and use the Help action on you. Of course, ensuring the survival of your retainer gives you something else to think about, but that's no problem, that's fun! Typically, a retainer will have lower HPs than the PCs, but bounded accuracy means that his AC will still be credible, if you ensure he's wearing sensible armour. I've found that using a retainer in this way actually makes the Protection Fighting Style quite good.

If your DM won't let you acquire retainers, then you might be able to convince another PC to do the same. But PCs tend to think they have better things to do.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Let's take the example of Maneuvering Strike. The BM gets to decide to use it after the attack is successful, so there is no chance that you will expend the superiority dice and it be wasted. (Yes, this requires the BM to hit, which relies on statistics. But once again, with bounded accuracy of 5e and most monsters having an AC of 13-16, with a BM strength bonus of at least +3 and a proficiency bonus of +3, that brings the hit likelihood to around 50%, give or take. Much higher than the 10% chance to score a crit of a champion without advantage). The BM in this situation will at least do +1 damage to this monster. In addition, an ally can make a move without drawing AoOs, potentially positioning him to allow the party rogue to get in their sneak attack or what have you.

Just to be clear, and trying not remain entirely in a white room vacuum: Wishing to use Maneuvering Strike would strongly imply there is an ally that would benefit from its use. Now that the cart is back behind the horse where it belongs, we need to understand that the hit (or miss) is the important variable setting up the use of the maneuver. In the moment. When you tell your injured wizard buddy that you are going to use the maneuver on your action to allow him to escape the reach of the ogre, a miss is going to suck. And yes, misses do happen. In crucial moments. At least IMX.

And since you wish to bring up a key 5e system feature (bounded accuracy) to justify likelihoods and probabilities, let's bring up another one from which the champion disproportionately benefits: advantage (also a key 5e system feature). Rolling double dice, looking for 18+, with multiple attacks, numerous rounds per day? You think the odds are likely you'll see crits happening?

For me personally, I just don't like the expanded critical. Yes, Remarkable Athlete sucks as written, but is much easier to fix. The expanded critical somehow seems different.

Okay.

 

[TwoSix]

Ah... so I was correct that your reply had no relationship to my post.

I was not talking about people ignoring that the d20 has more influence in matters than class features do - but about people that seem to act as though dice always behave exactly at their statistical averages (i.e. the average of a string of d20 rolls will be 10.5, not 10.55, 9.35, or 14, and exactly 1 d20 roll in 20, not anywhere from 0 to 20, will be a natural 20).

See, I too like to do what I can to stack the odds as much in my character's favor as I can - I'm just not going to forget that, for an example from another thread entirely, bless is a bonus 1d4, which is not functionally identical to +2 (.5) to every attack because that's not actually how dice work.

I took away a point slightly different from the point you were attempting to make, yes.

And people talk about averages for the same reason physics lessons start with spherical cows, it's a useful diagnostic for comparing various game features against each other, because the effects of the d20 (or other dice) exist for all of them (and if there is no random component, that can be called out specifically as a feature).

And no one mathematically literate doesn't recognize that a +1d4 isn't equivalent to a +2.5 bonus. (I've argued this point in the past, actually.) But then you get down into a rabbit hole of doing discrete math calculations, as opposed to an easy DPR calculation, and no one wants to go there.