Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Things You Think Would Improve the Game That We WON'T See
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9275704" data-attributes="member: 7030563"><p>Sure, but half the baseline is still competent.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If I optimize a character for DPR I can beat the Warlock EB/AB baseline in both strength melee and dex ranged at most levels.</p><p></p><p>Moreover to do this I would take 2 feats before ANY ASIs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"Sucking" damage is still more that adequate in 5E. You can be "competent" as an offensive damage dealing martial build with "sucking" damage.</p><p></p><p>Damage "sucking" works fine at default-level 5E! Knocking out 12 damage per round in tier 2 (after considering hit chances) as the only martial in the party will work in 5E. That is what you seem to not be getting.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is absolutely not true, you can and I have. I can pretty easily build a fighter that beats that Warlock EB/AB baseline at most levels in both strength and dex attacks and I can do it even with 14s to start in both stats.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Did you bother to even read the paragraph you quoted?</p><p></p><p>From page 70: <em>"<u><strong>Every fighter</strong></u> can swing an axe, fence with a Rapier, wield a longsword or Greatsword, use a bow or even trap someone in a net with <u><strong>some degree of skill</strong></u>"</em></p><p></p><p>From the PHB every fighter can use both dex and strength weapons with some degree of skill.</p><p></p><p>Now let me define Competent for you: <em>having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully</em></p><p></p><p>So yes according to the very section you quoted every fighter is competent with both dex and strength weapons. I sould suggest that is not actually true if you dummp strength or dex, but it certainly speaks to the design.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes and you can be WAY behind the curve and be successful in 5E. What the game "expects" and what is necessary to be successful are two different things.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, if you purposefully optimize for it, including racial abilities, subclasses and feats, you can stay on or ahead of that curve in both strength and dex based weapons.</p><p></p><p>Start out as a Variant Human Fighter with 14 strenght, 14 Dex, using Hand Axes, Two-Weapon fighting, Sharpshooter feat and a Heavy Crossbow and you will be ahead of a 1st level 16 Charisma Warlock EB-Hex baseline blaster using strength melee weapons, strength thrown weapons, Ranged Weapons and you can shoot out to 400 ft without disadvantage while ignoring cover.</p><p></p><p>Take the right subclass, feats and ASIs and change fighting styles at appropriate levels and you will stay ahead of that Warlock damage baseline and that damage baseline is plenty!</p><p></p><p>Here is a recipe:</p><p>Level 1: V Human Sharpshooter Feat and Two Weapon Fighting fighting style using hand axes and a heavy crossbow.</p><p>Level 3: Eldritch Knight (spell slots for Hunters Mark in future)</p><p>Level 4: Fey Touched with Hunters Mark</p><p>Level 5: Ditch crossbow for a Longbow</p><p>Level 6: Strength ASI (16)</p><p>Level 8: Strength ASI (18) Change Fighting Style to Great Weapon Fighting. You are now using War Magic with a Maul instead of TWF with axes in melee.</p><p>Level 12: PAM feat and you now start with a Maul and then switch to a Pole Arm once HM is up (doing 4 attacks a round with PAM). Change fighting style to Archery.</p><p>Level 13: You get 3rd level spell slots here and upcast Shadowblade is now your concentration instead of HM for 2 fights a day. 9d8+12 (3 attacks) plus an offhand 1d6. After these two fights you go PAM + Hunters Mark as above.</p><p>Level 14: Strength ASI (20)</p><p>Level 16: Dex ASI (16)</p><p>Level 19: Dex ASI (18)</p><p></p><p>This character would be ahead of the warlock EB/AB baseline at both strength and dex attacks at most levels. This is not the only way to do this with a fighter, but it is the easiest way to illustrate it with a simple build and few assumptions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9275704, member: 7030563"] Sure, but half the baseline is still competent. If I optimize a character for DPR I can beat the Warlock EB/AB baseline in both strength melee and dex ranged at most levels. Moreover to do this I would take 2 feats before ANY ASIs. "Sucking" damage is still more that adequate in 5E. You can be "competent" as an offensive damage dealing martial build with "sucking" damage. Damage "sucking" works fine at default-level 5E! Knocking out 12 damage per round in tier 2 (after considering hit chances) as the only martial in the party will work in 5E. That is what you seem to not be getting. That is absolutely not true, you can and I have. I can pretty easily build a fighter that beats that Warlock EB/AB baseline at most levels in both strength and dex attacks and I can do it even with 14s to start in both stats. Did you bother to even read the paragraph you quoted? From page 70: [I]"[U][B]Every fighter[/B][/U] can swing an axe, fence with a Rapier, wield a longsword or Greatsword, use a bow or even trap someone in a net with [U][B]some degree of skill[/B][/U]"[/I] From the PHB every fighter can use both dex and strength weapons with some degree of skill. Now let me define Competent for you: [I]having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully[/I] So yes according to the very section you quoted every fighter is competent with both dex and strength weapons. I sould suggest that is not actually true if you dummp strength or dex, but it certainly speaks to the design. Yes and you can be WAY behind the curve and be successful in 5E. What the game "expects" and what is necessary to be successful are two different things. Furthermore, if you purposefully optimize for it, including racial abilities, subclasses and feats, you can stay on or ahead of that curve in both strength and dex based weapons. Start out as a Variant Human Fighter with 14 strenght, 14 Dex, using Hand Axes, Two-Weapon fighting, Sharpshooter feat and a Heavy Crossbow and you will be ahead of a 1st level 16 Charisma Warlock EB-Hex baseline blaster using strength melee weapons, strength thrown weapons, Ranged Weapons and you can shoot out to 400 ft without disadvantage while ignoring cover. Take the right subclass, feats and ASIs and change fighting styles at appropriate levels and you will stay ahead of that Warlock damage baseline and that damage baseline is plenty! Here is a recipe: Level 1: V Human Sharpshooter Feat and Two Weapon Fighting fighting style using hand axes and a heavy crossbow. Level 3: Eldritch Knight (spell slots for Hunters Mark in future) Level 4: Fey Touched with Hunters Mark Level 5: Ditch crossbow for a Longbow Level 6: Strength ASI (16) Level 8: Strength ASI (18) Change Fighting Style to Great Weapon Fighting. You are now using War Magic with a Maul instead of TWF with axes in melee. Level 12: PAM feat and you now start with a Maul and then switch to a Pole Arm once HM is up (doing 4 attacks a round with PAM). Change fighting style to Archery. Level 13: You get 3rd level spell slots here and upcast Shadowblade is now your concentration instead of HM for 2 fights a day. 9d8+12 (3 attacks) plus an offhand 1d6. After these two fights you go PAM + Hunters Mark as above. Level 14: Strength ASI (20) Level 16: Dex ASI (16) Level 19: Dex ASI (18) This character would be ahead of the warlock EB/AB baseline at both strength and dex attacks at most levels. This is not the only way to do this with a fighter, but it is the easiest way to illustrate it with a simple build and few assumptions. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Things You Think Would Improve the Game That We WON'T See
Top