D&D 5E (2024) Martials: damage scaling like cantrips?

[Zardnaar]

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.

2024 iirc 0 critters are immune or resistance to force damage.

 

[Steampunkette]

2024 iirc 0 critters are immune or resistance to force damage.

Learned something new. They made Force the Untyped Damage of 5e, now.

Sure is a good thing this isn't a new edition with a buncha rules changes and changes to the classes, heritages, and monsters!

 

[Zardnaar]

Learned something new. They made Force the Untyped Damage of 5e, now.

Sure is a good thing this isn't a new edition with a buncha rules changes and changes to the classes, heritages, and monsters!

It's rare in 2014. One monster the helmed horror iirc.

Not much force damage outside usual suspect spells. 5.5 has a few on various attacks. Eg some druids and Rangers iirc.

With synaptic static and energy substitution in core resistances don't matter as much imho.

 

[ECMO3]

Regardless, at level 10, the fighter is attacking twice for weapon damage and dealing less than bladesinger/paladin/battlesmith/valor bard, etc.

IME they are dealing substantially more damage than Valor and Bladesinger from level 7 onward in the 2024 rules. They also deal substantially more at level 5 and generally more at level 1-4. Level 6 is the only level they are outdamaged by a single class Valor or Bladesinger IME. I've seen EK played side-by-side against a 2024 Valor Bard and while we have not seen a Bladesinger in the 2024 rules, I saw a lot of them in 5E. The lack of weapon masteries really nerfs these two subclasses weapon damage (and bladelocks) as compared to the true martial classes and if we start looking beyond damage the buff offered the fighter specifically by Tactical Mastery is even wider as compared to these two.

I would also say EKs are better than Battlemaster and comparable to most Paladins when it comes to damage. A lot of that varies by level and situationally game by game but in the 2024 games I have played they have generally done more damage than these two. Trustrike's ability to change damage type to do Radiant damage with their most powerful attack on their attack action without using any resources is a pretty big buff compared the Battlemaster's basic kit and their ability to do it with any ranged weapon or thrown weapon at range is a substantial buff compared to a Paladin.

 

[NotAYakk]

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?

So, I've messed with this extensively.

What I ended up with that sort of works looks like this:

1. When making a weapon attack, at 5th 11th and 17th level you deal an additional [W] damage. So a 2 handed sword at level 11 by default deals 6d6.

2. Extra Attack on a Fighter reads: When you make the attack action, you can sacrifice one [W] of damage on all of your attacks to make an additional attack. At level 11 and 17 they just get more attacks without having to give up [W]s.

3. I also add a Combat Dominance feature to Fighter 5: On your turn, you have advantage on weapon attacks if the target of your attack has not attacked you or caused you to make a saving throw since the end of your last turn. (This is a pseudo-marking mechanic). This gives Fighters a pseudo-mark mechanic (if you ignore the fighter, they'll mess you up).

4. I also made Action Surge read: You can make an additional attack, move your speed, and gain advantage on attribute checks in addition to your other actions on your turn, but only once on your turn and you cannot do this again until you complete a short rest. You get extra uses of this feature.

4. Barbarians (a) an unarmed or improvised attack, and (b) even more [W] dice starting at level 5.

5. Paladins get advantage on attacks on creatures who have damaged someone else, and extra radiant damage starting at level 5. They do this through an EK-like "blessed weapon". (This gives paladins a pseudo-mark mechanic). At higher levels they get both extra SMITE damage dice and radiant base damage.

6. Rangers get "Bladesinger" style "you can cast a ranger spell that requires an action and make an attack as part of the attack action" starting at 5. They also get some tweaked cantrips.

7. Monks get a 2nd bonus action, and flurry is 1 attack and no longer a bonus action or an action, just 1/turn.

Part of the goal is to ensure that all melee characters have a distinct game loop; they feel different to play.

The fighter feels the most like the base 2024 fighter; except they have the combat dominance game to play. And action surge isn't pure damage, but also maneuverability and tricks. (I also buff up second wind; I think it should be a half-heal with a defensive buff, so you use it when you are down to 25% and are being focused on).

The paladin is playing a crit-fishing game with smites and hard blows. Their damage bonus doesn't stack with weapon size, so using a 1 handed + shield is very tempting.

The Barbarian is gettting one big hit per turn instead of 2 smaller ones, plus a punch or an improvised attack. Hitting someone for 12d6 is its own reward.

The monk's gaining of bonus actions gives it a lot of flexibility with it choices features. Each bonus action can be a MA attack, or use its dodge/dash/etc abilities to reposition. Their core action is now just 1 attack; this means their action is very cheap, as more of their power budget is in their 2 bonus actions or their "action-free" flurry.

Rangers choose between a cantrip or a ranger spell each turn, plus get an attack. This is a big difference. Many of their spells also gives attacks, as would some of their cantrips.

---

Anyhow, the end result of this is effectively exponential damage output from melee types; every 4-5 levels melee character damage output doubles.

This has to be matched with a similar increase in damage output of spellcasters. Sorcerers, I kill flexible casting and give them sorcery points as a short rest resource. Then I auto-upcast spells based on the number of sorcery points you spend. And at level 11+ it starts getting even more gonzo.

After this entire balance sweep, we now have to go after monsters.

The base PC goes from roughly linear damage and HP (very roughly; more affine, but), to exponential damage and linear HP.

An appropriate monster then needs exponential HP and linear damage. Well, I often tweak up self-healing of PCs as well, which makes HP somewhat super-linear, but not by much.

You then rejigger monsters that way, then use (HP*Damage*2^([AC+ATK]/10)^0.6 to get an XP value. This lets you use higher or lower level monsters, and just add up XP for a fight.

All of this is a fair amount of work. It isn't as hard if you only have a handful of players, but resweeping the entire game is a bitch.

---

TL;DR - the damage boost is huge, so you end up having to rejigger much of the game.

 

[ECMO3]

So, I've messed with this extensively.

What I ended up with that sort of works looks like this:

1. When making a weapon attack, at 5th 11th and 17th level you deal an additional [W] damage. So a 2 handed sword at level 11 by default deals 6d6.

2. Extra Attack on a Fighter reads: When you make the attack action, you can sacrifice one [W] of damage on all of your attacks to make an additional attack. At level 11 and 17 they just get more attacks without having to give up [W]s.

This is too much crunch for most players and most tables I think.

 

[Genghis Don]

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.

I did something like that as a house rule change in B/X...but it was for anyone. The extra damage die varied by class, well, their THACO actually, when it improved 3/4/5 levels for fighters (inc. dwarves, elves & halflings)/clerics & thieves/magic-users. fighters et all added a d8 each bump up (d12 for 2 handed weaponry), clerics & thieves a d6 (d10 for 2 handed weaponry) & MU a d4 (d8 for 2 handed). I improved THACO one less than usual at each such change level. AC remained a bit more meaningful as levels rose, and fights were fast & brutal.

Everyone had to fight sometimes back then, spells were always a very limited resource, and there wasn't really any special attack/damage adds.

For 5e multiple attacks are supposed to do as you say, but generally struggle later on as cantrips are by no means the only tricks of casters; still, ways to add extra damage dice AND attacks are plentiful though, and easily adding ability score mods helps.

 

[Clint_L]

For 5e multiple attacks are supposed to do as you say, but generally struggle later on...

No, the gap between martial DPR and everyone else increases at higher levels, especially with the 2024 rules. Martial classes do NOT need a damage boost (well, maybe rangers and rogues).

We're a year into the 2024 rules, more for those of us who were playtesting. We have plenty of data on lower levels, quite a bit on mid-tier play, and less on high level play, but folks like @ECMO3 and various others have shown the strength of martial classes when it comes to doing damage at high levels.

My 5th level monk, who has one uncommon magic item (eldritch claw tattoos) and only does unarmed strikes (for flavour) has a base DPR of 38, or 52 if I activate the tattoos. At level 5! And she's far from optimized.

 

[Genghis Don]

No, the gap between martial DPR and everyone else increases at higher levels, especially with the 2024 rules. Martial classes do NOT need a damage boost (well, maybe rangers and rogues).

We're a year into the 2024 rules, more for those of us who were playtesting. We have plenty of data on lower levels, quite a bit on mid-tier play, and less on high level play, but folks like @ECMO3 and various others have shown the strength of martial classes when it comes to doing damage at high levels.

My 5th level monk, who has one uncommon magic item (eldritch claw tattoos) and only does unarmed strikes (for flavour) has a base DPR of 38, or 52 if I activate the tattoos. At level 5! And she's far from optimized.

2024 doesn't count as 5e...I wasn't, nor am ever referring to it, unless I specifically say so...and don't care anything about it; no offense.

5e is 5e
2024 is 2024

WOTC needs to burn in hell forever for their vile attempt to make them the same thing/to kill 5e with this filthy naming trick. I'm not playing along, and all invoking it will do is beget venom, if pressed.

 

[mellored]

2024 doesn't count as 5e...I wasn't, nor am ever referring to it, unless I specifically say so...and don't care anything about it; no offense.

5e is 5e
2024 is 2024

WOTC needs to burn in hell forever for their vile attempt to make them the same thing/to kill 5e with this filthy naming trick. I'm not playing along, and all invoking it will do is beget venom, if pressed.

Weird hill to die on, but ok.