False truisms in 5th edition

[MechaPilot]

What feats did the champion fighter have? I'm not sure you're comparing classes here rather than the impact of feats.

Shield Master, Sentinel, and Resilient (dex saves).

 

[Parmandur]

Expanded crit range only increases your chance of a critical hit by 5%, and then by another 5% when you crit on 18-20. With an 18-20 crit range that's only a 15% chance of getting an additional die of damage. Assuming a 60% hit chance, how does a 15% chance of a crit work out to getting an extra damage die on 60% of your attempted attacks?


Say the champion is fighting with a d8 weapon (because he's sword & board, as the one in my game was).
That's an average of 4.5 damage per hit.

Assuming a 60% hit chance and a crit on a nat 20 only we have the following weights:
40% chance of no damage (0)
55% chance of average damage (4.5)
5% chance of double average damage (9)

That gives us a weighted average damage per attack roll of 2.925 calculated as follows:
((0 * 8 = 0) + (11 * 4.5 = 49.5) + (1 * 9 = 9) = 58.5) / 20 = 2.925 per swing


Now, assuming a 60% hit chance and a crit on a nat 18-20 we have the following weights:
40% chance of no damage (0)
50% chance of average damage (4.5)
10% chance of double average damage (9)

That gives us a weighted average damage per attack roll of 2.925 calculated as follows:
((0 * 8 = 0) + (10 * 4.5 = 45) + (2 * 9 = 18) = 63) / 20 = 3.15 per swing

3.15 - 2.925 = 0.225 increased damage per attack roll for having an 18-20 crit range

Across 20 rounds of combat in a day, the average damage is the same as having another hit die on every hit. Mearls covers this in detail on the Happy Fun Hour, but the TL;DR version is that the Barbarian at Level 5 is making ~40 attacks per day, while the Champion is making ~45 from Second Wind. The Barbarian is likely to get a critical or two, the Champion is likely to get ~4.5 instead. At the next Tier, the Champion is making over 50% more attacks, and hence ~9-10 Critical hits in a day.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Yeah, I've run games with both a fighter and a barbarian. Neither player was an optimizer, both took a feat or two and then ASIs. While the barbarian had an occasional impressive round in terms of DPR, the fighter absolutely out-damaged her on the long curve. (The fighter was a dual-wielder.) The barbarian, OTOH, was a lot more mobile and could soak a lot more damage.

 

[MechaPilot]

Across 20 rounds of combat in a day, the average damage is the same as having another hit die on every hit. Mearls covers this in detail on the Happy Fun Hour, but the TL;DR version is that the Barbarian at Level 5 is making ~40 attacks per day, while the Champion is making ~45 from Second Wind. The Barbarian is likely to get a critical or two, the Champion is likely to get ~4.5 instead. At the next Tier, the Champion is making over 50% more attacks, and hence ~9-10 Critical hits in a day.

That doesn't jive with what I've seen at the table. I might search for Mearls showing his math on the HFH, but I have to confess I'm not terribly motivated to do so when a simple weighted-average damage per swing accurately reflects the play I've experienced; it seems like it might be an interesting intellectual exercise, but I'm not motivated to do it because it doesn't offer me anything in the realm of troubleshooting or gaining a greater understanding of my play experience. I think Mearls has helped make some fun stuff over the years, but I find myself seriously doubting his math if he claims a 15% crit chance works out to an extra die of damage per hit and he's assuming a hit chance greater than 15%.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Shield Master, Sentinel, and Resilient (dex saves).

Right, then, you're comparing feats. The champion had defensive and special case feats versus the barbarian's "I hit things hard" feat. Also, tanking+control don't synergize well with the champion's core abilities like GWM does the barbarian (reckless attack makes GWM functional for barbarians).

This is a case of a build that wasn't supported well by the adventures versus a strong synergy that was. I'd fully expect the barbarian to shine brighter without adjusting the stock adventure. Also, there's the point that most of the published adventure paths are pretty lenient on the PCs -- soft pacing, easy encounter design, etc. This makes the points where they do step up especially jarring. They tend to be uneven with a strong bias towards easy play. Which isn't a criticism -- they're pretty good intros for new players and for experienced players and DMs it's much easier to ramp up than down.

 

[MechaPilot]

Right, then, you're comparing feats. The champion had defensive and special case feats versus the barbarian's "I hit things hard" feat. Also, tanking+control don't synergize well with the champion's core abilities like GWM does the barbarian (reckless attack makes GWM functional for barbarians).

This is a case of a build that wasn't supported well by the adventures versus a strong synergy that was. I'd fully expect the barbarian to shine brighter without adjusting the stock adventure. Also, there's the point that most of the published adventure paths are pretty lenient on the PCs -- soft pacing, easy encounter design, etc. This makes the points where they do step up especially jarring. They tend to be uneven with a strong bias towards easy play. Which isn't a criticism -- they're pretty good intros for new players and for experienced players and DMs it's much easier to ramp up than down.

Sort of. The champion player asked if they could use their shield to attempt to shield-bash foes prone. I thought that sounded appropriate, so I let the champion do the damage and attempt to prone the target on a hit. The champion used this tactic frequently to prone a target and then attack it with advantage.

Admittedly, the player of the champion character was trying to build a good fighter with great survival ability, hence Shield Master and Resilience. He was planning to take Resilience (wisdom) with the next Feat/ASI opportunity; he really wanted proficiency with the three major saves.

 

[Umbran]

Also, there's the point that most of the published adventure paths are pretty lenient on the PCs -- soft pacing, easy encounter design, etc.

*shrug* My group at work is going trough Storm King's Thunder... and our party of four characters of 6th level keep coming upon CR 9 Fire Giants.

Everyone's mileage varies, I suppose. And that's kind of the point.

 

[Parmandur]

That doesn't jive with what I've seen at the table. I might search for Mearls showing his math on the HFH, but I have to confess I'm not terribly motivated to do so when a simple weighted-average damage per swing accurately reflects the play I've experienced; it seems like it might be an interesting intellectual exercise, but I'm not motivated to do it because it doesn't offer me anything in the realm of troubleshooting or gaining a greater understanding of my play experience. I think Mearls has helped make some fun stuff over the years, but I find myself seriously doubting his math if he claims a 15% crit chance works out to an extra die of damage per hit and he's assuming a hit chance greater than 15%.

To be fair, he brought this up in the context of how the Brute was poorly received as "feeling" stronger to folks who read the UA despite the rather robust mathematical model they worked out internally, and how that feeling matters.

However, back to the Barbarian being "better" at fighting than the Fighter proper...your anecdote of two Fighters and one Barbarian who never gets his resource limits pushed is nice and all, but that doesn't take away from the Fighters superiority as an always-on combatant. Another aspect: Range. The Fighter is amazing at range, the Barbarian sucks completely at range. The Champion can have the Great Weapon Mastery Feat, the Great Weapon fighting style and the Archery fighting style, being better with a great weapon than the Barbarian while being able to rock a longbow. And that's before the Barbarian is an exhausted hot mess, or considering Action Surges, Manuvers, Spells or expanded critical. Yes, Barbarians are ethe ultimate nova combatants, but Fighters remain strongest there is.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sort of. The champion player asked if they could use their shield to attempt to shield-bash foes prone. I thought that sounded appropriate, so I let the champion do the damage and attempt to prone the target on a hit. The champion used this tactic frequently to prone a target and then attack it with advantage.

Admittedly, the player of the champion character was trying to build a good fighter with great survival ability, hence Shield Master and Resilience. He was planning to take Resilience (wisdom) with the next Feat/ASI opportunity; he really wanted proficiency with the three major saves.

If they’d taken Sentinel, GWM, and an ASI, they’d probably have out-damaged the Barbarian.

 

[MechaPilot]

If they’d taken Sentinel, GWM, and an ASI, they’d probably have out-damaged the Barbarian.

not as a sword & board champion