Have we rebalanced the Champion Yet?

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
There is a feature in 4e where the striker class ie the guys doing the most potential damage was also somewhat less defended and having fewer hit points. This "give an opportunity to attack" or even make an exertion and spend hit points or alternatively hit die is basically using increased risk to implement that... I think its actually better flavor for the fighter to do this as choice since they have better defenses on which to trade and your I would do this with higher armor class (20 sounds extreme given plate is 18) and a second wind is an intended effect ... the person willing to try it more often is going to get more danger and bang.
 

Xeviat

Adventurer
Switching out the champion's improved crit for +1 to hit and +2 damage, weapon focus and specialization as it were, would feel right to me, but earlier when I ran the numbers on the comparisons, +2 damage ontop of improved crit ended up being more damage than the BM at the higher levels, especially at 20.

But, I purposefully was looking at the really basic BM maneuvers, not Repost and Precision, because the math in those is much harder to do. The BM gets all those riders, but the Champion has other features other than damage, eventually, so that's fine.

For me, it's just a matter of increasing that 3rd level ability to be something that feels worth a whole level. I don't want to make the champion a more complicated class.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
But, I purposefully was looking at the really basic BM maneuvers, not Repost and Precision, because the math in those is much harder to do.
Those are from what I read the most commonly taken and really seem to be the easiest to translate into what is the best damage a BM can do. Enemies will attack and will miss in a fight you get the riposte. You will attack and you will miss sometimes too and precision attack gives you a replacement opportunity to hit. They seem easier to compute
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
I would definitely be taking those two even for flavor the one is evocative of a more sophisticated fighting style and the other is the key to being able to do cool stunts if you want to (ie my robinhood archery shots)
 
Switching out the champion's improved crit for +1 to hit and +2 damage, weapon focus and specialization as it were, would feel right to me, but earlier when I ran the numbers on the comparisons, +2 damage ontop of improved crit ended up being more damage than the BM at the higher levels, especially at 20.

But, I purposefully was looking at the really basic BM maneuvers, not Repost and Precision, because the math in those is much harder to do. The BM gets all those riders, but the Champion has other features other than damage, eventually, so that's fine.

For me, it's just a matter of increasing that 3rd level ability to be something that feels worth a whole level. I don't want to make the champion a more complicated class.
IMO - you have to pick your balance point comparison first. If you are wishy washy with that then this will end up as a failed exercise. I don't care what you actually use so much that you pick one and stick to it

A few additional points:
1. Anything that modifies a champions attacks will be weaker than a battlemaster early and stronger than it later. There is no way around it
2. Which brings me to - You must think about the error tolerance. How close is close enough? To me a champion doing 20ish less damage per day at level 3-4 is acceptable. Is that for you? Him doing 50 more at level 20 is also acceptable.

For me the super simple solution of adding +2 damage or +1 hit / +1 dmg works great because it's within my tolerance for balanced (at least before feats).

If that doesn't work then the next simplest option to look would be to have a mechanic that adds damage to an attack once per turn.

If that doesn't work I think you are basically in activated ability territory as your next most simple mechanics.
 
I would definitely be taking those two even for flavor the one is evocative of a more sophisticated fighting style and the other is the key to being able to do cool stunts if you want to (ie my robinhood archery shots)
There's a lot of maneuvers I like.

Commander's Strike (when theirs a rogue in the party)
Disarming Attack
Goading Attack
Manuevering Attack
Menacing Attack
Parry
Precision Attack
Rally
Riposte
Trip Attack
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
There's a lot of maneuvers I like.
Some are clearly too variable like the one does the party have a potent single target striker in position ... enough less certain that I think Mearles himself said to ignore that difference. Others are not far different than riposte or precision strike but many do work out the same when used properly but they are harder to get the situation a lot harder.. as for the math I would go with what was mentioned by @Cap'n Kobold its pretty good for some of the others too.
 

fearsomepirate

Explorer
Fighters don't need more sub-classes than Battle Master and Eldritch Knight. They cover all that we need.
The reason Champion exists is a large contingent of players wanted a Fighter archetype that didn't have abstract expendable resources like Superiority Dice, but just flat, passive mechanics. IIRC Mearls said he was surprised by this, he figured everybody wanted more stuff to mess with.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
The reason Champion exists is a large contingent of players wanted a Fighter archetype that didn't have abstract expendable resources like Superiority Dice, but just flat, passive mechanics. IIRC Mearls said he was surprised by this, he figured everybody wanted more stuff to mess with.
Well I think it has been known that "not everybody" for a bit. There is a decided populous who are simplistically put at the table either for story not game and others with more social reasons or to enjoy raw visceral die rolling (the gamblers urge as I usually call it). So enter simpler crit fishing the class. I like the idea but the implementation maybe doesn't feel distinct.
 
Last edited:

Xeviat

Adventurer
A few additional points:
1. Anything that modifies a champions attacks will be weaker than a battlemaster early and stronger than it later. There is no way around it
2. Which brings me to - You must think about the error tolerance. How close is close enough? To me a champion doing 20ish less damage per day at level 3-4 is acceptable. Is that for you? Him doing 50 more at level 20 is also acceptable.
Luckily, the BM goes from like 4d8 (18ish) to 7d12 (45ish) from 3rd to 18th.

But, this also brings me back to a separate discussion I've had about the BM starting off too high when compared to the Eldritch Knight. The disparity between the EK and BM wears off once they get their 7th level feature and 2nd level spells, but before that the BM has way more extra oomph. Reining in the early BM would go a long way to making the Champion feel like a better option at the lower levels. Really, I'm only concerned about sub 10th level, because at 10th and later the Champion starts getting unique things (like +1 AC and passive regeneration) that end up being a lot harder to directly compare.

As for what the balance threshold for be, that's a good question. I'd say +/-10% would be fair. But, mostly, I want that 3rd level feature to be worth a full feat, since that's just how classes are designed.
 

fearsomepirate

Explorer
Well I think it has been known that "not everybody" for a bit. There is a decided populous who are simplistically put at the table either for story not game and others with more social reasons or to enjoy raw visceral die rolling (the gamblers urge as I usually call it). So enter simpler crit fishing the class. I like the idea but the implementation maybe doesn't feel distinct.
Personally, I usually DM, so when I do play, I want a break from managing a bunch of stuff. Champion's by far my favorite Fighter to play.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Personally, I usually DM, so when I do play, I want a break from managing a bunch of stuff. Champion's by far my favorite Fighter to play.
When I get to play I want to play something i can personally invest in (not much call for doing that with monsters) and monsters and npcs are relatively simple generally they lack individuality - so when I can I like elaborate character design choices and so I still want to feel those and subsequent in play choices are important ie the appeal is lost on me.
 

fearsomepirate

Explorer
I don't see much individuality in Superiority Dice TBH. It's just another mechanic, a resource to manage that I don't really care about. You don't have a ton of options with Fighter anyway, it's not like one half-orc Great Weapon fighter differs from another all that much.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
You don't have a ton of options with Fighter anyway, it's not like one half-orc Great Weapon fighter differs from another all that much.
So an eldritch knight half-orc Great Weapon fighter is identical to I get a crit once in a while more than you.... really?
 

Advertisement

Top