D&D 5E Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

[EzekielRaiden]

The Champion's crit chance is a really bad damage feature, if your goal is to compare it to the effectiveness of other features. If the goal is simplicity über alles, then it is of course great because it's one of the simplest possible damage sources in the game.

Let's say we're looking at a Champion Fighter with 15% crit chance (crit on 18, 19, or 20), a typical net hit rate of 60% (this may be slightly low or slightly high, but 60% is a good ballpark; crits are part of this value) and using a greatsword (greataxe has bigger highs, but lower lows and the numbers are better for greatsword unless you're a half-orc). We'll further assume great weapon style since the Fighter can easily have that. Feats are irrelevant in this context (they're unaffected by crits; the Champion gets the same bonus from them as anyone else.) 20 Strength, of course, since any Fighter should have that by this time.

Average damage per regular hit: 4.125+5 = 9.125. Average damage per crit: 2*4.125+5 = 13.25. Expected damage per attack: .4*0+.45*9.125+.15*13.25 = 6.09375. Then, by using the expected damage without this crit benefit (.4*0+.55*9.125+.05*13.25 = 5.68125) we can calculate the average damage gained per attack. While numbers at this fine a degree are not useful for singular attacks, we're looking at averages over entire adventuring days, perhaps even over several of them, so it will be a good approximation. The Champion Fighter gets (approximately) 6.09375-5.68125 = 0.4125 extra damage per attack (averaged across all attacks, not just all hits.)

For the sake of argument, we'll take the most favorable, designer-expected conditions, that is 8 fights every day and three short rests so this Fighter is getting maximal use of Action Surge in combat. We'll also assume that the Fighter is never unable to attack anything (perhaps the axe can be thrown, but magically returns to the user, I dunno.) A typical fight is not longer than 4 rounds, usually less. That gives us 4*8 (regular combat rounds) + 4 Action Surges (won't get more per rest until level 17) = 36 combat rounds. Each combat round is 3 attacks at this level. So the expected damage increase, under these conditions, is 0.4125*36*3 = 44.55 bonus damage.

By comparison, a Battle Master that uses her maneuvers, whatever they may be, has 6d10 per short rest. I will assume inefficiency, thus this Battle Master always holds onto at least one die at the end of combat, thus never gaining the benefit of the "if you have no superiority dice and roll initiative, you regain one superiority die" feature. With four rests (finishing the long rest and taking 3 short rests), the Battle Master gets a total of 6*4 = 24d10 dice. Because there are several maneuvers which only trigger when you've hit the target and which just let you add the superiority die to your damage, there's no need to perform any hit calculations, so long as we assume that the aforementioned Battle Master can manage to land 6 attacks before each rest (an extremely safe assumption). You just get a bonus 24d10 = 24*5.5 = 132 bonus damage.

The Battle Master gets at least triple the extra damage that the Champion gets, under circumstances taken to be almost maximally favorable. IOW, Superior Critical is garbage. Even if you cut out one of those short rests, costing the Battle Master 6 superiority dice, 18*5.5 = 99, still more than double the Champion's bonus damage (before factoring in that the Champion just lost 3 rounds of crit-fishing due to getting one less Action Surge!) Further, that's in extremely unfavorable circumstances PLUS the Battle Master literally never triggering their minor recharge. (In general, it's also more efficient for them to instead take Great Weapon Master as a feat, if allowed, and use Precision Attack to mitigate the loss, since that always gives +10 damage but becomes an average of 1d10-5 = +0.5 to hit, meaning you do slightly better than breaking even on your hit chances. This is one of the reasons some DMs dislike such feats.)

Edit: Now, I didn't factor in Advantage, which would help fix some of the impact. But even with how profligate 5e is with advantage, I don't think you're going to get it often enough to have that much of an impact.

With advantage, your crit chance becomes 0.2775 while your hit chance (presuming the aforementioned 60% normal hit chance) becomes 1-0.4*0.4-0.2775 = 0.5625, vs. the normal 0.0975 crit vs 1-.4*.4-0.0975 = 0.7425, giving expected Champion damage-per-attack of .5625*9.125+.2775*13.25 = about 8.81, while non-Champions would have 0.7425*9.125+0.0975*13.25 = 8.07. This gives a net damage gain of 0.7425 per attack, or 0.7425*36*3 = 80.19 extra damage. Which is definitely an improvement, but it's not even 2/3 the bonus that the intentionally-inefficient Battle Master can bring, if the Champion is somehow always getting advantage on all attacks.

 

[HammerMan]

A longbow and 14 dex does worse damage than a fire bolt with 20 int.

since firebolt doesn't add int to damage (it does help hit though) a long bow with a 15 or less dex is 1d8+2 (min 3 max 11 avg6) what level do we need for a d10 cantrip to match that? 1st is 1d10 so min 1 max 10 avg 5... already close but not there. 5th is 2d10 so min 2 max 20 average 11... oh shoot they just rocketed past. 11th is 3d10 so min 3 max 30 avg 16 and 17th is 4d10...

wait what about the d6 plus control cantrips... 1d6 min 3 max 6 average 3 (well below long bow) 2d6 min 2 max 12 average 7 (wait again at 5th level it looks close)

 

[tetrasodium]

The last several pages have been devoted, again, to fighter DPR. As in, how effective are fighters in combat.

But, once again, ALL classes are good to excellent in combat. Does it depend on build yes, could there be tweaks, yes. But ALL classes contribute in combat and play a decent role.

But, the other 2 pillars? Most other classes, especially casters, have tools built into the class to contribute.

Fighters not only have no active class tools to contribute (thus having to rely on stuff everyone gets such as backgrounds), with a few small exceptions like Tasha's allowing the battlemaster to pick non-combat maneuvers. But, even there, the class actively fights them by demanding that resources be devoted to the one pillar they are supposed to excel in: combat.

That's the problem.

That may be so but the post I quoted to start this is literally just an attempt to correct math in a way that shows how bad fighters have it that appears to be completely divorced from simple math. That post is here

D&D 5E - Truly Understanding the Martials & Casters discussion (+)

How did they get into your hand in the first place? It's a very much niche case here. In short you can throw things competently if and only if you actually invested a feat. Great. You hadn’t heard of Schroedinger’s Fighter? He has two extra feats, but has taken Dual Wielder, Crossbow Expert...

www.enworld.org

Your attempt to change the subject away from "the math supporting your claim is flat wrong how are you calculating that correction there" to "but it's more than damage" is why these discussions to on forever without ever accomplishing anything. If I were to address or correct any of the points I feel are lacking that you are trying to change the subject with now it wouldn't be long before there is yet another "forget about that talk about this instead" from someone in the fighters need at will flight at level 11 because a level 18 wizard could choose levitate with spell mastery crowd.

Correcting understanding and accepting when things being used to support a position are objectively & probably false is critical to discussion because it allows both sides to see where the mistake is & how big thst is. The unwillingness to do it when it's just a black & white "no 6.5 is greater than 5.5" suggests that the same disregard for reality applies to more subjective matters like the ones that you are trying to shift to.

 

[Fanaelialae]

@Mort
I agree, but the argument being made is that even in combat, the pillar they are supposed to excel in, they lack versatility. A classic greatsword fighter can be rendered impotent by nothing more complex than a flying enemy with a decent ranged attack.

Counter: then that you should have built your fighter to be more well rounded.

Counter counter: the fighter lacks sufficient resources to do so without significantly diminishing their effectiveness.

Counter counter counter: that's just a trade off. You want your fighter to be good at everything combat related!?

Counter counter counter counter: yes, if combat is the only thing the fighter is good at, they should at least be competent at all aspects of combat. The greatsword fighter shouldn't lose 50% or more of their damage just because an enemy can fly. That's not a reasonable trade-off unless he's doing something like 50% more damage than the non-fighters when in melee (which is almost certainly not the case).

 

[HammerMan]

Just some thoughts, on the last couple of posts. Particularly those claiming Wizards are overpowered in 5e.

• 1 spell slot extra per level from 11 onwards. Only gaining a single slot of 6+ (until level 19 & 20 at which point you aren’t gaining higher levels)

no non caster gets any class feature equal to a single 6th level spell... at 20th you have 2 6th 1 7th 1 8th and 1 9th.
remember hexblade,some bards and half clerics can do that and still be pretty close to melee fighters in AC,damage, and hp

• Concentration

is the best limit yet... and still allows to 'only' have 1 or 2 big buffs up at a time

• Energy resistance
• Energy immunity
• Spell resistance

spell resistance (I assume you mean magic resistance) is a joke and energy immunity/resistance is only an issue if your caster doesn't have diversity of energy types (witch is possible, and with spell known class likely) but we keep compare optimal fighter.... so now we need to play the caster dumb AND optimize the fighter

weapon (blud/slahs/peirce) can also be resist and immune just FYI... so that about equals out

• Ongoing saving throws [Added]

yeah cause the 'take the enemy out of the fight' spells might only work for 1 round, or (less likely) 2... but martials have nothing like it

• Concentration: The fighter doesn’t have a 10% chance of dropping his sword every time someone hits him.

not withstanding my hate of fumbles... I doubt many casters only have a 10% chance of fail... but all it does is mean cast another spell

• 50gp per spell level to gain additional spell (above your base 2)

how much does it cost to learn new fighting technices... oh you just can't raw... got it

• Expensive material components

like concentration this is a good idea... but few spells have them

• Reduced hp

lol what... wizards and sorcerers have the least hp in the game... at an average of 2 less per level.

• AC defense requires using limited spell slots

what do you mean limited? 1 1st level spells slot, 1 invocation and you can have mage armor all day. or you can put on leather armor for a feat... and many casters (including 1/2 of all clerics) can have full plate

• Int + Level (less for some other casters) limits on spells.

and how many manuvers can fighters know... I'll wait well you look that up

• increased rarity of scrolls & wands vs 3e

so as long as it is better then 3e? you do know they can make there own right?

• Limited power gain from feats (without heavily specialising in fire - the most resisted energy type)

limited power gain... lucky seems like still the break away star, but magic adept letting you break your own concept of what magic is feels pretty powerful too.

• Oh did I mention Concentration?

yes you did... but all that does is stops novaing and force you to have longer work days...

However the single biggest thing this conversation misses, is that the best thing a wizard can use a concentration spell on is to Haste or fly the fighter, because when the dragon isn’t wasting attacks on the fighter, it’s shredding the wizard.

or it can suggest the dragon go home and guard it's hoard, or it can make it break out into laughter missing a turn, or it can launch a 3rd level fire or lighting spell that even save for half is a joke becuse they KNEW they were over powered...

 

[tetrasodium]

since firebolt doesn't add int to damage (it does help hit though) a long bow with a 15 or less dex is 1d8+2 (min 3 max 11 avg6) what level do we need for a d10 cantrip to match that? 1st is 1d10 so min 1 max 10 avg 5... already close but not there. 5th is 2d10 so min 2 max 20 average 11... oh shoot they just rocketed past. 11th is 3d10 so min 3 max 30 avg 16 and 17th is 4d10...

wait what about the d6 plus control cantrips... 1d6 min 3 max 6 average 3 (well below long bow) 2d6 min 2 max 12 average 7 (wait again at 5th level it looks close)

Firebolt never catches up or "rockets past" because extra attack for fighter multiplies both the d8 & the dex mod at basically the same rate that the cantrip dice multiply. The multiplicative effect of extra attack on both Stat mod to damage & any weapon/feat/fighting style/etc mods is what makes the Fighter damage output so impossible to ignore the higher level the game goes. At level 11 with 3 attacks the difference between a d12+2 greataxe with gwm & d12 toll the dead is 51 points of damage for a total even greater than the possible max on the dice
(d12+2+5+10=23.5 3 attacks =70.5 for the greataxe vrs 3 the d12's average 6.5 amounts to 19.5 which is a full four points behind the average damage of any one of the gwm greataxe being compared to it.

 

[HammerMan]

I agree. IMHO, a good design space for martials could have been for a Barbarian, Knight (rebranded Warlord), spell-less Ranger, and Rogue. The Magic-User has now evolved into the Sorcerer, Bard, Warlock, and Wizard. It's time to let the Fighting-Man become more than just the Fighter.

I have 0 problem with this. Knight/Warlord/Marshal/Warblade/Swordsage there NEEDs to be a new martial class.

we started with 4 classes
magic user (full caster)
Priest (2/3 caster)
thief (no cast but skills)
fighting man (no cast but buff combat)

we now have (PHB)
Wizard Sorcerer Cleric Druid Bard (full caster) (some of those get full armor weapon 2 attacks and bonus damage so also awesome martial)
Rouge Monk (no casting but some cool abilities still mostly skill and combat)
Warlock (almost a full caster but more limited... my favorite design for a class)
Paliden and Ranger (1/2 caster with fighting and skill tricks)
Fighter and Barbarian (cust combat buff no cast)

HOWEVER we have subclasses in fighter and rogue to make them 1/3 casters...

so we went from 4 classes 2 caster 2 not to 12 classes 4-5(depending on counting warlock) full caster, 2 half caster and 4 non caster but 2 of the non casters have subclasses ffor casting...

the only new class is artificer (and I do like it) and it is... a half caster.

Barbarian and Monk
Fighter and Rogue

to quote oceans 11 "I think we need 1 more"

 

[HammerMan]

But, 5e Wizards do have healing. Specifically, Transmutation Wizards. Panacea, Restore Life, and Restore Youth are just things a level 14 Transmuter can do on a fairly regular basis. Working backwards, it seems absurd that the Transmuter Wizard does not have cure wounds on its spell list, given three of the four Master Transmuter options explicitly deal with healing of one kind or another.

and vampric touch, and wither and bloom

 

[HammerMan]

This is all true, but doesn't exactly tell the whole story.

A fighter gets 3 attacks at level 11, and improves to 4 at level 20. Meaning that most high level fighters have 3, not 4, attacks.

A fighter can have 20 Str, 20 Dex, and high Con, but only if they use all of their ASIs to boost their stats, meaning that they won't be able to take feats. In a campaign that allows feats, that's a high opportunity cost. Moreover, by spreading your stats out in this way your to hit bonus and damage bonus are going to lag behind for many levels (or you focus on one stat to the detriment of the other, and then raise the other stat when you've capped the first stat). Once again, you're snapshotting a 20th level character, but leaving out the progression, which tells a different story.

Finally, not all fighters get superiority dice, because only one fighter subclass has access to them (unless you take the feat for superiority dice, but then that's one less ASI available).

yeah the "Let me give the fighter full ASI AND just the right 2-3 feats" argument seems weird when at most they are 2 asi/feats ahead and for 1/2 to most of the game they are 0-1 ASI/Feat ahead.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Not true. There are several ranged weapons that key off strength. There are also perfectly good ways of playing a melee fighter that key off Dex.

Several..the dagger..the handaxe.. the light hammer..the spear..the javelin..the trident.. and the net.

Yes. If you have an appetite for 1, maybe even 2 attacks (you brought more than one right?) with a d6 weapon and disadvantage beyond 30 feat..consider this plethora of 'worthwhile' options.