D&D 5E Is the Champion weak compared to Battle Master?

[Valetudo]

The answer to this threads question is it depends on your groups composition and playstyle. Does your DM tend to use alot of lower CR monsters, the champion tends to be a better mob sweeper. Where as the BM tends to be better against lone but strong monsters as long as he has his SD. Ive noticed alot of people claiming the BM as the strongest are also ones that tend to short rest after every fight. Where as my players tend to short rest after every three fights on average(sometimes even when they have a chance to rest earlier). Thats one of the things that is really a deciding factor in what subclass is better or more usefull in 5th. Also how come the E.knight is never in these disscusions?

 

[Imaro]

Cool, glad to hear it. Unfortunately, I ran Next so much during the playtest that its still easy for me to get details like that confused. I will go back and remove that one thing from the long list of goodies 5e heaped on casters....

So you don't even know which version of the rules you are complaining about... got it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So you don't even know which version of the rules you are complaining about... got it.

'Versionitis,' I call it. Doesn't cause a big problem when running 5e, since I'm free to overrule the rules as I see fit, so if I mis-remember something one round but get it right another, I'm just being 'empowered.'

But, hey if you see a second thing in that long list of 5e caster goodies that's incorrect, please, feel free to point it out, and I'll edit it away, too.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The basic conclusion I came to after initially starting this thread, doing a bunch of math, and spending a lot of thought on it is that they are fairly close in power.

If you had to put one above the other, it would be Battle Master. Battle Master also wins hands down if you have a lot of short rests.

What Champion needs to come out on top with damage dealing is lots of attack rolls--so advantage really helps here, as does Great Weapon Master if you include feats. In fact, at very high levels Champion with Great Weapon Master out-damages Battle Master by default. The initiative bonus that Champion gets also means that they will get more attacks overall than a similarly statted Battle Master, which synergized with their abilities well.

If you aren't really interested in managing a Battle Master's maneuvers, you don't have to feel like you are getting the shaft with Champion. You'll have more athletic prowess, better initiative, likely an extra +1 AC eventually, and you shine when short rests aren't available or when you can gain advantage on attacks (so get your allies to use things like faerie fire and watch yourself dominate the fight).

I'm actually planning on playing a Champion straight out of basic, default human, not even using feats. I want to go with someone with a simple fighting style and great athletic prowess (it's a savage setting, and I envision him leaping across a chasm swinging some mighty weapon at a foe mid-jump) and that's the way to do it.

This really hasn't been my experience with 5e so far... but whatever.

EDIT: I also find it interesting that on these forums we have some posters claiming that the casters have been nerfed too far with concentration limitations... while others are claiming they are akin to gods in the game... which one is it?

My guess is that they relate to a couple different play styles. Sure, casters can be over-contributers if you take advantage of all of the tactical possibilities, both in and out of combat. Scouring the internet helps in this area.

On the other hand, if you just pick up the Player's Handbook, come up with an interesting character concept and some reasonably good sounding tactics, they aren't going to overshadow anyone.

Or in other words, while you can break anything with heavy optimization, casters can apparently be broken in more and more interesting ways. I have no personal experience with this in my groups.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What Champion needs to come out on top with damage dealing is lots of attack rolls. Battle Master also wins hands down if you have a lot of short rests.

In a sense, each of these can be just a little self-defeating. The Champion is very much a high-DPR character, so the brighter he shines, the faster the combat ends, and, well, the less chance he has to shine. Similarly, the Battlemaster is supposed to thrive in tactical combat, but needs to 'rest' /an hour/ after every fight to really do so, which would probably involve declining at least some combats (by hiding or removing the party from an area full of enemies & the like).

If you aren't really interested in managing a Battle Master's maneuvers, you don't have to feel like you are getting the shaft with Champion.

I think that's a fair bottom-line assessment.

Conversely, if you are looking to manage just a few resources to get a small tactical edge - for instance, if you liked the play of the Essentials Knight - the Battlemaster might not disappoint.

 

[Dargrimm]

Both are fine, but just forget for a moment the numbers and think about your character. Imagine your character is a tough dwarven warrior who always charges first into battle with his two-handed maul. Maybe Battlemaster is better number-wise but I would choose Champion for him because it is closer to the spirit of the character.

 

[Sunseeker]

The Champion is simple. That's its attraction. Being able to do more things is always superior to being able to do less. The Champion was designed expressly for people who wanted a simple, straight-forward fighter with no gimmicks, tricks or other funny abilities. You can make a pretty strong Champion, but by its simplistic nature it is going to fall behind due to lack of utility.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

The answer to this threads question is it depends on your groups composition and playstyle. Does your DM tend to use alot of lower CR monsters, the champion tends to be a better mob sweeper. Where as the BM tends to be better against lone but strong monsters as long as he has his SD. Ive noticed alot of people claiming the BM as the strongest are also ones that tend to short rest after every fight. Where as my players tend to short rest after every three fights on average(sometimes even when they have a chance to rest earlier). Thats one of the things that is really a deciding factor in what subclass is better or more usefull in 5th. Also how come the E.knight is never in these disscusions?

Because the Eldritch Knight is awesome, and complainers hate awesomesauce.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Also how come the E.knight is never in these disscusions?

Well, it is a caster. If your concept is 'fighter who casts spells,' then EK is in the running, and how it stacks up matters. It also has no competition unless multi-classing is available. OTOH, if your concept is a tough martial type of any archetype who doesn't actually cast spells, Champion and Battlemaster are your choices. OK, maybe Berserker.

Why is berserker never in these disscussions? IDK.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yes. THe Battlemaster is the best fighter except maybe at the highest levels of the game.