D&D 5E A tweak for the Battlemaster fighter

[Quartz]

For TWF simply reduce the fighter's base DPR by 2 per round per attack (i.e. 6 for the base 3 attacks to 12 for four base attacks, a reaction, and a bonus action) ) and a further 1 for the reduced die of the off-hand weapon.

For PAM, the die is d10 for the base attacks and d4 for the bonus attack

Here's the table for PAM, without considering criticals:

Class    Base Attacks    Damage die    Stat Bonus    Reaction Attack    Bonus attack    Bonus die    Style    P(Hit)    Total damage        Notes
Fighter    3    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    0    0    0.6    29.7        Polearm 1d10 +1d4 - no GWM
Paladin    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    4.5    0    0.6    34.2        Bonus radiant damage
Ranger    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    3.5    0    0.6    31.8        Assumes Hunter's Mark active
Barbarian    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    3    0    0.84    34.44        Assumes Rage active

ENWorld isn't allowing me to attack a graphic for some reason, but you can see that the 11th level Battlemaster does less damage than any other class. At 20th level the Fighter's DPR increases to 36 and the Barbarian's to 41.6 (Str 24).

Actually, with PAM you can now use the spear so spear + shield and thus duellist is valid:

Class    Base Attacks    Damage die    Stat Bonus    Reaction Attack    Bonus attack    Bonus die    Style    P(Hit)    Total damage        Notes
Fighter    3    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    0    2    0.6    32.1        Spear 1d6 +1d4 - Duellist style
Paladin    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    4.5    2    0.6    36.6        Bonus radiant damage
Ranger    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    3.5    2    0.6    34.2        Assumes Hunter's Mark active
Barbarian    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    3    0    0.84    31.08        Assumes Rage active

At 20th level the Battlemaster Fighter does 38.4 damage and the Barbarian 37.8 (assuming Str 24).

You can see that the BM fighter is simply outclassed at 11th level upwards.

 

[FrogReaver]

For TWF simply reduce the fighter's base DPR by 2 per round per attack (i.e. 6 for the base 3 attacks to 12 for four base attacks, a reaction, and a bonus action) ) and a further 1 for the reduced die of the off-hand weapon.

For PAM, the die is d10 for the base attacks and d4 for the bonus attack

Here's the table for PAM, without considering criticals:

Class    Base Attacks    Damage die    Stat Bonus    Reaction Attack    Bonus attack    Bonus die    Style    P(Hit)    Total damage        Notes
Fighter    3    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    0    0    0.6    29.7        Polearm 1d10 +1d4 - no GWM
Paladin    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    4.5    0    0.6    34.2        Bonus radiant damage
Ranger    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    3.5    0    0.6    31.8        Assumes Hunter's Mark active
Barbarian    2    5.5    5    5.5    2.5    3    0    0.84    34.44        Assumes Rage active

ENWorld isn't allowing me to attack a graphic for some reason, but you can see that the 11th level Battlemaster does less damage than any other class. At 20th level the Fighter's DPR increases to 36 and the Barbarian's to 41.6 (Str 24).

Actually, with PAM you can now use the spear so spear + shield and thus duellist is valid:

Class    Base Attacks    Damage die    Stat Bonus    Reaction Attack    Bonus attack    Bonus die    Style    P(Hit)    Total damage        Notes
Fighter    3    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    0    2    0.6    32.1        Spear 1d6 +1d4 - Duellist style
Paladin    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    4.5    2    0.6    36.6        Bonus radiant damage
Ranger    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    3.5    2    0.6    34.2        Assumes Hunter's Mark active
Barbarian    2    3.5    5    5.5    2.5    3    0    0.84    31.08        Assumes Rage active

At 20th level the Battlemaster Fighter does 38.4 damage and the Barbarian 37.8 (assuming Str 24).

You can see that the BM fighter is simply outclassed at 11th level upwards.

So we are using feats and TWF now?

I wonder what prompted this change...

 

[Quartz]

So we are using feats and TWF now?

And you're still wrong: the Battlemaster Fighter is still an inferior combatant.

 

[Mort]

And you're still wrong: the Battlemaster Fighter is still an inferior combatant.

You have to be careful when you set parameters, game play isn't in a vacuum.

One of your big sources of damage is the bonus action attack from polearm master. This means your going with a strength based ranger - that's fine but it has ripple effects.

Namely, you have to worry much more about AC in combat than the fighter. You don't get heavy armor, so can't dump stat dex. This is a big deal, the fighter can have an 18-21 AC with an 8 dex. The ranger can have a 17-19 only if Dex is 14 plus, otherwise it's 15-17 or worse (if you dumped dex you're sitting with a 14-16 AC in melee)

What do you sacrifice, Con? For a front liner reliant on concentration? Unlikely. But if you do, good luck keeping hunters mark up.

 

[Esker]

You have to be careful when you set parameters, game play isn't in a vacuum.

Welcome to the absurd party. Good points, but don't bother; Quartz has shown repeatedly that he isn't interested in any kind of apples to apples comparison (or, for that matter, even an accurate apples-to-buckets-of-nails comparison, since he's apparently assuming the PAM ranger can cast and move HM without ever actually using a bonus action). The evidence flows from the conclusion in these parts.

 

[dave2008]

Ah, the dreaded 'agenna' tactic. I believe I have proved that the Battlemaster is indeed underpowered. The spreadsheets provided to counter my case actually prove it.

Your wrong. There may be errors in my spreadsheet (but I don't think so), but it shows that the fighter is about equal with the ranger. Your revisions to the spreadsheet where completely off base. Whether the fighter or ranger is better a 11th is determined by the dials you adjust (rounds/ combat; combats/day; short rest/day). Which makes perfect sense. For the way my group normally plays (3-4 combats w/ 2-3 short rests & 3-5 round per combat) the fighter is does more damage. It will be different for other groups.

FYI, I was able recover my updated spreadsheet. If I get time I will post it over the weekend.

Using TWF insteead of Duelling actually makes the Battlemaster worse off.

That may be, but in the OP you said duelling fighting style so that is what we went with. That was the parameter that you set.

I guess you forgot Polearm Mastery.

You said no feats. Also polearm mastery bonus is very situational and is not usable with the dueling style. So it doesn't apply. It really seems like you are not arguing in good faith here. I didn't think I would have to say:

"how do you get a bonus action attack compatible with the parameters that you set, i.e. dueling fighting style, no feats, & hunters mark."

I thought it was implied. The fact that you came back with polearm mastery is a pretty clear indicator of the fact that you don't get the bonus action damage you thought you did, and that really throws your analysis for a loop.

You have been very careful in not mentioning the Paladin.

Not really, I just don't want to take the time to figure it out (I have already spent way to much time on this). It is also my understanding that they are pretty good at damage. Look I don't care if the paladin, ranger, fighter, wizard, or rouge does more damage. It doesn't bother me one way or the other. I just want to get to the truth. And I am pretty sure I have:

The fighter and ranger are pretty balanced in the damage department. Which one does more damage is dependent on how you play the game. That is what my spreadsheet tells, and it seems to corroborate my own experiences and what I have heard from others.

 

[dave2008]

Class Base Attacks Damage die Stat Bonus Reaction Attack Bonus attack Bonus die Style P(Hit) Total damage Notes
Fighter 3 3.5 5 5.5 2.5 0 2 0.6 32.1 Spear 1d6 +1d4 - Duellist style
Paladin 2 3.5 5 5.5 2.5 4.5 2 0.6 36.6 Bonus radiant damage
Ranger 2 3.5 5 5.5 2.5 3.5 2 0.6 34.2 Assumes Hunter's Mark active
Barbarian 2 3.5 5 5.5 2.5 3 0 0.84 31.08 Assumes Rage active
[/code]

Look, I simply don't trust your analysis anymore. I have been nothing but nice and transparent about this process, but you keep changing things and cherry picking things to meet your goals instead analysis to discover the truth.

That being said it is really hard to follow your table (because of how it is displayed); however, I think I get it. But it really leaves a lot of things out of the discussion and makes odd choices. Like I said, I just can't trust you anymore. I was hoping to have an honest discussion, but you just seem to want to prove a point instead of looking at the information objectively. I'm sorry, I think I'm done.

 

[dave2008]

And you're still wrong: the Battlemaster Fighter is still an inferior combatant.

To be clear, Frogreaver has repeatedly said the ranger does do more damage and you are saying his is wrong?!

Or, are you saying his statement that you changed the parameters to TWF and using feats from dueling style and no feats is wrong? It is like you aren't even really reading the posts.

 

[FrogReaver]

To be clear, Frogreaver has repeatedly said the ranger does do more damage and you are saying his is wrong?!

Or, are you saying his statement that you changed the parameters to TWF and using feats from dueling style and no feats is wrong? It is like you aren't even really reading the posts.

To be clear, Frogreaver has repeatedly said the ranger does do more damage and you are saying his is wrong?!

Or, are you saying his statement that you changed the parameters to TWF and using feats from dueling style and no feats is wrong? It is like you aren't even really reading the posts.

I’ve said till level 11 the ranger does more (a little more( but that the fighter has lots of effects and the damage now which still make him better imo). After level 11 it’s the fighter who doesn’t more damage.

 

[dave2008]

I’ve said till level 11 the ranger does more (a little more( but that the fighter has lots of effects and the damage now which still make him better imo). After level 11 it’s the fighter who does more damage.

OK, that is what I'm seeing in general as well (though there are scenarios where the ranger does more damage. When you get a lot more combats & rounds per short rest than what I typically see).

FYI, corrected that for you.