D&D (2024) Martials: damage scaling like cantrips?

[Bae'zel]

I saw a meme about this the other day and it got me thinking… attack cantrips have damage dice that scale with caster level, right? Sometimes doing other effects as well.

My question is: what if martial classes (eg Fighter, Paladin, Ranger and Barbarian) also had their melee weapon damage scale up?

Eg at 5th level, the Fighter gets an extra damage die to their chosen weapons (masteries). So a longsword does 2d8 (2d10 two handed).

Or is this already covered, mathematically? By their extra attack actions?

Did 4e do something like this?

Being a simpleton like me, who is terrible at math, it makes sense considering the amazing stuff spellcasters can do at higher levels.

 

[Horwath]

I would say that is covered by extra attack,
but there is little consistency in the game,

cantrips are universal at levels 5,11,17 but without ability bonus(by default atleast)

and extra attacks as a martial you might get and might not, universal is 5th level and additional only for fighter.

kind of wish they made it more of them and more universal

IE:
all cantrips get improvement at levels 4,8,12,16,20

all martials get extra attack at levels 4,8,12,16,20

then you can also have hybrids with extra attacks at levels:
5,10,15,20
6,12,18 or
8,16 or
10,20 or
just at 12th level


fighter, barbarian, monk. extra attacks at levels: 4,8,12,16,20
paladin, ranger, extra attacks at levels: 5,10,15,20
rogue, artificer,: extra attack at levels 6,12,18
bard, warlock maybe: 8,16
possible extra attack for casters at level 12

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I saw a meme about this the other day and it got me thinking… attack cantrips have damage dice that scale with caster level, right? Sometimes doing other effects as well.

My question is: what if martial classes (eg Fighter, Paladin, Ranger and Barbarian) also had their melee weapon damage scale up?

Eg at 5th level, the Fighter gets an extra damage die to their chosen weapons (masteries). So a longsword does 2d8 (2d10 two handed).

Or is this already covered, mathematically? By their extra attack actions?

Did 4e do something like this?

Being a simpleton like me, who is terrible at math, it makes sense considering the amazing stuff spellcasters can do at higher levels.

It is scaled by their attack actions, and they often get some extras that boost it further taking martials generally outside the range of casters for single damage targets.
4e gave everyone encounter and daily powers that generally did more damage than basic attacks. They scaled by replacing them at higher levels with better versions.
The really amazing stuff casters do are area of effect and control effects.

 

[Steampunkette]

So... yeah. Martial Damage is scaled to a similar degree as Cantrips, though it ultimately favors martials. Lemme 'splain.

Casters get one attack roll for up to 4d10 damage. If they use a Wand of the Warmage it has a better chance of landing and gains a +3 to damage. This means on a given round, a Caster has one shot of dealing their cantrip damage, but it's 4 dice and energy typed which is generally (but not always) better than B/S/P.

Fighters get 4 attacks. Most fighter weapons deal 1d8+Mod. So they have four chances of dealing out damage similar to the 4d10, but a better average overall. They can also get magic weapons that make every chance to hit better, add +3 damage, or add +2d6 fire damage or whatever to every attack. This puts them to a point of scaling far -beyond- what the Caster does in average DPR.

Paladins get two attacks, but by level 11 each one is dealing 2d8+Mod, and they, too, can get the 2d6 fire damage or whatever or a +3. They deal slightly less total potential damage than the fighter, and are more likely in a given round to do less damage. This is offset by smites as on-demand damage to level out their DPR.

Barbarians get rage, with a flat scaling damage bonus and advantage on every attack, increasing the likelihood of them landing an attack significantly, putting their damage value around the Paladin on overall DPR. They also get the +2d6 or +3.

Rogues get one shot, like Casters, but then go ahead and add 10d6 to it because WOO HOO. They also have the option of +2d6 or +3. (Though the +3 is more favorable 'cause a LOT more dice are riding on getting at least one hit)

Rangers rely entirely on Hunter's Mark to carry their damage dealing capabilities for the extra 1d6 Force damage on their attacks, making them stronger, early game, on consistent DPR, but weaker late game than most classes. And without an on-demand source of damage like a Smite, or increased crit chances like a barbarian, they swiftly fall behind. Granted, force is resisted less often than Radiant... but not by much. Still. +2d6 or +3 applies to them, too.

 

[CreamCloud0]

yeah i do think it would be interesting for martial design if there was a dual progression on their damage, between extra attack and extra weapon damage dice, i do think the specifics of the weapon table might need to be reworked a little, but just the idea that a higher level warrior can get more out of a single weapon strike than they could at lower levels, more than just what their attack mod adds, the same 1d4+mod dagger doing 4d4+mod in the hands of 20th level character.

 

[Horwath]

yeah i do think it would be interesting for martial design if there was a dual progression on their damage, between extra attack and extra weapon damage dice, i do think the specifics of the weapon table might need to be reworked a little, but just the idea that a higher level warrior can get more out of a single weapon strike than they could at lower levels, more than just what their attack mod adds, the same 1d4+mod dagger doing 4d4+mod in the hands of 20th level character.

I would rather have 5 attacks for 1X damage than 1 attack for 5X damage.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I would rather have 5 attacks for 1X damage than 1 attack for 5X damage.

the idea is more you get 3 attacks for x3 damage than going to either of the ends of the scale.

 

[Horwath]

the idea is more you get 3 attacks for x3 damage than going to either of the ends of the scale.

that works also, but I would still lean towards more attacks than more damage per attack.

more attacks is more consistent and can temper the swinginess of d20.

 

[CreamCloud0]

that works also, but I would still lean towards more attacks than more damage per attack.

more attacks is more consistent and can temper the swinginess of d20.

as is most martials end up having two attacks by default, do you think it would be better if they got more?

 

[aco175]

I saw a meme about this the other day and it got me thinking… attack cantrips have damage dice that scale with caster level, right? Sometimes doing other effects as well.

My question is: what if martial classes (eg Fighter, Paladin, Ranger and Barbarian) also had their melee weapon damage scale up?

Eg at 5th level, the Fighter gets an extra damage die to their chosen weapons (masteries). So a longsword does 2d8 (2d10 two handed).

Or is this already covered, mathematically? By their extra attack actions?

Did 4e do something like this?

Being a simpleton like me, who is terrible at math, it makes sense considering the amazing stuff spellcasters can do at higher levels.

Is the other way to ask the question to say, should cantrips scale at all? And would this stay on-par with martials? And are/should cantrips be the go-to above level 5?

I do not know the answer, I'm not a math person as well. It had felt to me that cantrips at 5th and 11th level seem to deal more than the fighter at my table per swing, but then it is only one attack instead of 2 or 3.