D&D 5E Non-Scaling Class Specialties: Why Choose Them?

[keterys]

It probably doesn't help that the lowest AC character in several of the parties I've seen is also the shapeshifted druid who happens to be the most obvious target in many cases. Doesn't actually change anything. +1 AC still makes 1 of the 20 attacks miss. Same damage mitigated whether it's to the fighter or the cleric.

Stupid monsters tend to attack in a spread out fashion in my general experience. A horde of zombies will tend to erupt from multiple exits, claw through windows, dig up from the ground, etc. It may be the local scene, but limiting fights to a single person at a chokepoint is _really_ hard. Maybe if we played more 5-ft corridor dungeons, but nobody does that.

So, in the games I've seen, +1 AC on the highest person tends to be diminishing returns (encourages any intelligent foe to attack elsewhere) and +1 AC is most useful on any melee, healer, or rearguard person who can't easily avoid enemies. In some groups, I know "the healer" or "the caster" is always the first attack pick, so in those groups it's that person.

But, again, +1 AC is still helpful at all levels. And it still makes about 1 in 20 attacks miss you. No matter who is attacking you.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

We created some 14th level characters for an adventure. I have a hill dwarf battlemaster dual wielding a dwarven thrower (yay for the perfect random magic item!), while a fellow player has a human champion dual wielding longswords (including a dancing sword). We both chose to dual-wield for purposes of character concept. (We also have a cleric and a paladin in the group.) We only had one fight so far, but it was extremely tough.

I must admit, despite the claims (that I partly agree with*) that battlemaster is more powerful than champion, I was looking longingly at that +1 AC and +5 (total) initiative her character had. And rationing out my combat superiority dice (I used all of them) was fun, but that expanded crit range (which came up once or twice) also looked pretty nice. There is also a feeling that once I have spent my dice, I'm now an inferior combatant for the rest of the fight. I'm sure I did out-damage her, but that is as much or more because I was a dwarf standing back and throwing a dwarven thrower with a +3 to hit and an extra 1d8+3 to damage, verses her swinging a couple longswords with no to hit or damage bonus.

In a friend's upcoming longer running campaign, I'm planning on playing a human (standard version) champion fighter with no feats--right out of the basic rules, even though the rest of the players will likely be using the PHB. I'm pretty excited about going the super athletic, ability scores through the roof route. And since it's 5e, I plan to use plenty of shoving and grappling and jumping and other such activities that are available to anyone, just relying on my multiple attacks and excellent physical capabilities to excel at them.

* Except in certain situations (high level with Great Weapon Master primarily), battlemaster out-damages champion on average, but it is dependent on intelligent use of your features and the number of rounds of combat you have between short rests. Champion also gets an "invisible" damage bonus via an initiative bonus. They could have perhaps given champion something else to make them more powerful, but the divide isn't that great as it is sometimes portrayed as being. After I played with math and went through a long thread on it months ago, I came to the conclusion that you don't have to feel gimped by choosing a champion over a battlemaster.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Stupid monsters tend to attack in a spread out fashion in my general experience. A horde of zombies will tend to erupt from multiple exits, claw through windows, dig up from the ground, etc. It may be the local scene, but limiting fights to a single person at a chokepoint is _really_ hard. Maybe if we played more 5-ft corridor dungeons, but nobody does that.

There should be occasional 3' to 5' corridor dungeons because otherwise the game is too easy. In the open you can just kite things to death with arrows from horseback. I'm oversimplifying but you get the gist: a team needs both a ranged configuration and a chokepoint configuration, and also a counterbattery configuration for enemy missile fire. That covers 90% of threats IME, as long as your scouts are good enough to prevent ambushes.

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2