D&D General Data from a million DnDBeyond character sheets?

[darjr]

That's making the assumption that people choose fighter because of it's simplicity. We have no idea how often that is the case. I know that for me, when I play fighters it's because I think I will enjoy playing them, I have no problem with playing any class.

My very first PC was a fighter/rogue because it was an homage to one of my first PCs that was a fighter/thief. But mechanically I also liked the off-hand ability damage bonus two-weapon fighting, better armor and weapon options, improved crit from champion and so on.

There's a lot of reasons to multi-class.

It’s the reason I asked the original question.

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm have to agree and disagree. When you have two teams which are basically working on the same domain, it can be a huge red flag when things don't align. But that's not the situation with the D&D Beyond data. Our feeling on the ground, what's going on in our games, is a very small piece of the gaming world. We shouldn't expect our gaming experience to necessarily line up with the broader gaming experience, and if it doesn't line up then it's not a huge red flag.

IMO. It is if there’s not a good explanation.

This doesn't mean that there aren't too many low level characters skewing the data. Half the characters in the data are first level. Even if all of those characters are legitimate, they are not speaking to games where characters are playing through several levels.

I don’t think you’d be pushing back if you went back and reviewed the initial d&d beyond graphs and charts that were provided.

 

[Hussar]

From what I've seen Warlock is the simplest class to play. Your turn in combat? Eldritch Blast. Can't open a door? Eldritch Blast. Starting negotiations with that orc war chief? Eldritch Blast.

Heh. I can't argue against that one. It really is one of the simplest classes in play.

I think that's where the "simple class" thing kinda breaks down. It's not just about simplicity of presentation. I mean, one of the shortest classes in word length is a Frenzy Barbarian. There's just not a whole lot going on there. But, in play, a Frenzy Barbarian is not actually simple - do you Frenzy? Well, certainly not every time you rage. And, because you are the only character that ever actually uses the exhaustion rules, there's another level of complexity that, because it doesn't come up all the time, is a PITA to remember. And, being exhausted is yet another fiddly bit to remember - roll your perception check, oh, wait, are you exhausted? Oh right, no you're not. Or were you last week? Errrr....

Warlock and Paladin are, for my money, probably the absolute simplest classes in play. Very limited choices, very few finicky bits, very little to track.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Barbarian is one of the two classes I have never played personally, even on a multiclass (the other is Druid).

There are multiple problems with Barbarians. Some of these can be solved by multiclassing or "off" builds. In general a Barbarian is ok in combat but has a higher rest/healing cost than any other class. They are generally poor in the non-combat pillars. Here is the reason why:

1. They are only really acceptable in combat if you really push Constitution to 16+ because of the limits on heavy armor and no fighting style. While you can have a good AC in half-plate with a 14 Dex, it is a full 2 points behind plate and defensive fighting style. The focus on damage and synergy with reckless attacks strongly favors Great Weapon Master, but you are going to get beat up in melee doing that, even while raging. This means Barbarians need a crap ton of hit points to stay alive in battles and lots of healing between battles to really play to their strengths.

If you go the other way and sword and board you can be a very effective tank as a Barbarian, but a fighter in plate and shield will be just about as good (and an EK will be a lot better) while doing just about as much damage with dueling.

In either case Constitution is the least useful ability outside of combat. When I play generally I am usually looking for a 10 or 12 Constitution and putting higher abilities in the social/exploration stats to be better at those pillars while still being good at combat. That does not work well for a Barbarian. If you play with an average constitution you end up with a character that is below average in combat and still below average in the social/exploration pillars. Meanwhile with a Ranger, Paladin or to a lessor extent Fighter you can be good at both.

2. In addition to needing a high Constitution you really need a 14+ Dexterity and maximum strength to make this work too. This makes the build very MAD and limits Wisdom, Charisma and Intelligence, which are your 3 primary non-combat stats. As a result a Barbarian is generally not real great out of combat. The 14 Dex can help with some things like sneaking, but they are generally not going to be great out of combat.

3. Their Wisdom saves typically are awful and against a caster they spend a lot of time under some kind of condition that either incapacitates them .... or worse has them attack the party. Lucky for the party a Dominated Barbarian is easy to shut down with Hold Person or Fear.

You say, only having 14 in constitution, which means 1 to 10 less hp (20 with rage) for 10 levels gets you immediately killed?

So be a dwarf or variant human woth toughness ad you are good.

I really think the barbarian has different problems, a few hp isn't it.

 

[FrogReaver]

I was able to discover some evidence of the SRD only characters having strong influence in the data.

The only feat in SRD is grappler. The only fighter subclass is champion.

I looked at non champion fighter subclasses and split them into categories of dex based and str based depending on which score was higher. I discovered about 43% level 8 or above dex based non champion fighters took sharpshooter. However only about 9% of all dex based fighters level 8+ did so. It seems to me that lack of accessibility to the sharpshooter feat due to Srd only restrictions for the free version of dnd beyond are the best explanation for this discrepancy.

 

[ECMO3]

You say, only having 14 in constitution, which means 1 to 10 less hp (20 with rage) for 10 levels gets you immediately killed?

No I didn't say it gets you immediately killed. I said without a 16 you are not very good in combat compared to most other classes and with a 16 there is still a high cost to pay in out of combat healing in addition to short changing other abilities.

I can run a melee Fighter or Bladesinger with a 10 constitution or a Paladin or heavy armor Cleric with a 12 Constitution and be very effective in melee as a tank character. You can not do that as effectively with a Barbarian without a high Constitution, and I would argue with a 14 Constitution a Barbarian is still behind where those classes are with a 10 or a 12 respectively.

I really think the barbarian has different problems, a few hp isn't it.

In my opinion to optimize the functions of the class usable (reckless attack, rage damage, melee combat, and high damage through Great Weapon Master) drive you to a high-hit point character to be effective in combat or on par with other melee martials.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I can run a melee Fighter or Bladesinger with a 10 constitution or a Paladin or heavy armor Cleric with a 12 Constitution and be very effective in melee as a tank character. You can not do that as effectively with a Barbarian without a high Constitution, and I would argue with a 14 Constitution a Barbarian is still behind where those classes are with a 10 or a 12 respectively.

I think that does not follow. A barbarian with 14 constitution is functional. A cleric or paladin needs to do concentration saves. So I'd say, that having low con there is at least as detrimental.

Of course a barbarian with 14 con is behind a con 16 barb. But so is every other class.
The question is always: how much do you pay for 1 extra hp at level 1?
4 points of wisdom? Is that worth it? Mayby, maybe not.

 

[ECMO3]

I think that does not follow. A barbarian with 14 constitution is functional. A cleric or paladin needs to do concentration saves. So I'd say, that having low con there is at least as detrimental.

A Cleric or Paladin is going to have a better AC out of the box meaning they will get hit less. This will be a lot less with something like Shield of Faith up and on the order of 25% as often with Protection from Evil and Good. Losing concentration doesn't really change that because they just recast the spell and it is not like AC is bad without it, you will be 20 with a cleric or 21 with a paladin before those defensive spells so if you get hit and if you lose concentration, you are without that defense for a part of one round until you can cast it again.

Do they lose concentration occasionally with some really bad results - sure and a Barbarian can lose rage too thereby losing his resistance to some damage.

Of course a barbarian with 14 con is behind a con 16 barb. But so is every other class.

A Barbarian with a 16 Constitution in tier 2 still will not last as long tanking against melee attacks as a Bladesinger or Eldritch Knight optimized for tanking with a 12 Constitution. They can last about as long as a Paladin or Cleric with a 12, although they will need a lot more healing between battles.

And the key here is yes they can keep up with those classes, but they need to use a shield and have a very high constitution to equal what those characters can do while investing less in Constitution and while being substantially better at the non-combat pillars.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A Cleric or Paladin is going to have a better AC out of the box meaning they will get hit less. This will be a lot less with something like Shield of Faith up and on the order of 25% as often with Protection from Evil and Good. Losing concentration doesn't really change that because they just recast the spell and it is not like AC is bad without it, you will be 20 with a cleric or 21 with a paladin before those defensive spells so if you get hit and if you lose concentration, you are without that defense for a part of one round until you can cast it again.

Do they lose concentration occasionally with some really bad results - sure and a Barbarian can lose rage too thereby losing his resistance to some damage.



A Barbarian with a 16 Constitution in tier 2 still will not last as long tanking against melee attacks as a Bladesinger or Eldritch Knight optimized for tanking with a 12 Constitution. They can last about as long as a Paladin or Cleric with a 12, although they will need a lot more healing between battles.

And the key here is yes they can keep up with those classes, but they need to use a shield and have a very high constitution to equal what those characters can do while investing less in Constitution and while being substantially better at the non-combat pillars.

I am not convinced.
As I said, one less hp per level is the smallest problem.

 

[ECMO3]

I am not convinced.
As I said, one less hp per level is the smallest problem.

Not convinced about what specifically?

If you let me know what specifically you disagree with I will try and prove it out mathematically.