D&D 5E The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy

[smbakeresq]

The point of my reply was hussars flawed analysis. If you agree that he needs to include precision then just say so. Or if not then explain why. There's no need to jump up and make points based on wrong assumptions that have nothing to do with what I actually said. Please understand how annoying that is.

Please understand how sensitive you must be to somehow construe what I wrote as and endorsement of or attack on anyone's analysis. Please understand how annoying that is.


In the context of the actual point of the thread you proved it, the fighter gets a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds over other martial classes that no way makes it for what the others classes get. Thanks!

 

[Satyrn]

Again, there's my point. NOTHING you just listed is a "fighter". It's a background. I can be a samurai or a pirate or a cunning mercenary with any class. In fact, other classes would probably do the job better. Certainly ranger would be a far better pirate than fighter.

The point I'm making is that the base classes other than fighter, actually come with a roleplaying hook. You're an Oath of Ancients paladin. That says a LOT about your character. You're a fighter. That says... you can use a sword and wear armor? The class contributes virtually nothing to the actual character.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I'm glad the fighter doesn't have that character built in. It's generally that sort of class I prefer.

Likewise, I like that I can readily ignore the wizard's thin roleplay hook. I just wish there was a rogue-like class that didn't have the crook hook.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Please understand how sensitive you must be to somehow construe what I wrote as and endorsement of or attack on anyone's analysis. Please understand how annoying that is.


In the context of the actual point of the thread you proved it, the fighter gets a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds over other martial classes that no way makes it for what the others classes get. Thanks!

Actually, that analysis assumed perfect results for the ranger, so it's a bit more than a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds.

What that says about the fighter is open to your interpretation -- and I doubt it will be sufficient to alter your opinion -- but not acknowledging the points made isn't necessary to hold your own opinions.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

In the context of the actual point of the thread you proved it, the fighter gets a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds over other martial classes that no way makes it for what the others classes get.

At level 6, the fighter gets +1 to hit and damage above either the barbarian or the paladin. At level 11, when the other classes have caught up on their stats, fighter get an extra attack. That is the actual edge they have, which is nowhere close to irrelevant.

To contrast, barbarians have an option to sacrifice their own defense in order to dramatically increase their accuracy, which is only really worth it while raging (so there's a daily limit, and it can be stopped); and paladins can smite (which also has a daily limit). At higher levels, paladins have the option to actually improve their saves at a reasonable rate. That seems like a pretty even trade, honestly, which only swings away from the fighter if you stray too far from the attrition model.

 

[Tony Vargas]

it's a bit more than a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds.

It's +/- 2-3 DPR.

DPR can be calculated to a high degree of precision, which might make that seem significant (just like the half-point DPR difference between greatswords & greataxes somehow seemed so earth-shaking in 3.x) - but it doesn't mean all that precision is relevant.

In the context of the actual point of the thread you proved it, the fighter gets a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds over other martial classes ...

/iif/ he devotes his 6th level ASI to it.

I'm sure each analysis was slanted by (unconsious?/unavoidable) bias, but neither put the two classes all that far apart, and both left the fighter with no ASI devoted to the interaction or exploration pillars. So, while they were arguing about the fighter's DPR stacking up (or not), they were all illustrating the OP's point: Two bonus ASIs, one of them coming at 14th level, can't fix 3+ deficiencies at levels 1-10. (At 11th, I have a hard time believing that an unanswered second Extra Attack, synergizing with Action Surge, can't take up the slack on the DPR side.)

 

[smbakeresq]

Actually, that analysis assumed perfect results for the ranger, so it's a bit more than a tiny, bordering on irrelevant boost in damage over a large number of rounds.

What that says about the fighter is open to your interpretation -- and I doubt it will be sufficient to alter your opinion -- but not acknowledging the points made isn't necessary to hold your own opinions.

His analysis is correct, its been done on many threads by many other people before, but like I said the damage per round difference between a fighter and ranger should be 10+ round at level 5 and then go up from there to balance out the other things the ranger gets compared to the fighter. Same thing goes for other martial classes, the Fighter will out damage them all in static competition, but not by enough to really matter compared to the other things the other martial classes get.

For example, build an optimized fighter compared to an optimized Paladin at a level, say levels 5-11 where most games are. Both get weapons and armor and a fighting style. The base Paladin chassis gets self healing with Lay on the Hands (takes an action by still good,) Smites (fun and useful and adds a lot of spike damage), immunity to disease (always useful,) bonuses to saving throws for you always and the party sometimes, immunity to fear for you always and your party sometimes, and then improved divine smite, adding more damage to your base attacks (but not as much as an additional attack.) The base fighter chassis gets an extra feat and an extra attack at 11th level, Second Wind (less effective but more action efficient then Lay on the Hands) Action Surge, and a reroll on a failed save. I would argue Divine Smite is better than Action Surge since its impossible to miss using it and it also gets doubled on a crit, but Action Surge is still good. Rerolling a failed save is not all equivalent to getting bonuses to all save for you and party plus immunity to disease and fear. Both get a subclass, BM is good but so are Paladin Oaths.

The real difference is the Paladin gets so many good and useful base abilities to its class that a fighter can't compete unless they are significantly buffed. The same goes for the other martial classes too.

The idea here is make the fighter base chassis better. The more I think about it the more I think the Champion subclass should just be melded into the fighter base chassis and then go from there.

That's the big-picture point that I made several times but somehow got lost in argument over numbers.

 

[smbakeresq]

At level 6, the fighter gets +1 to hit and damage above either the barbarian or the paladin. At level 11, when the other classes have caught up on their stats, fighter get an extra attack. That is the actual edge they have, which is nowhere close to irrelevant.

To contrast, barbarians have an option to sacrifice their own defense in order to dramatically increase their accuracy, which is only really worth it while raging (so there's a daily limit, and it can be stopped); and paladins can smite (which also has a daily limit). At higher levels, paladins have the option to actually improve their saves at a reasonable rate. That seems like a pretty even trade, honestly, which only swings away from the fighter if you stray too far from the attrition model.

For paladins it not an option to improve their saves, they just get it at level 7 for free, it will always be at least +2 as no Paladin build will have less than 14 CHR. They can also give the bonus to the team, which is great. They also never have to save against disease or fear, and can save the team from fear affects. They just get that for free, and its a big get.

For Barbarians they do sacrifice their defense for advantage, but that's mostly used with GWF to greatly spike damage when appropriate, being able to turn on advantage at will is pretty big. For a variation try Barbarian with a shield and shield master, they get advantage on the strength check to prone them while raging. They get built in extra damage and resistances built in and bonuses to initiative and speed. Barbs are just fun to play, as when raging you will turn reckless attacks on.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's +/- 2-3 DPR.

DPR can be calculated to a high degree of precision, which might make that seem significant (just like the half-point DPR difference between greatswords & greataxes somehow seemed so earth-shaking in 3.x) - but it doesn't mean all that precision is relevant.

/iif/ he devotes his 6th level ASI to it.

I'm sure each analysis was slanted by (unconsious?/unavoidable) bias, but neither put the two classes all that far apart, and both left the fighter with no ASI devoted to the interaction or exploration pillars. So, while they were arguing about the fighter's DPR stacking up (or not), they were all illustrating the OP's point: Two bonus ASIs, one of them coming at 14th level, can't fix 3+ deficiencies at levels 1-10. (At 11th, I have a hard time believing that an unanswered second Extra Attack, synergizing with Action Surge, can't take up the slack on the DPR side.)

If anyone cared to ask. My opinion is that fighters don't get enough in the social or exploaration pillars of the game. I've made that point in multiple other threads. It's the shoddy analysis here I've been talking about.

 

[FrogReaver]

His analysis is correct, its been done on many threads by many other people before, but like I said the damage per round difference between a fighter and ranger should be 10+ round at level 5 and then go up from there to balance out the other things the ranger gets compared to the fighter. Same thing goes for other martial classes, the Fighter will out damage them all in static competition, but not by enough to really matter compared to the other things the other martial classes get.

For example, build an optimized fighter compared to an optimized Paladin at a level, say levels 5-11 where most games are. Both get weapons and armor and a fighting style. The base Paladin chassis gets self healing with Lay on the Hands (takes an action by still good,) Smites (fun and useful and adds a lot of spike damage), immunity to disease (always useful,) bonuses to saving throws for you always and the party sometimes, immunity to fear for you always and your party sometimes, and then improved divine smite, adding more damage to your base attacks (but not as much as an additional attack.) The base fighter chassis gets an extra feat and an extra attack at 11th level, Second Wind (less effective but more action efficient then Lay on the Hands) Action Surge, and a reroll on a failed save. I would argue Divine Smite is better than Action Surge since its impossible to miss using it and it also gets doubled on a crit, but Action Surge is still good. Rerolling a failed save is not all equivalent to getting bonuses to all save for you and party plus immunity to disease and fear. Both get a subclass, BM is good but so are Paladin Oaths.

The real difference is the Paladin gets so many good and useful base abilities to its class that a fighter can't compete unless they are significantly buffed. The same goes for the other martial classes too.

The idea here is make the fighter base chassis better. The more I think about it the more I think the Champion subclass should just be melded into the fighter base chassis and then go from there.

That's the big-picture point that I made several times but somehow got lost in argument over numbers.

I don't think you realize what a +10 damage a round actually means. +10 damage a round is huge!!!

 

[The Crimson Binome]

For paladins it not an option to improve their saves, they just get it at level 7 for free, it will always be at least +2 as no Paladin build will have less than 14 CHR. They can also give the bonus to the team, which is great. They also never have to save against disease or fear, and can save the team from fear affects. They just get that for free, and its a big get.

I mean, they have the reasonable option at later levels to take +1 to all saves (and only their saves), instead of gaining +2 to a single stat that they might care about. Practically speaking, it's infeasible for a fighter or barbarian to increase their Wisdom save (for example), because the opportunity cost is too high until they've maxed out their Strength and Con and possibly Dex. Paladins at least have the option.

As a baseline ability, though, the +2 to all saves at level 7 comes at the cost of lower Dexterity and/or Constitution at all levels. That comparison is much less obviously in the paladin's favor.

For Barbarians they do sacrifice their defense for advantage, but that's mostly used with GWF to greatly spike damage when appropriate, being able to turn on advantage at will is pretty big. For a variation try Barbarian with a shield and shield master, they get advantage on the strength check to prone them while raging. They get built in extra damage and resistances built in and bonuses to initiative and speed. Barbs are just fun to play, as when raging you will turn reckless attacks on.

I'm not going to get into feats. If you want to allow feats at your table, then that's on you, but know that it wildly skews the established balance. A class that's only balanced if you're playing with feats is not a well-balanced class.