D&D 5E Homebrew Marshal Class (+Thread)

[Fenris-77]

I don't really want to add an additional full action spell to anyone's turn at any tier with this ability. An extra attack on an attack action is one thing, but an additional action is something else entirely. I actually think you're the first person to bring it up that way @Tony Vargas. Much better to have this convo now than significantly down stream.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't really want to add an additional full action spell to anyone's turn at any tier with this ability. An extra attack on an attack action is one thing, but an additional action is something else entirely. I actually think you're the first person to bring it up that way @Tony Vargas. Much better to have this convo now than significantly down stream.

We actually had that conversation in a thread several years ago, about the viability of a class that sacrificed their action to grant an ally an action. Most of the people in thread agreed with you, although I think it's dangerous but viable, depending on how strict the game is on enforcing resource attrition. (So for most games, probably really broken lol).

 

[Tony Vargas]

I actually think you're the first person to bring it up that way @Tony Vargas. Much better to have this convo now than significantly down stream.

Nod. I mean, this isn't 4e, there isn't a 'basic attack,' that scales about the same for everyone. Scaling varies a bit class to class, not just in how dramatic it is, but in the mechanics that drive it.

Just looking at tiers 1-2, virtually every attack is in the range of 1dX+stat+small rider. Making it on-turn attacks means rogues don't get a 2nd sneak attack, which is one reason I favor that option.

OT1H, two attacks are still very nice for a rogue, because it means a greater chance of getting in that SA damage. OTOH, SA is how their attacks scale with level.

If you open up actions, you open up the Cast a Spell action, which opens up Eldritch Blast. That's bad.

Cast a spell, limited to a cantrip, would probably be fine - the cantrip baseline is lower than the attack baseline and it scales less dramatically than extra attack. EB is a cantrip outlier, of course, since it acts more like Extra Attack, but, it is still something the warlock can do every round, their at-will baseline.

That is, if we're talking giving up an action to grant attacks.
Giving up an attack to grant an attack, when you, yourself, get Extra Attack is different, because now /you/ are providing scaling. That can work logically enough with other classes that also scale via Extra Attack, at a similar rate - only the Fighter would start to look at you askance at high level, that way. By the same token, it could work with EB, and the right wording - maybe something about a single attack roll? But, as soon as you start using that scaled attack-granting on someone who scales their at-will baseline in some other way, it becomes more questionable.

 

[Fenris-77]

It might be fair to say that a class that scales it's at will baseline in some other way probably isn't the intended target of this particular WL ability anyway. That's neither here nor there on the mechanical side, but I think it's probably accurate.

I think I can accommodate myself to allowing a cantrip instead of an additional attack on an attack action. The scaling there is close enough that it isn't a big difference. If you make target's choice I think we have everyone covered.

 

[TwoSix]

OT1H, two attacks are still very nice for a rogue, because it means a greater chance of getting in that SA damage. OTOH, SA is how their attacks scale with level.

Back of the envelope math for level 10 rogue vs fighter. I like to look at level 10 for balance purposes, since you spend the most time there of any level, according to the XP charts. And it's right in the middle.

A 2nd attack with a rogue will give you, at-most, a 25% increase in your chance at landing SA damage. (50% chance going up to 75%.) So assuming 20 Dex and rapier and 5d6 SA, that's 0.5 * (4.5+5) + 0.25 (17.5) = 9.1 damage per attack.

Another fighter attack, assuming greatsword with GWF style and 20 Str, gives 0.5 * (8.33+5) = 6.7 damage per attack.

Ideally, the rogue's a decent amount better, but any other accuracy advantages (not to mention GWM) swing it towards even and can tip it to fighter. Not something I think is super unbalanced, though.

Cast a spell, limited to a cantrip, would probably be fine - the cantrip baseline is lower than the attack baseline and it scales less dramatically than extra attack. EB is a cantrip outlier, of course, since it acts more like Extra Attack, but, it is still something the warlock can do every round, their at-will baseline.

That is, if we're talking giving up an action to grant attacks.
Giving up an attack to grant an attack, when you, yourself, get Extra Attack is different, because now /you/ are providing scaling. That can work logically enough with other classes that also scale via Extra Attack, at a similar rate - only the Fighter would start to look at you askance at high level, that way. By the same token, it could work with EB, and the right wording - maybe something about a single attack roll? But, as soon as you start using that scaled attack-granting on someone who scales their at-will baseline in some other way, it becomes more questionable.

Action for action can totally work if the actions are restricted to Attack, Cast a Spell (cantrips only), and the Dash/Dodge/Disengage trifecta. It only really breaks down for 20th level fighters and 17th characters with 2 level warlock dips. The balance budget is a lot higher, though.

 

[Undrave]

It only really breaks down for 20th level fighters and 17th characters with 2 level warlock dips. The balance budget is a lot higher, though.

At those level I don't think we should care that much if things go crazy... There's tons of insane spells at those levels after all so for 17 to 20 are just the 'crazy endcap powers' levels and leave it at that.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Hmm. What turn they happen on would probably depend on initiative.

Here's my issue as plainly as possible. At level 5 the Marshal has two attacks per attack action. He also has the ability to grant attacks to allies. Do we think it's ok that he grant both of those attacks, at whatever cost, to the same ally on the same turn? My thought was no, but I'll roll with the majority opinion.

I’m not sure that it has a different balance weight than granting them to the two allies, but spotlight balance is also important.

I also prefer to add the attacks off turn, otherwise the rogue gets basically nothing out of it, while most other weapon users get the full potential out of it.

so, I’d say either use the ally’s reaction, or grant it off turn and specify that a creature can only benefit from the ability once per round. Either way, 4 Marshals can’t make the rogue attack in 5 total turns.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also I’d totally let the tier 5 big feature be granting a whole extra action. Hell, maybe tier 3 if it’s 1/rest or costs a decent chunk of ki.

 

[TwoSix]

Also I’d totally let the tier 5 big feature be granting a whole extra action. Hell, maybe tier 3 if it’s 1/rest or costs a decent chunk of ki.

I have no problem with a grantable action surge if it's at Tier 3+.

 

[Fenris-77]

I have no problem with a grantable action surge if it's at Tier 3+.

Yeah, I'm ok with that too. It's a nice big shiny rock to plant the class on.