D&D 5E Buffing the Champion Fighter

[Xeviat]

This may have been said, but what if Improved Critical started at 18-20, and then increased to 17-20? (I'm not worrying about multiclassing in that thought.)

I'll test it, but here's the quick look at it.

A crit adds weapon damage die again. Best case scenario is 2d6* with rerolls, or 8.33. This is statistically similar to 9 from 2d8 from two maneuvers. At 15% crit chance, you'd need about 14 attacks before breaking even with the battle master's 4 superiority dice, not mentioning he utility of their attack modifiers. At level 5, that becomes far more doable.

I don't like it, though. It's bland and random. I'm personally thinking of giving them a to-hit and damage bonus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think the best way to buff champion is
1) Extra ASI at level 7 attacked to remarkable athlete
2) At level 10 they get the benefits of ALL fighting styles
Maybe switch the levels since an ASI is probably better than fighting styles

What this accimplishes is adding more versatility to the class. BM and EK get more versatility through manuevers and superiority dice while the Champion gets all straight boosts that don't have options
An extra ASI is nice to get the Champion to full faster and allow another asi to be used for a luxury feat while getting all fighting styles does nothing to increase their actual damage but lets them excel in many situations

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

The whole point of the champion is to not have that versatility like an EK or BM, but to be simple and streamlined. So anything that adds extra maneuvers, feats, abilities, or anything else to keep track of is counter to how the subclass is designed. That's why you see suggestions like expanding crit range because it doesn't add anything new to keep track of.

It's important to note that not every class or subclass is designed for our personal tastes, so more often than not, nothing needs to be fixed. Just play the classes/subclasses you like.

 

[droid6689]

The whole point of the champion is to not have that versatility like an EK or BM, but to be simple and streamlined. So anything that adds extra maneuvers, feats, abilities, or anything else to keep track of is counter to how the subclass is designed. That's why you see suggestions like expanding crit range because it doesn't add anything new to keep track of.

It's important to note that not every class or subclass is designed for our personal tastes, so more often than not, nothing needs to be fixed. Just play the classes/subclasses you like.

No, the point of the class is to be straightforward and have less moving parts. Giving all the fighting styles gives it less moving parts. An extra asi could give it more but doesn't necessarily. The issue with a higher crit range is that it pumps dpr which the champion already can compete in with the other classes whereas fighting styles and an extra feat won't really boost dpr

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Sacrosanct]

No, the point of the class is to be straightforward and have less moving parts. Giving all the fighting styles gives it less moving parts. An extra asi could give it more but doesn't necessarily. The issue with a higher crit range is that it pumps dpr which the champion already can compete in with the other classes whereas fighting styles and an extra feat won't really boost dpr

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I disagree, because "less moving parts" =/= "simple with less complexity", and that was the goal of that subclass. We know this because they flat out stated that because so many people wanted a basic fighter (like older editions), they created the champion fighter for those people. Giving extra feats and extra abilities is very much counter to the design goal of the champion, which was to keep it simple. If each ability is a nut or bolt which may or may not interact with each other (moving part), it is counter to the design goal to still end up with a bowl full of nuts and bolts.

I also disagree with your premise that extra feats and fighting styles don't impact DPR. That is simply not true. Getting a direct bonus to attack and/or damage very much impacts DPR. Are you telling me that an extra style of archery, combined with sharpshooter feat, won't "really boost dpr"?

 

[droid6689]

I disagree, because "less moving parts" =/= "simple with less complexity", and that was the goal of that subclass. We know this because they flat out stated that because so many people wanted a basic fighter (like older editions), they created the champion fighter for those people. Giving extra feats and extra abilities is very much counter to the design goal of the champion, which was to keep it simple. If each ability is a nut or bolt which may or may not interact with each other (moving part), it is counter to the design goal to still end up with a bowl full of nuts and bolts.

I also disagree with your premise that extra feats and fighting styles don't impact DPR. That is simply not true. Getting a direct bonus to attack and/or damage very much impacts DPR. Are you telling me that an extra style of archery, combined with sharpshooter feat, won't "really boost dpr"?

It is less moving parts.
Also explain to me how an extra feat or extra style boosts dpr. A fighter who has GWM/PAM is not going to get higher DPR by getting archery + ss. Plus the basic fighter of old editions had more feats so your argument is moot

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Sacrosanct]

It is less moving parts.
Also explain to me how an extra feat or extra style boosts dpr. A fighter who has GWM/PAM is not going to get higher DPR by getting archery + ss. Plus the basic fighter of old editions had more feats so your argument is moot

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Getting a style or a feat that adds a bonus to hit and/or damage will increase DPR. That's basic math. Also, the goal of the champion is not just "less moving parts", it's "less parts in general."

Secondly, I must point out that the fighter existed for 25 years before 3e ever came out, so no, my argument is not moot. 3e is not the only "old edition". Heck, I don't consider it old at all because it's post TSR era, which IMO makes it very much NOT old. The 5e champion fighter was very much inspired by the AD&D basic fighter because that's what people asked for, and that's what Mearls said it was for.

*Edit* Also, a fighter with GWM will not make every single attack ever with their GW. Sometimes they will need to make something like a ranged attack, or attack with a different weapon. So if a fighter is doing 20 DPR with GWM and 8 DPR with ranged attacks, and you're giving them free styles and feats that bring ranged DPR up to 20 as well, then that increases their overall DPR in total.

 

[Ahrimon]

What about a simple static damage bonus applied to all attacks? That should move them closer to the theorycraft balance while still keeping in line with the old school (weapons specialization) simplicity.

 

[droid6689]

Getting a style or a feat that adds a bonus to hit and/or damage will increase DPR. That's basic math. Also, the goal of the champion is not just "less moving parts", it's "less parts in general."

Secondly, I must point out that the fighter existed for 25 years before 3e ever came out, so no, my argument is not moot. 3e is not the only "old edition". Heck, I don't consider it old at all because it's post TSR era, which IMO makes it very much NOT old. The 5e champion fighter was very much inspired by the AD&D basic fighter because that's what people asked for, and that's what Mearls said it was for.

*Edit* Also, a fighter with GWM will not make every single attack ever with their GW. Sometimes they will need to make something like a ranged attack, or attack with a different weapon. So if a fighter is doing 20 DPR with GWM and 8 DPR with ranged attacks, and you're giving them free styles and feats that bring ranged DPR up to 20 as well, then that increases their overall DPR in total.

No, the goal is less moving parts.

And you have not shown how it increases dpr. Maybe in super specific circumstances it can but in any given fight it has ZERO affect on dpr.

From this discussion it seems like my worries about it were unfounded. It is definitely balanced

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Sacrosanct]

No, the goal is less moving parts.

You keep saying this, but why? How did you come to this conclusion, especially since the DEVS have come right out and said what the champion's design goal was. It wasn't just less moving parts. It was less parts in general. They've come right out and said it was to emulate the TSR era fighter where a lot of gamers preferred a class without fiddly bits to worry about, so I'm not sure why you keep disagreeing. Why should I believe you on what it really was about when that doesn't match with what the people who actually designed the game have said it's about? Why should I take your word over the actual developers?

And you have not shown how it increases dpr. Maybe in super specific circumstances it can but in any given fight it has ZERO affect on dpr.

Yes I have. Even at a basic level, any time you increase an attack bonus (hitting more often) or damage (increased damage), your DPR increases. It's literally right there in the words. You're saying that "increasing damage" does not increase damage (DPR). That makes no sense, and is quite backwards. The only example you gave was how archery won't increase the DPR of a GWM. That also makes no sense, because not every attack the PC will ever make will be with their GWM. I've literally spelled out an example for you in the post you quoted as to how the overall DPR does in fact increase.

 

[droid6689]

You keep saying this, but why? How did you come to this conclusion, especially since the DEVS have come right out and said what the champion's design goal was.

Provide the exact quote

Yes I have. Even at a basic level, any time you increase an attack bonus (hitting more often) or damage (increased damage), your DPR increases. It's literally right there in the words. You're saying that "increasing damage" does not increase damage (DPR). That makes no sense, and is quite backwards. The only example you gave was how archery won't increase the DPR of a GWM. That also makes no sense, because not every attack the PC will ever make will be with their GWM. I've literally spelled out an example for you in the post you quoted as to how the overall DPR does in fact increase.

Overall DPR doesn't increase meaningfully if you use the lower pdr weapon 1 in 50 encounters. If your DM is putting more flying enemies than that without prior warning then he's trash because he's gimping classes with no warning. An extra feat does not increase dpr, just makes varied attack styles have mlre competitive dpr


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk