D&D 5E Fixing the Champion

[BookBarbarian]

Sorry, but reckless attack IS limited to the barbarian's first attack

This is categorically untrue. From the 5e SRD: "When you make your first attack on your turn, you can decide to attack recklessly. Doing so gives you advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength during this turn" emphasis added.

 

[abirdcall]

To be honest, the whole idea that the Champion is the "simple fighter" is starting to ring a bit hollow to me. It seems that most of those complaining about the Champion being underwhelming are finding it (either in play or just 'theoretically') too hard to play the subclass effectively. So, the supposed fix is to add or change bits to make it easier to play the subclass in accordance with some play-style.

This tells me that in fact the Champion is a complex subclass. If you really want to play a complex and challenging subclass, you should just figure out how to play the Champion well according to the RAW; rather than trying to make the class simpler to play effectively.

Yeah, there is greater emphasis on using your environment and other abilities creatively to gain advantages. Almost like it is designed to be the fighter of old.

Also, Champions are best friends of Masterminds.

 

[jonathonhawke]

I don't know why several people have said that RA gives a bonus of +1 - +2. RA is one-half of proficiency rounded up, so that when you get it at level 7, the bonus is (3/2 rounded up) +2. At level 13, it increases to (5/2 rounded up) +3.

 

[Tony Vargas]

To be honest, the whole idea that the Champion is the "simple fighter" is starting to ring a bit hollow to me. It seems that most of those complaining about the Champion being underwhelming are finding it (either in play or just 'theoretically') too hard to play the subclass effectively. So, the supposed fix is to add or change bits to make it easier to play the subclass in accordance with some play-style.

Yeah, I could see that: anytime there's a balance issue, there's probably some system-mastery way to ameliorate it, and it might be a tad complex. That's what it sounds like, here. You can pull some tricks to leverage Champion crits to close the (not that significant) gap with other DPR fiends, but the price is more complexity, in play. It's just another way in which the same nominally lesser performance is the price 'simplicity.'

 

[krakistophales]

This is categorically untrue. From the 5e SRD: "When you make your first attack on your turn, you can decide to attack recklessly. Doing so gives you advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength during this turn" emphasis added.

Yes, I was wrong. Sorry.

Anyway, if you don't agree with the original premise that the champion needs work, this discussion isn't for you. This discussion assumes that you feel that the champion is a trap option, suck alternative, subpar archetype.

Yes, the battlemaster's abilities are on demand precisely because you can choose to use them or not. As for etc, do you really need to ask? How about increasing attack range, increasing chance to hit, adding damage, inducing status effects, allowing allies to maneuver outside of their turn, tripping enemies, forcing a target to drop a held item, hitting multiple targets with the same attack, ETC. That doesn't even list all of them. Do I really need to go on?

Now, down to the point of this whole thread:

The battlemaster can use superiority dice to fuel maneuvers on demand to do a myriad of things, and almost always including extra damage.
The barbarian can grant himself advantage on every attack, on top of that having extra damage, brutal criticals, and resistance to goddamn everything in the game.
The paladin has passive immunities, buffs, can buff the whole party, cure disease, cast spells, or use those spells to deal huge nova damage.
The eldritch knight can blast, buff, provide utility, AND battlefield control, all while still having a D10 HD, dressed in plate armor, having a greatsword with GWF, GWM, and 4 attacks.

The champion, as it's built now, has a 10% extra chance to do an extra 2d6 damage, +1 AC, a max of +3 to non-proficient physical skills, and regeneration 10 at levels of play where that really doesn't even matter. Do you now see why a thread was made proposing changes to this archetype? I don't propose that the champion become a juggernaut that storms the battlefield and crushes all others in his wake. I just want him to be AS GOOD as the other two fighter archetypes are. Is that too much to ask?

 

[NotActuallyTim]

Yes actually. The book is out.

WoTC isn't going to change it now.

And you asking on this forum isn't going to achieve anything at all.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The battlemaster can use superiority dice to fuel maneuvers on demand to do a myriad of things, and almost always including extra damage.

To be fair, 'myriad' = ~17 for the sub-class as a whole, only 3 for the typical newly-minted Battlemaster, and it's not like he has to prep them in the morning.

I don't propose that the champion become a juggernaut that storms the battlefield and crushes all others in his wake. I just want him to be AS GOOD as the other two fighter archetypes are. Is that too much to ask?

Yes, because one of them casts spells. "As good as the Battlemaster" is a lot easier to pin down.

 

[krakistophales]

The battlemaster can use superiority dice to fuel maneuvers on demand to do a myriad of things, and almost always including extra damage.

To be fair, 'myriad' = ~17 for the sub-class as a whole, only 3 for the typical newly-minted Battlemaster, and it's not like he has to prep them in the morning.

Yes, because one of them casts spells. "As good as the Battlemaster" is a lot easier to pin down.

Fair enough.

 

[TwoSix]

The closest to this is probably the Evoker (which is one of the reasons it's touted as the "default/basic wizard."), with maybe either kind of Sorcerer coming in close behind (I have three spells, I spam them all day, this is What I Do).

Sorcerer is closer, but what I was really looking for is something more like an eldritch blast warlock minus the spells and the pact boons. Make some of the invocations a little stronger to compensate.

There's nothing stopping you creating additional manoeuvres for the Battlemaster.

Well, you're forgetting one thing....I'm REALLY lazy. I'm more interested in making simple casters than complex fighters, personally. To be honest, my personal preference would be to see more powerful martial effects added to the rogue.

 

[TwoSix]

To be honest, the whole idea that the Champion is the "simple fighter" is starting to ring a bit hollow to me. It seems that most of those complaining about the Champion being underwhelming are finding it (either in play or just 'theoretically') too hard to play the subclass effectively. So, the supposed fix is to add or change bits to make it easier to play the subclass in accordance with some play-style.

This tells me that in fact the Champion is a complex subclass. If you really want to play a complex and challenging subclass, you should just figure out how to play the Champion well according to the RAW; rather than trying to make the class simpler to play effectively.

That's a poor analogy, because you're conflating complexity with difficulty. The champion might be more difficult to play because it has leverage narrative considerations instead of using abilities built into the rules, but that doesn't make it complex. After all, those narrative considerations are available to EVERY character.

Just as a note, I personally consider the Champion fine (Remarkable Athlete is fine mechanically, it's simply terribly named). I'm just bemoaning the general design ethos that doesn't include obvious evolutions to the game like complex warriors and simple casters.