D&D 5E Building a better Fighter

[Pauln6]

Sounds like you're either confusing turns with rounds OR you're using a house rule regarding a group of monsters acting on the same turn.

RAW, each creature gets a turn. Even if 10 hobgoblins are clustered on the same initiative count, when hobgoblin A acts it takes its turn, and when hobgoblin B acts it takes its turn, and so on until the end of the combat round.

What Combat Reflexes + Berserker's Retaliation does is allow for a scenario where, for example...

Hobgoblin A damages PC with a melee weapon on its turn. PC reacts via Berserker's Retaliation, kills/wounds Hobgoblin A.

Hobgoblin B damages PC with a melee weapon on its turn. PC reacts via Berserker's Retaliation, and uses 2nd reaction thanks to Combat Reflexes, kills/wounds Hobgoblin B.

What you have here is a clear power-up over other characters that are possible in the PHB. This is objectively better than a Battle Master using Counterattack.

If you're operating from the premise that the PHB Fighter is "weaker" than other classes, then this may be seen as a feature to you. Similarly, if you want to encourage multi-classing into fighter, this may be seen as a feature to you. However, if the objective of your design is to make the fighter more interesting without a significant power boost, then this is something to be aware of.

Another example would be being able to use shield (via Magic Initiate feat or levels in a spellcasting class) and to make an opportunity attack in the same combat round.

You could hard code limitations into the fighter class I suppose e.g. an additional reaction which may be used in the following ways: to attack an opponent who moves out of reach, to impose disadvantage on attack rolls against allies when using the Protection fighting style etc. You can then use sub-classes to expand that in much the same way as the rogue sub-classes expand cunning action.

Of course if you multi-class or take a feat or manouevre that grants a reaction ability, you might still be able to use that ability and then multiple reactions under the fighter head but it becomes far more circumstance specific.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You want a better fighter? Go play 4th edition. Thats the only edition that has a better version.

At your table. For others, it's the worst version. Funny thing about personal tastes: they're personal.

 

[steeldragons]

I'd say, for the proposed "Combat Reflexes" balancing thing that the simple phrase, "...once per round..." should clear everything up and keep it from being OPed.

Still giving the Fighter something that other folks can't do. Not going to get out of hand if you use/allow the optional 3+e-style MCing or Feats. Everybody's happy.

 

[Pauln6]

I'd say, for the proposed "Combat Reflexes" balancing thing that the simple phrase, "...once per round..." should clear everything up and keep it from being OPed.

Still giving the Fighter something that other folks can't do. Not going to get out of hand if you use/allow the optional 3+e-style MCing or Feats. Everybody's happy.

Can you explain your thinking? Everybody gets a single reaction once per round. Saying you get multiple reactions once per round is either negating the class feature altogether or placing no limitation on it at all.

Of course the other alternative is handling out additional reactions rechargeable on a short rest but again, that sounds like it might give greater advantages to other classes with more interesting features suck up reactions. Many players may take 5 levels of fighter for the extra attack. Maybe the thing to do is move combat reflexes to the same level as the ability score improvements that fighters get instead. Then it becomes 6th, 14th, and 19th. A disincentive to multi-class that deep.

 

[steeldragons]

It's not particularly complicated thinking.

Everyone gets 1 reaction.

Saying the Fighter gets another [1] additional reaction from this feature (each round!) gives them a potential 2 reactions within a single round. Something other classes don't have/can't do.

But still not, as the fear/seeming of overpowered-ness, allowing for many multiples of reactionary actions within a single round.

 

[Pauln6]

It's not particularly complicated thinking.

Everyone gets 1 reaction.

Saying the Fighter gets another [1] additional reaction from this feature (each round!) gives them a potential 2 reactions within a single round. Something other classes don't have/can't do.

But still not, as the fear/seeming of overpowered-ness, allowing for many multiples of reactionary actions within a single round.

Ok, I'm with you. So just don't scale it. I think that opens it up to more powerful combinations though if you can perform more than one reaction on your own turn.

If you have three reactions but you can only use one of them on your own turn, this is likely more diluted as your remaining reaction abilities will be dependent on your enemies actions - ripostes, sentinel attacks, pole-arm reach etc.

I think that restricting the things you can do with your additional reactions to certain fighter things is a safer way of future-proofing it and keeping the lid on it. It works ok for cunning action.

I've also noticed that Remarkable Athlete covers tool proficiencies and initiative checks? Was it the intention to make fighters good at picking locks? I'd probably say it's too much for level 2 - why would any fighter ever train in athletics or acrobatics? Half bonus to Strength and Con checks might be more sensible.

 

[DaedalusX51]

Sounds like you're either confusing turns with rounds OR you're using a house rule regarding a group of monsters acting on the same turn.

No I'm aware of how the round/turn structure works. I was just saying that in a one on one fight retaliation will not allow more than one attack per turn. You are correct that in the event that the 19th level Barbarian/Fighter is damaged by two separate creatures on two turns he will be able to retaliate twice that round. Which he had to gve up quite a lot to do. However wouldn't it be wiser for the hobgoblins to avoid melee attacking the Barbarian/Fighter at all? It would be best to use skirmishing tactics and ranged attacks to avoid it all together, and after the first retaliation intelligent monsters would likely change their tactics.

What you have here is a clear power-up over other characters that are possible in the PHB. This is objectively better than a Battle Master using Counterattack.

If you're operating from the premise that the PHB Fighter is "weaker" than other classes, then this may be seen as a feature to you. Similarly, if you want to encourage multi-classing into fighter, this may be seen as a feature to you. However, if the objective of your design is to make the fighter more interesting without a significant power boost, then this is something to be aware of.

Another example would be being able to use shield (via Magic Initiate feat or levels in a spellcasting class) and to make an opportunity attack in the same combat round.

You are correct that I am operating from the premise that the PHB Fighter is weaker than other classes. About half of the fighter's damage over the course of a day comes from the core class while the rest needs to come from the subclass.

For a 20th level Fighter the damage from action surge come to 129.6 damage over the course of an adventuring day.

For a 20th level Battle Master only using riposte (the most damaging maneuver) it comes to 172.5 damage over the course of an adventuring day. (or 136.5 if you use other maneuvers that give you the bonus damage)

For a 20th level Champion, Superior Critical with a great sword or maul is only dealing 16.8 damage over the course of the 24 attacks that the Battle Master had to make to use up an entire day's worth of resources. At most if you had advantage on every single attack you would reach 33.6 damage.

Now from this we can see that the Champion is severely under-powered compared to the Battle Master.

However if we compare the Fighter to the Paladin we can see that the Fighter/Battle Master is still under-powered.

If a 20th Paladin uses every spell slot to smite on every successful hit he will do 310.5 damage over 15 attacks.

Compare the daily damage of 302.1 damage of the fighter using riposte on every superiority die (which is pretty close) or 266.1 damage for using another maneuver that deals the superiority die in damage. For each maneuver you use that does not deal damage it reduces your damage even further.

We can then sadly compare the Champion fighters 163.2 damage when he has advantage on every attack.

This doesn't even include all of the other features the Paladin gets like lay on hands, auras, divine health, and the Oath abilities.

So yes I think the Fighter needs some love. He isn't even the best at fighting.

---

Math

All calculations made against a Hobgoblin with AC 18

Improved Divine Smite vs 2nd Extra Attack
11th level Paladin vs 11th level Fighter
Both with a +9 Attack Bonus
.45(2d6+5+1d8)+.45(2d6+5+1d8) = 14.85 vs 16.2 = .45(2d6+5)+.45(2d6)+5+.45(2d6+5)

Paladin Divine Smite damage per day
3 3 (2d8)*3 = 27 damage from 3 attacks
5 4 2 (2d8)*4+(3d8)*2 = 36+27 = 63 damage from 6 attacks
7 4 3 (2d8)*4+(3d8)*3 = 36+40.5 = 76.5 damage from 7 attacks
9 4 3 2 (2d8)*4+(3d8)*3+(4d8)*2 = 36+40.5+68 = 144.5 damage from 9 attacks
11 4 3 3 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3 = 54+54+67.5 = 175.5 damage from 10 attacks
13 4 3 3 1 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3+(6d8) = 54+54+67.5+27 = 202.5 damage from 11 attacks
15 4 3 3 2 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3+(6d8)*2 = 54+54+67.5+54 = 229.5 damage from 12 attacks
17 4 3 3 3 1 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3+(6d8)*3+(6d8) = 54+54+67.5+81+27 = 283.5 damage from 14 attacks
19 4 3 3 3 2 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3+(6d8)*3+(6d8)*2 = 54+54+67.5+81+54 = 310.5 damage from 15 attacks
20 4 3 3 3 2 (3d8)*4+(4d8)*3+(5d8)*3+(6d8)*3+(6d8)*2 = 54+54+67.5+81+54 = 310.5 damage from 15 attacks

Action Surge Damage over a 3 short rest day
3 .45(2d6+3)*3 = 13.5 damage from 3 Attacks over 3 rounds
5 .45(2d6+4)*6 = 29.7 damage from 6 Attacks over 3 rounds
7 .45(2d6+5)*6 = 32.4 damage from 6 Attacks over 3 rounds
9 .45(2d6+5)*6 = 32.4 damage from 6 Attacks over 3 rounds
11 .45(2d6+5)*9 = 48.6 damage from 9 Attacks over 3 rounds
13 .45(2d6+5)*9 = 48.6 damage from 9 Attacks over 3 rounds
15 .45(2d6+5)*9 = 48.6 damage from 9 Attacks over 3 rounds
17 .45(2d6+5)*18 = 97.2 damage from 18 Attacks over 6 rounds
19 .45(2d6+5)*18 = 97.2 damage from 18 Attacks over 6 rounds
20 .45(2d6+5)*24 = 129.6 damage from 24 Attacks over 6 rounds

Battle Master Damage over a 3 short rest day (+ additional damage if using riposte)
3 (4d8)*3 = 54 damage +24
5 (4d8)*3 = 54 damage +24
7 (5d8)*3 = 67.5 damage +30
9 (5d8)*3 = 67.5 damage +30
11 (5d10)*3 = 82.5 damage +30
13 (5d10)*3 = 82.5 damage +30
15 (6d10)*3+3d10 = 115.5 damage +36
17 (6d10)*3+3d10 = 115.5 damage +36
19 (6d12)*3+3d12 = 136.5 damage +36
20 (6d12)*3+3d12 = 136.5 damage +36

Comparing Riposte vs any other damaging maneuver
.45(2d6+3+1d8) = 6.525 damage vs 4.5 damage difference of 2.025 at 3rd level
.45(2d6+5+1d12) = 8.325 damage vs 6.5 damage difference of 1.825 at 20th level

Champion extra damage from Superior Critical
.1(2d6) 0.7 damage per attack or .14 damage per attack with advantage

 

[Pauln6]

It's worth pointing out that if you ignore excess damage, the fighter does just fine in these tests. The Paladin can smite a foe with 60 damage but if he only had 20 hit points, the paladin only actually did 20 damage. The fighter meanwhile can change targets and carry on inflicting a further 20 damage on the text target. These mathematical exercises are fun but they aren't overly accurate at the gaming table. You get certain classes performing better in certain scenarios but on balance the classes performance overall is pretty balanced.

 

[DaedalusX51]

Now I also want to point out that the version of the Fighter I posted would still be weaker than a Paladin. I've just shifted the majority of the damage form the subclass to the core class.

It would equate to about 259.2 Damage per day if we are to follow Quickleaf's estimation that additional reactions are equivalent to action surge.

 

[DaedalusX51]

It's worth pointing out that if you ignore excess damage, the fighter does just fine in these tests. The Paladin can smite a foe with 60 damage but if he only had 20 hit points, the paladin only actually did 20 damage. The fighter meanwhile can change targets and carry on inflicting a further 20 damage on the text target. These mathematical exercises are fun but they aren't overly accurate at the gaming table. You get certain classes performing better in certain scenarios but on balance the classes performance overall is pretty balanced.

While you are correct, the Paladin would most likely use lower level spell slots on low hp creatures and higher level spell slots on high hp creatures. So in the end I think it about evens out in regards to excess damage, maybe with a slight nod to the Fighter.