Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 8303240" data-attributes="member: 7030563">I wouldn't mind seeing the game make spellcasters more powerful so they outperform martials in combat.  Basically martials have had their day in the sun since 1E, I think it would be nice to give the casters their turn at the top tier.That said, putting aside Paladins and Monks for a moment - RAW I think Fighters and Barbarians have an edge in combat over every other class.  The only exceptions is in a game with a lot of short rests and then warlocks built for combat might be their equal.  The idea that cantrips do as much as weapon attacks by martials is false for two reasons, first because they generally do not get ability bonuses to damage and second, because without a feat they usually can not be used on AOOs which happen all the time.Fighters and Barbarians also either one or more combat style to improve combat performance or in the case of Barbarians a rage ability and damage resistance.  Fighters also have things like improved criticals or battlemaster maneuvers etc that come as kits on their base class.  Fighters get 7 ASIs compared to most classes that get 5  (including all full casters).  Not only do they get more ASIs, the combat feats available to martials are better at increasing weapon damage then spellcasting feats are.   For example spell sniper is the caster equivalent of sharpshooter for ranged cantrips but sharpshooter is hands down a more powerful feat.  Things like GWM, sharpshooter, piercer, PAM and CBE all provide substantial boosts to martial damage, more so than you are going to get out of comparable spell casting feats.  Even without the +10 damage, GWM and SS boost damage by the bonus action attack and cover/range bonus.  Finally in strength builds these characters can also generally execute grapple and shove better than non-martials making them more useful in combat outside of their superior damage output.In my experience, Paladins are the most effective class in the game in terms of raw combat performance.  Now that is largely because of smites and spells, so I don't know if they fit the "martial" definition we are using here.Monks can be close to fighters and Barbarians in a game with a lot of short rests, I think they are a step down but in the same ballpark.  This is particularly true if your game has a lot of enemy "high-fantasy" bosses.  Spellcasters, dragons, undead etc. where stunning strike really makes in money.  It requires skilled play though and if your game has mostly martial enemies this will  not be as powerful.Now 5E is extremely flexible in terms of character builds and it is possible to build a caster that excels at combat and a martial that doesn't (for example take commanding presence as a battlemaster maneuver). So I would not go as far as to say all martials can outperform all casters but most martials can if they focus their build on that.</blockquote>

Verification