D&D 5E Battle Masters

[Grimstaff]

For anyone playing the Battle Master archetype - how's it going? Does the extra die of damage along with the maneuvers make a big difference, or is it much the same as a Champion?

 

[Kobold Stew]

The extra die means you get to pick when you do extra damage, rather than leave it to the roll of the dice. You might get to apply the bonus less regularly, but you can direct it, which I like. I am enjoying playing one a lot (currently 4th level), but find that tactically it's more complex than many spellcasters; there are a lot of fiddly bits, and I think the Basic rules were right not to include it.

 

[Celtavian]

My buddy played one. Battle-Master dice were pretty awesome for novaing.

 

[Zaran]

I have a 5th level Battlemaster that I play and absolutely love. I will argue that the class is the most well rounded and versatile class in the book. Riposte is a great way to add yet another attack, since my characters AC is high enough that it's normal to be missed. I also use the Feint maneuver (don't remember the name. the bonus action that gives advantage and bonus die if you hit) whenever I have disadvantage so it cancels out. Parry is cool but I rather have the extra attack from Riposte.

The extra maneuvers along with Second Wind and Action surge make short rests a needed resource for this class but if you get them then it's a very fun subclass.

 

[Mercule]

My wife is playing a dual rapier wielding, wood elf battle master. I won't opine on two-weapons vs. great weapons, because we have an agile/stealthy group. The dice, however, are very handy. She has Precision Strike, as well as damage maneuvers. All told, she does feel like a master of battle.

You could probably make the case that the champion build is a bit more consistently powerful, but I think it's a matter of managing resources vs. not having to think about it. Watching her use Pushing Strike to drive someone off a cliff was awesome, even if it won't happen very often.

If you're asking as a player: This is a potent enough choice to be fun. The resource management isn't onerous, either. If I were to play a Fighter, it's probably the build I'd take -- barring a concept that begged for one of the others.

If you're asking as a DM: This is a balanced build. The dice make the difference in some situations, but they require just enough resource management that they aren't "always on".

 

[brehobit]

So far I like mine. And with action surge, you become king of the "short-rest nova".

 

[Mephista]

For anyone playing the Battle Master archetype - how's it going? Does the extra die of damage along with the maneuvers make a big difference, or is it much the same as a Champion?

Not only is the extra die of damage putting the Battle Master at a higher DPR than the Champion, but the extra flexibility, making counters, inflicting status, disarming and trips, etc is huge. Battlemaster is hands down awesome.

The only time I would play something different is if you really wanted to do something with mindless slashing (Champion) or magic (Eldritch Knight).

 

[jgsugden]

Champion vs BM: In terms of which is 'better' it comes down to length of combats and frequency of rests. If you fight in a party where you rarely get to rest and the battles are long and drawn out, your average BM will not be better than a Champ...

 

[Grimstaff]

Great observations everyone, exactly the sort of insight I was looking for. Thanks!