D&D 5E A tweak for the Battlemaster fighter

[FrogReaver]

@Quartz

It's easy to "prove" something when you leave off meaningful abilities for no good reason. But when you do that, you've actually proven nothing.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Except of course, that everyone who thinks they are disputing my point is actually proving it. You have to use Action Surge for an attack to equalise matters. That's a bit of a problem when there are so many other uses for Action Surge.

And the Paladin has so many other uses for his spell slot besides Divine Smite.
And the Rogue has so many other uses for her bonus action besides an off-hand attack.
And the Ranger has so many other uses for his spell slot (AND bonus action) besides Hunter's Mark.

You're really not proving anything.

 

[Quartz]

Address that issue. PLEASE address that issue. It's time.

And I have repeatedly addressed them. The sources of the Bonus Attack and Reaction attack are irrelevant. A red herring. Duelling is just one style; the maths applies to all styles. Run the numbers yourself.

 

[FrogReaver]

And I have repeatedly addressed them. The sources of the Bonus Attack and Reaction attack are irrelevant. A red herring. Duelling is just one style; the maths applies to all styles. Run the numbers yourself.

The math doesn't apply to all styles. Take away the dueling style and use TWF and you are down to d6 weapons without a +2 damage bonus. That's a significant difference. You also now have competing bonus actions for the ranger, hunter's mark vs bonus action attack. Another significant difference.

 

[Esker]

And I have repeatedly addressed them. The sources of the Bonus Attack and Reaction attack are irrelevant. A red herring. Duelling is just one style; the maths applies to all styles. Run the numbers yourself.

I am amazed by the community's commitment to continually trying to show you the holes in your reasoning despite the fact that you have shown no interest whatsoever in listening to anything anybody has to say. And so in the spirit of constructive community engagement, here's what I suggest:

Build a level 11 ranger, however you want; try to get the most damage you can get out of them. Tell us what fighting style and subclass you take, and what ASIs and feats, and tell us how you are spending your concentration during fights (I assume Hunter's Mark, but feel free to pick something else), and if you don't have enough daily resources to do that thing all the time, what is your backup option? (For the record, I'm totally fine assuming that you will have enough spell slots to keep Hunter's Mark up all the time; the only question is how many bonus actions it uses up)

Then, I will do the same thing for a level 11 Battlemaster. I won't take a two-handed or ranged weapon unless you do.

And then we'll do the math for those specific characters.

That will make concrete all the stuff about whether we're doing duelist or TWF, whether we have feats or not, etc. You decide. I'll play by whatever rules you play by.

 

[Mort]

I am amazed by the community's commitment to continually trying to show you the holes in your reasoning despite the fact that you have shown no interest whatsoever in listening to anything anybody has to say. And so in the spirit of constructive community engagement, here's what I suggest:

Build a level 11 ranger, however you want; try to get the most damage you can get out of them. Tell us what fighting style and subclass you take, and what ASIs and feats, and tell us how you are spending your concentration during fights (I assume Hunter's Mark, but feel free to pick something else), and if you don't have enough daily resources to do that thing all the time, what is your backup option? (For the record, I'm totally fine assuming that you will have enough spell slots to keep Hunter's Mark up all the time; the only question is how many bonus actions it uses up)

Then, I will do the same thing for a level 11 Battlemaster. I won't take a two-handed or ranged weapon unless you do.

And then we'll do the math for those specific characters.

That will make concrete all the stuff about whether we're doing duelist or TWF, whether we have feats or not, etc. You decide. I'll play by whatever rules you play by.

Opponents also matter, % of large+ creatures will make an impact.

 

[Esker]

Opponents also matter, % of large+ creatures will make an impact.

Agreed; I figure we'll do the math for a range of non-build variables like that, since chances are the fighter will come out ahead in some contexts and the ranger in others.

 

[Mort]

Except of course, that everyone who thinks they are disputing my point is actually proving it. You have to use Action Surge for an attack to equalise matters. That's a bit of a problem when there are so many other uses for Action Surge.

I have both a BM fighter and a ranger in my group.

1. The fighter has had action surge for 4 levels. In that time he's used it for something other than attacking exactly once. He typically uses it to finish monsters that are "on the ropes," thereby preventing that monster from getting another round of attacks.

2. The ranger tries to use Hunter's Mark all the time. It's become a bit of a running joke how consistently he gets hit and loses concentration.

Just injecting some reality into all the conjecture.

 

[Mistwell]

And I have repeatedly addressed them. The sources of the Bonus Attack and Reaction attack are irrelevant. A red herring. Duelling is just one style; the maths applies to all styles. Run the numbers yourself.

Stop. If something is impossible, it's not irrelevant. So stop claiming you've addressed it. That's not addressing it, that's saying "go away I don't want to talk about that".

Duelling is one style, WHICH YOU CHOSE. The maths definitely, unquestionable do not apply the way you wrote it. Everyone has run the numbers with your example and concluded objectively you are wrong. It's not a matter of opinion - your example gets ZERO bonus action attacks. Period. End of analysis. That's relevant. Talk about that fact and stop pretending it didn't happen. If the source is irrelevant than NAME ONE SINGLE SOURCE WHICH WORKS WITH YOUR EXAMPLE. You can't, because there are none.

If you want it put another way, fine, then the fighter casts fireball as a bonus action every round. And when you say they can't because that's impossible, I will explain the source of that fireball is irrelevant and a red hearing so just run the maths that way. See how that's not actually answering the topic now? It needs to be possible for it to be part of the maths. Your example was not possible, so they get no bonus action using your example. And if your example needs to be changed, then it's not representative of the baseline, is it?

 

[Ashrym]

Except of course, that everyone who thinks they are disputing my point is actually proving it. You have to use Action Surge for an attack to equalise matters. That's a bit of a problem when there are so many other uses for Action Surge.

Action surge is so good it doesn't need our help to point it out. All it takes is applying the attack ratio for action surge and eliminating the non-attack ratio, as I pointed out earlier. The issue is the non-attack ratio is such a low point of elimination it's negligible.

It's extremely rare to see action surge used for anything else because it's effectiveness easily favors another attack action.

The assumptions behind your claim does not stand up to scrutiny.

And I have repeatedly addressed them. The sources of the Bonus Attack and Reaction attack are irrelevant. A red herring. Duelling is just one style; the maths applies to all styles. Run the numbers yourself.

Addressing them would have been to demonstrate actually having a bonus action attack with the frequency assumed. It would be extremely easy to address by providing the source of the bonus action in the build offered.

Claiming bonus actions have sources and applying to a build that doesn't offer any of those sources addresses nothing.

I have both a BM fighter and a ranger in my group.

1. The fighter has had action surge for 4 levels. In that time he's used it for something other than attacking exactly once. He typically uses it to finish monsters that are "on the ropes," thereby preventing that monster from getting another round of attacks.

2. The ranger tries to use Hunter's Mark all the time. It's become a bit of a running joke how consistently he gets hit and loses concentration.

Just injecting some reality into all the conjecture.

That's exactly it. It's obvious from playing these classes hunter's mark isn't always up and action surge is only used outside of attacking on rare exception. Making assumptions to complete an analysis needs to be done sometimes but those assumption need to be reasonable and reflect typical play,