D&D (2024) Which class is the most durable (level 1)?

[Mistwell]

I assumed +2 Dex.

The difference was chain shirt vs scale mail. I do agree in retrospect that scale mail can be obtained just as easily, giving the barbarian 16 ac or 18 ac with a shield. That’s 1 point less than the defense style fighter.

Why Defense Style? It’s good (though maybe not the best) and it enhances our durability which is the goal for this character. It’s not like it’s a crap option. If so i wouldn’t have included it.

It's spin though. Fighters usually don't take it. But OK. Fighters have 1 more AC, and d10 healing every short rest, vs Rage resistance to damage and 2 more hit points. Seems a push on defense, with lower offense.

 

[Willie the Duck]

It's spin though. Fighters usually don't take it. But OK. Fighters have 1 more AC, and d10 healing every short rest, vs Rage resistance to damage and 2 more hit points. Seems a push on defense, with lower offense.

Given that they can swap it out at level 2, it's worthwhile to analyze what it could do for a durability build at level 1.

Also, FWIW, second wind is (1d10+1) x (2+ # of short rests taken per day). It doesn't scale great, but at level 1 it is pretty significant.

 

[FrogReaver]

It's spin though. Fighters usually don't take it. But OK. Fighters have 1 more AC, and d10 healing every short rest, vs Rage resistance to damage and 2 more hit points. Seems a push on defense, with lower offense.

As I said before, I don’t fault anyone for picking barbarian over fighter.

But the defenses are not perfectly equal. I’m particularly worried about the barbarian taking hits before he gets to go or running out of rages in a 4+ encounter 1 short rest adventuring day.

The fighter has different concerns though. Being downed in a single round before you can use 2nd wind is a big one.

Meanwhile hp attrition lowers durability over time more for those that can’t heal than those that do, meaning a barbarians chances of being downed in a given encounter likely have a greater variance than the fighters.

My personal thought is that the barbarians concerns will manifest a bit more often than the fighters. Thus why i pick fighter.

 

[Mistwell]

Given that they can swap it out at level 2, it's worthwhile to analyze what it could do for a durability build at level 1.

Also, FWIW, second wind is (1d10+1) x (2+ # of short rests taken per day). It doesn't scale great, but at level 1 it is pretty significant.

Agreed it's meaningful. 13 hit points under this analysis. Which would be offset by 4.33 normal blows from a goblin warrior, or 3 blows from a goblin warrior with advantage (see below*) from damage resistance. And that's not counting the Barbarian has 2 more hit points to begin with. In my opinion, damage resistance well outweighs the 13 hit points healing and +1 AC. But I can see why others differ.

*Someone mentioned Goblins earlier as a common level 1 foe. That's fine, let's take a look:

Scimitar. Melee Attack Roll: +4, reach 5 ft. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) Slashing damage, plus 2 (1d4) Slashing damage if the attack roll had Advantage.

Shortbow. Ranged Attack Roll: +4, range 80/320 ft. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) Piercing damage, plus 2 (1d4) Piercing damage if the attack roll had Advantage.

Goblin Warrior Damage
Scimitar or Short Bow
Damage Roll	Damage Fighter Takes	Damage Raging Barbarian Takes
3	3	1
4	4	2
5	5	2
6	6	3
7	7	3
8	8	4
w/Advantage Extra
1	1	1
2	2	1
3	3	1
4	4	2
Average Normal Damage	5.5	2.5
Average Advantage Dam	2.5	1.25
Total Advantage Dam	8	3.75

 

[Ashrym]

ONLY if they chose Defense as their fighting style, which is unlikley.

The premise of the thread is to make a defensive build. The typical alternative to the bonus AC is bonus damage is dueling, which would give the fighter +2 damage all the time instead of only when raging while still having the better AC from blade ward.

As was mentioned, barbarians starting gold would typically limit them 1 more point if they want a more reasonable equipment list. This would be 17 AC instead of 18 AC while the fighter still has 19 AC.

That's silly. Barbarian could do the same thing. They both get the same feat at level 1.

It is silly because if you were following posts I addressed this earlier. Why would a barbarian take a feat they can't use? A barbarian cannot cast spells or maintain concentration while rage is active. That means the barbarians taking the same feat would have either closer AC and no damage reduction, or lose that AC for the damage reduction.

The fighter can actually use the feat all the time. The barbarian has a conflict going on. In either case the fighter has a much better method of hit point recovery.

Why would the fighter get the benefit of racial choice and not the barbarian? And why is the barbarian only taking even sums of hits? This is weird spin.

Yes, it is a weird spin because I did give the barbarian the same benefit of racial choice so I'm not clear why you would say this. That's how the barbarian starts with 17hp instead of 15hp.

Agreed it's meaningful. 13 hit points under this analysis. Which would be offset by 4.33 normal blows from a goblin warrior, or 3 blows from a goblin warrior with advantage (see below*) from damage resistance. And that's not counting the Barbarian has 2 more hit points to begin with. In my opinion, damage resistance well outweighs the 13 hit points healing and +1 AC. But I can see why others differ.

*Someone mentioned Goblins earlier as a common level 1 foe. That's fine, let's take a look:

Scimitar. Melee Attack Roll: +4, reach 5 ft. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) Slashing damage, plus 2 (1d4) Slashing damage if the attack roll had Advantage.

Shortbow. Ranged Attack Roll: +4, range 80/320 ft. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) Piercing damage, plus 2 (1d4) Piercing damage if the attack roll had Advantage.

Goblin Warrior Damage
Scimitar or Short Bow
Damage Roll	Damage Fighter Takes	Damage Raging Barbarian Takes
3	3	1
4	4	2
5	5	2
6	6	3
7	7	3
8	8	4
w/Advantage Extra
1	1	1
2	2	1
3	3	1
4	4	2
Average Normal Damage	5.5	2.5
Average Advantage Dam	2.5	1.25
Total Advantage Dam	8	3.75

I actually gave several examples of 1st level monsters to encounter. This one that you're using isn't the same goblin minions to which you referred, however, and the method of damage you're using is different.

Damage Notation​

A stat block usually provides both a number and a die expression for each instance of damage. For example, an attack might deal 4 (1d4 + 2) damage on a hit. You decide whether to use the number or the die expression in parentheses; don’t use both.

I think it's a bit misleading to say "*Someone mentioned Goblins earlier as a common level 1 foe. That's fine, let's take a look..." and then use different goblins and a different damage method. I use the basic number outside of the parentheses because it's faster, consistent, and the average slightly favors the players that way. It also looks like the default method which is why it's presented first with the damage rolling method presented second in parentheses.

Your analysis is flawed because you are ignoring hit chance and seem to be allowing both rage and spell concentration at the same time for the barbarian.

You also included damage when the goblin warrior has advantage but there's a lack of options granting that advantage. There is, however, the disadvantage being applied by both the fighter and barbarian because I was allowing for weapon mastery with a sapping weapon and you missed that.

Your table doesn't allow for blade ward whether the barbarian took it or not because the barbarian is raging and cannot concentrate or cast spells. That's why the fighter gets hit 17.5% of the time and the barbarian gets hit 35% of the time. The fighter and barbarian are both hitting 15 AC 55% of the time to inflict the sap effect about 1 out 2 attacks to further favor the higher AC on the fighter.

If we ignore that AC difference then the fighter would drop after about 7 hits and using both second winds and the barbarian would still have a couple of hit points. The problem is we can't ignore that AC difference. By the time the fighter has taken 7 hits the barbarian has taken over a dozen and already dropped.

On top of that, there are many monsters that do damage to which barbarians are not resistant. Second wind can still heal that damage. Priest acolytes, for example, are also +4 to hit with radiant flame. The fighter's higher AC can still help protect him and he can still second wind to heal the damage, but the barbarian takes the full 7 points.

 

[Mistwell]

The premise of the thread is to make a defensive build. The typical alternative to the bonus AC is bonus damage is dueling, which would give the fighter +2 damage all the time instead of only when raging while still having the better AC from blade ward.

As was mentioned, barbarians starting gold would typically limit them 1 more point if they want a more reasonable equipment list. This would be 17 AC instead of 18 AC while the fighter still has 19 AC.

They start with enough gold for a Scale Mail, Shield, Battle Axe, and some other equipment. You don't get to make defensive assumptions for the Fighter but not the Barbarian to prove your point. Let's put this issue to bed: Barbarian starts with 18 AC.

It is silly because if you were following posts I addressed this earlier. Why would a barbarian take a feat they can't use? A barbarian cannot cast spells or maintain concentration while rage is active. That means the barbarians taking the same feat would have either closer AC and no damage reduction, or lose that AC for the damage reduction.

Obviously they can take another feat but as BOTH GET A FREE FEAT IT'S A WASH. For example, do you want to run calculations for party survivability if the Barbarian takes Musician? Do we run calculations for Lucky? Come on man, YOU ARE SPINNING IN AN ILLEGIT WAY. Fighters gain no benefit from a first level feat beyond a Barbarian.

I actually gave several examples of 1st level monsters to encounter. This one that you're using isn't the same goblin minions to which you referred, however, and the method of damage you're using is different.

Are you arguing a Goblin Warrior is an unfair foe to choose for analysis at first level? If not, what is the point of what you said?

I think it's a bit misleading to say "*Someone mentioned Goblins earlier as a common level 1 foe. That's fine, let's take a look..." and then use different goblins and a different damage method.

I honestly just grabbed the most common goblin. I didn't pay attention to a specific one you mentioned, and given you're spinning stuff to your benefit throughout this thread I am glad I didn't. If you don't like the Goblin Warrior, it's more proof you cherry pick. My choice was fairly random. It's a standard goblin warrior. That should be fine for analysis.

I use the basic number outside of the parentheses because it's faster, consistent, and the average slightly favors the players that way.

I don't care since it's not accurate. We use precise numbers for the PC, so we should use precise numbers for the monster. What I did was accurate. If you don't like it, my guess is it was more of you spinning stuff to some advantage for an argument.

It also looks like the default method which is why it's presented first with the damage rolling method presented second in parentheses.

It's not default. Neither is default. EVERYONE I know plays with the actual dice and not the average, and all VTTs easily use the dice.

Your analysis is flawed because you are ignoring hit chance and seem to be allowing both rage and spell concentration at the same time for the barbarian.

Yes intentionally so because my argument is the hit chance is the same. If you don't like it, do your own analysis. But use AC 18 for Barbarian and 19 for Fighter, rather than your spin involving gold and feat choice. Run it fair or don't run it at all. Ignore starting feat as they both get a valuable feat and that's an honest way to do it. This isn't a "Build challenge! First level!" It's asking what NORMAL first level PC is most survivable at first level. It's why I mentioned earlier that usually both their ACs would be 17 because they will want to make different choices most of the time that don't involve defense anyway.

You also included damage when the goblin warrior has advantage but there's a lack of options granting that advantage.

I just used the statblock man, I don't write the creatures. It's an ability they have. Take it up with WOTC.

On top of that, there are many monsters that do damage to which barbarians are not resistant.

This is more silliness. I'm growing close to concluding this is an unproductive conversation if your trying to spin that it's unfair AT FIRST LEVEL to assume damage that's slashing, piercing or bludgeoning.

 

[Ashrym]

They start with enough gold for a Scale Mail, Shield, Battle Axe, and some other equipment. You don't get to make defensive assumptions for the Fighter but not the Barbarian to prove your point. Let's put this issue to bed: Barbarian starts with 18 AC.

I haven't omitted assumptions about the barbarian. The problem is I don't see an options that's as good as the fighter adding cantrips and shield.

I'm not sure what you think you're arguing against here. I demonstrated that a barbarian can start with 18 AC and not much equipment. Your choice of a battle axe removes the option for sap, however, and adds topple instead. The 13 DC on that topple gives those goblin warriors from your example 40% chance to save even when hit which increases the number of times the barbarian gets hit compared to the fighter.

Obviously they can take another feat but as BOTH GET A FREE FEAT IT'S A WASH. For example, do you want to run calculations for party survivability if the Barbarian takes Musician? Do we run calculations for Lucky? Come on man, YOU ARE SPINNING IN AN ILLEGIT WAY. Fighters gain no benefit from a first level feat beyond a Barbarian.

Musician or Lucky don't have the number of uses at 1st level to match magic initiate using blade ward on every attack. If you have a feat to match that I'm missing then demonstrated it.

Are you arguing a Goblin Warrior is an unfair foe to choose for analysis at first level? If not, what is the point of what you said?

No. Why would you ask that? I pointed you you referenced a comment about goblin minions and then brought up goblin warriors as if they were the same thing. Then I proceeded with the goblin warriors that you brought up.

I honestly just grabbed the most common goblin. I didn't pay attention to a specific one you mentioned, and given you're spinning stuff to your benefit throughout this thread I am glad I didn't. If you don't like the Goblin Warrior, it's more proof you cherry pick. My choice was fairly random. It's a standard goblin warrior. That should be fine for analysis.

I haven't spun anything to the benefit of fighters. Fighters last longer against goblin warriors too for the same reasons. I can't cherry pick your examples, lol.

I don't care since it's not accurate. We use precise numbers for the PC, so we should use precise numbers for the monster. What I did was accurate. If you don't like it, my guess is it was more of you spinning stuff to some advantage for an argument.

I explained the difference then used your numbers, which doesn't change anything. If you give different numbers, I point that out, and then use the numbers you gave with the same result that's not me "spinning things". That's just me using the numbers you gave for the same results.

It's not default. Neither is default. EVERYONE I know plays with the actual dice and not the average, and all VTTs easily use the dice.

The VTT's aren't the Monster Manual where I pulled that information from. A slightly lower average damage is fair to all players. It's not some weird advantage to fighters and not barbarians. That's why I could demonstrate the same results with either damage method.

Yes intentionally so because my argument is the hit chance is the same. If you don't like it, do your own analysis. But use AC 18 for Barbarian and 19 for Fighter, rather than your spin involving gold and feat choice. Run it fair or don't run it at all. Ignore starting feat as they both get a valuable feat and that's an honest way to do it. This isn't a "Build challenge! First level!" It's asking what NORMAL first level PC is most survivable at first level. It's why I mentioned earlier that usually both their ACs would be 17 because they will want to make different choices most of the time that don't involve defense anyway.

I did my own analysis. Barbarians have half the gold fighters do to buy starting equipment. That's a fact. A fighter starts with chainmail and a shield for 18 AC before anything else. There's no reason for a fighter to start with a lower AC.

The second a barbarian makes the choice to add more rations and a decent ranged weapon they've purchased themselves out of that 18 AC for 1st level.

If I'm making my fighter who plans on becoming an EK there's nothing wrong with the choices I made. If I take dueling instead of the AC bonus then the barbarian is still getting hit 35% of the time giving him the best AC we can while the fighter is still only getting hit 22.5% of the time. At that point sap is more reliable than topple for further benefit.

It's not hard to build a defensive fighter more durable than a barbarian at 1st level.

I just used the statblock man, I don't write the creatures. It's an ability they have. Take it up with WOTC.

No. It's a situational condition that you applied without any reason for it to apply and it's an ability fairly unique to better goblins instead of similar to abilities across the range of typical 1st level monsters. I use all the same stat blocks.

This is more silliness. I'm growing close to concluding this is an unproductive conversation if your trying to spin that it's unfair AT FIRST LEVEL to assume damage that's slashing, piercing or bludgeoning.

What's silly is assuming that all the damage is slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning. That's the conditions favoring the barbarian when cherry picking opponents, which is something you trying to claim I was doing while you seem to restrict the monsters to only those damage types.

Monsters in the CR 0 through 1 range aren't restricted to those damage types. Traps are not restricted to those damage types.

Second wind heals all damage types. Rage damage reduction does not prevent damage from all damage types. That's not a spin either. It's just a fact.

 

[Zardnaar]

maybe not, maybe that is just not thinking what your PCs need.
but why would you give bunch of magic items no one will use?

just give a sack of gold/gems then. it's the same thing.

sure, now and then you can give item that has sense for NPC that is set against the party, but not throw those around.

1. You ran not making fun for players, as selling stuff is not fun 90% of the time.

2. You are wasting your time as you are finding items that are useless to the party.

it's a lose-lose situation.

And I have witnessed that, when the DMs will for D&D drained from his face.

we got 4 custom made magic items, and that took work to design them,

4 of us looked at them and decided that we will "vendor" them and buy a bunch of +1 generic items because those actually made out characters better(atleast from our perspective).

effort was made for those items and we treated them as truck load of scrap metal to be sold.

If you pick strange weapons that gave good feat support you might not get the best version vs someone else with an inferior weapon.

Magic spears and swords for example are more common than say polearms. You won't be getting a better magical polearm anytime soon vs say a longsword. The exception would be if an adventure has a great magical whatever.

I do buy and sell curated items. You might be able to get a +1 whatever with an ability vs a vicious dagger or spear.

 

[Zardnaar]

I haven't omitted assumptions about the barbarian. The problem is I don't see an options that's as good as the fighter adding cantrips and shield.

I'm not sure what you think you're arguing against here. I demonstrated that a barbarian can start with 18 AC and not much equipment. Your choice of a battle axe removes the option for sap, however, and adds topple instead. The 13 DC on that topple gives those goblin warriors from your example 40% chance to save even when hit which increases the number of times the barbarian gets hit compared to the fighter.



Musician or Lucky don't have the number of uses at 1st level to match magic initiate using blade ward on every attack. If you have a feat to match that I'm missing then demonstrated it.



No. Why would you ask that? I pointed you you referenced a comment about goblin minions and then brought up goblin warriors as if they were the same thing. Then I proceeded with the goblin warriors that you brought up.



I haven't spun anything to the benefit of fighters. Fighters last longer against goblin warriors too for the same reasons. I can't cherry pick your examples, lol.



I explained the difference then used your numbers, which doesn't change anything. If you give different numbers, I point that out, and then use the numbers you gave with the same result that's not me "spinning things". That's just me using the numbers you gave for the same results.



The VTT's aren't the Monster Manual where I pulled that information from. A slightly lower average damage is fair to all players. It's not some weird advantage to fighters and not barbarians. That's why I could demonstrate the same results with either damage method.



I did my own analysis. Barbarians have half the gold fighters do to buy starting equipment. That's a fact. A fighter starts with chainmail and a shield for 18 AC before anything else. There's no reason for a fighter to start with a lower AC.

The second a barbarian makes the choice to add more rations and a decent ranged weapon they've purchased themselves out of that 18 AC for 1st level.

If I'm making my fighter who plans on becoming an EK there's nothing wrong with the choices I made. If I take dueling instead of the AC bonus then the barbarian is still getting hit 35% of the time giving him the best AC we can while the fighter is still only getting hit 22.5% of the time. At that point sap is more reliable than topple for further benefit.

It's not hard to build a defensive fighter more durable than a barbarian at 1st level.




No. It's a situational condition that you applied without any reason for it to apply and it's an ability fairly unique to better goblins instead of similar to abilities across the range of typical 1st level monsters. I use all the same stat blocks.



What's silly is assuming that all the damage is slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning. That's the conditions favoring the barbarian when cherry picking opponents, which is something you trying to claim I was doing while you seem to restrict the monsters to only those damage types.

Monsters in the CR 0 through 1 range aren't restricted to those damage types. Traps are not restricted to those damage types.

Second wind heals all damage types. Rage damage reduction does not prevent damage from all damage types. That's not a spin either. It's just a fact.

Rage weakness is initiative and you'll probably not have it every fight.

It's situational imho what ones better. In a real game I wouldn't bother with 19AC or the toughness feat.

Running Sunless Citadel now. Poison, fire and frost damage were around.

Rage probably avaliable 50-75% of the time may or may not be effective depending on the situation (initiative, other types of damage).

The two classes are neck and neck. Fighters more reliable imho. Situationally the Barbarian can beat it.

Because the Barbarian is situational (encounter, initiative and critical hit depending) though the fighter beats it.

1st. Fighter
2nd Barbarian* (maybe a tie)
3rd and 4th Ranger and Clerics (buffed cure spells).

* situationally.

IMHO.

Let's face it the barbarians probably not using a shield either.

Barbarian wins most damage level 3.

If you have to invent situations the barbarian is better you've already lost the argument. It can outperform the fighter. Sometimes.

 

[Mistwell]

No. It's a situational condition that you applied without any reason for it to apply and it's an ability fairly unique to better goblins instead of similar to abilities across the range of typical 1st level monsters. I use all the same stat blocks.

I'm done replying tit for tat with you because it's not productive. But on this one, I encourage you to read the entry in the MM, and then apologize for claiming I had no reason to mention it. If I didn't mention it, people would have said why I ignored a stated ability of there. Which is why I'm done with the conversation. No matter what I say you're going to spin it as something negative when I literally just repeated the stat block.