(I'm going to be using the term fighter, but also applies to a paladin and some other "warrior" concepts).
There has been a lot of discussion how in 5e the shield and weapon using fighter is a bit... underwhelming... when compared to other options. This is mainly due to limited feat support: I'm doing 1d8+7 with my sword and dueling fighting style fighter, while the PAM/GWM is doing massive damage.
IMO. There are multiple paths to damage for a fighter/paladin/etc. You mentioned 1 above and that is feats. However, there is also multiclassing and multiclassing further drifts into 2 paradigms - high single damage attack + reaction attack (often rogue) - or many attacks with damage enhancement.
One of my favorite builds combines that together, while using a sword and shield. Battlemaster Fighter 5 Genie Warlock X.
- Start with sword and shield and dueling style.
- You can go str or dex but i recommend dex.
- Take battlemaster maneuvers for reaction attacks (Riposte/Brace). I'd recomend precision or trip attack.
- For warlock you get genie pact proficiency bonus damage boost and will want hex and then later on to transition to shadowblade.
By level 10 you can be doing 3d8+7 for 2 attacks (often with advantage) and make a reaction brace/riposte attack for 4d8+7 most rounds.
Continuing in warlock can eventually get you another d8 per attack and also +cha mod to damage. Nearing max level that looks like 4d8+12 damage x2 and 5d8+12 damage on reaction brace/riposte attacks. If you find a strong magic weapon spirit shroud works as a great replacement for shadowblade.
By level 10 you should be matching or out performing GWM and possibly GWM+PAM fighters in damage.
Also, the Battlemaster 3/Rogue X is similar but more skills and a little less damage.
I don't think you were meaning your post to extol the benefits of multiclassing for sword and shield fighters though. Outside of multiclassing fighter as you define it doesn't just have to compete with GWM/PAM and CBE/SS, they also have to compete with casters. Yes, casters have a different feel and aesthetic, but in terms of power and versatility, something like a simple life cleric likely outdoes or at least matches a non-feated non-multiclassed fighter in damage, while having alot more versatility and generally more useful out of combat stats. They can easily take a similar feats as they really can get by without upping their primary stats if desired. Save for half damage spirit guardians and auto hit healing spells / bless tend to mean they can live without max wisdom (wisdom is still really nice for them though).
What if this was... on purpose? Or if it's not on purpose, what if this was a "happy accident?"
If we look at a featless game, sword and board is actually somewhat better - if you take dueling fighting style, your damage output is basically the same as a 2 handed weapon and you have a shield!
So in a game with feats, because you really can't take things to improve your fighting style (there is shield master but it's... decent, not great?), you can take... whatever feat you want! Or just increase your stats if you don't like feats. You don't feel the "pressure" to take those "important" combat feats because they are simply not meaningful to you.
There are still incredibly strong feats for sword and shield. Any feat that grants even a single cast of hex per day is very strong. The feat for more battlemaster manuevers is very nice as well. Sentinel pairs very well. Inspiring leader and chef are solid defensive staples. Lucky is solid all around.
Never underestimate what a Battlemaster using Action Surge + trip attack + precision attack + hex can output as damage. It's incredible even if hex is limited to once per day.
I once made a dex-built melee fighter with shield and sword, and for feats by the end of the campaign I had ritual caster, chef, lucky ... was my PC as hard hitting as he could have been? No, but he was very versatile - a better rounded adventurer vs a mere DPS machine. I'm sure there are many other example of fun and useful combos a PC could have when they aren't "forced" to take PAM/GWM or SS/CE....
Sure. I mean you can use those feats with a greatsword and defensive style just as easily though. It's just the tradeoff feels better as you don't feel like you are giving up as much by not having the GWM/PAM feat option.
EDIT: to be clear: Sword and Shield is a bit better to compensate for the lack of feats
I think only slightly so. And it comes with some noticable downsides. Changing to a ranged weapon when wielding a shield is rough. Grappling when using a shield is rough. There's always the concern that without significant damage output that enemies can just ignore the high ac fighter (different dm npc battle tactics really change things).
I say all of this and I should note that my favorite melee character I've played has been a bear totem barbarian / swashbuckler. No feats. Focused on Con (was the only melee character in the party). Playing a fairly simple martial really freed up my mental load to be used for PC behavior and comments. Tactically the speed from rogue cunning action made engaging an enemy away from my allies work and the high OA damage coupled with the distance gap encouraged enemies to focus me instead of allies. I'd often grapple enemies as well just to be sure.
I'm honestly with you on the feats, they are strong but fairly boring. There's a more fun way to play, but with creative multiclassing you don't have to give up significant effectiveness. I do think going just sword and shield single class fighter is a waste. You don't end up doing significantly more damage than cantrips and have none of the versatility of casters (including clerics who can match your AC).