D&D 5E A tweak for the Battlemaster fighter
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Just to be clear, I am not laughing at you. I am laughing with you, in agreement. It's friggen unbelievable. I have not seen contortions like this since I watched a contortionist on America's Got Talent.
I'm not seeing the duelist S&B rangers and fighters giving rangers an advantage at any levels. I took hunter's mark out of the lower levels because it's a melee build, no feats, and no CON save prof to avoid losing it. Assumed 4 encounters at 3 rounds for tier 1, 6 encounters at 3 rounds for tier 2, and 8 encounters at 3 rounds for tiers 3 and 4; and 2 short rests per day.
I added in daily hunter's mark damage at lower levels as bonus daily damage, assumed it could be maintained indefinitely at higher levels (11th+ but I still think that's generous), and added in foe slayer at 20th. Without the fighter surge damage the ranger is ahead at lower levels, but not total damage once the surge damage is divided out per round. I fudged the crit calcs as not significant given the results without them.
It looks to me like the only way to pull this off is to assume an unrealistic use of hunter's mark as always there. Adding it back in I came up with marginal benefits for rangers up to 11th level when fighters take over. That seems in line with @dave2008 and @FrogReaver.
@dave2008 -- your spreadsheet should reflect higher accuracy at 6th level for fighters relative to rangers from the bonus ASI. It's not that big of an increase but it's there.
I added in daily hunter's mark damage at lower levels as bonus daily damage, assumed it could be maintained indefinitely at higher levels (11th+ but I still think that's generous), and added in foe slayer at 20th. Without the fighter surge damage the ranger is ahead at lower levels, but not total damage once the surge damage is divided out per round. I fudged the crit calcs as not significant given the results without them.
It looks to me like the only way to pull this off is to assume an unrealistic use of hunter's mark as always there. Adding it back in I came up with marginal benefits for rangers up to 11th level when fighters take over. That seems in line with @dave2008 and @FrogReaver.
@dave2008 -- your spreadsheet should reflect higher accuracy at 6th level for fighters relative to rangers from the bonus ASI. It's not that big of an increase but it's there.
Esker
Hero
@dave2008 @FrogReaver @Mort @Mistwell
I made a shiny new spreadsheet here. I added Paladin Smites, sneak attack, and toggles for feats, and coded in a lot of stuff so that you can just change what's in the yellow, and everything else should automatically populate. It looks for exact string matches in the fields for class, subclass and fighting style (enter one of Dueling, TWF, GWF, Archery, or none; I think case-sensitive), and looks for the word 'yes' in the feat fields.
Enjoy! There are almost certainly typos, so would love it if you found them! (Though some of the formulas are excessively complex)
If the results are right or very nearly right, it demonstrates an impressive degree of balance across the martial classes at level 11 with a standard number of combats, rests, and lengths of combat. It turns out that distracting strike is worth more than GWM, if you compare the Champion with PAM and GWM to the Battlemaster PAM using spear and shield.
I made a shiny new spreadsheet here. I added Paladin Smites, sneak attack, and toggles for feats, and coded in a lot of stuff so that you can just change what's in the yellow, and everything else should automatically populate. It looks for exact string matches in the fields for class, subclass and fighting style (enter one of Dueling, TWF, GWF, Archery, or none; I think case-sensitive), and looks for the word 'yes' in the feat fields.
Enjoy! There are almost certainly typos, so would love it if you found them! (Though some of the formulas are excessively complex)
If the results are right or very nearly right, it demonstrates an impressive degree of balance across the martial classes at level 11 with a standard number of combats, rests, and lengths of combat. It turns out that distracting strike is worth more than GWM, if you compare the Champion with PAM and GWM to the Battlemaster PAM using spear and shield.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
I have no doubt you very sincerely believe that, and no arguments presented here will shake that belief. That's how humans think: they decide what they believe first, then look for evidence to support that belief. The hardest skill for a scientist to learn is how to let go of a hypothesis, because they have so much of themselves invested in it. Possibly the most famous example was Fred Hoyle, who jumped through all kinds of convoluted hoops in order to tray and justify his continued belief in a steady state universe, despite all evidence to the contrary.
No one "forgot" Polearm Mastery. Youre initial parameter was: NO FEATS. Once you start allowing feats, fighters leap well ahead of rangers, since they get three more of those than rangers do. They could even use Magic Adept to pick up Hex, which gives them the equal of Hunter's Mark.
As for Polearm Mastery, that doesn't play nice with Duelling. Whilst RAW you could use a staff one-handed, it is then a d6 weapon instead of d8, cancelling out half of the +2.
Paladins have been mentioned several times. If you want to try and argue that paladins are overpowered, then you might have a case.
But I'm sure I am wasting my breath - no argument I or anyone else can present will shake your faith.
Last edited:
dave2008
Legend
dave2008
Legend
That is quite a spreadsheet - it is going to take some time to digest. PS can you provide a link to download so that we can play around with it?
Esker
Hero
The Polearm Master feat.
I hardly ever use Google Docs... are you not able to download it?
dave2008
Legend
Actually what are PAM; CBE; EA; & SS? Heck, any change you could add a legend?
Similar Threads
