D&D 5E Why everyone think that Battlemaster is better than Samurai?

[Garthanos]

Still simple to use but additional skill, language, wis saving throw made him a more interesting character.
samurai is not the best name.
this build can be use to play a Knight, an wise soldier.

Well Knight etc are always to my thinking the same as Samurai (sans Orientalism). So to me that is a success.

 

[Sacrosanct]

What are you talking about? The Samurai was printed in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, it's not just in an unofficial pdf...

point still stands. I’m sure many more people own the PHB than the XGE. And many groups limit things to core books only (I’m in one now, because the DM doesn’t want a pile of books to have to keep referencing to or to have to know all of the possible combinations)

 

[Undrave]

point still stands. I’m sure many more people own the PHB than the XGE. And many groups limit things to core books only (I’m in one now, because the DM doesn’t want a pile of books to have to keep referencing to or to have to know all of the possible combinations)

Fair enough! I myself don't own the XGE because I can't justify the price for something I'll only partially use (since I don't DM), though my group has one available. I did get the Spell Cards because they were useful to my previous Druid!

I'm still not sure why DMs are so paranoid about other books in 5e though, but that's not relevant to the current discussion. I personally think the Adventure League rule of "PHB+1" is a good way to allow some new options without going overboard with cross checking of books and stuff.

 

[Salthorae]

I like how a year and a half-old thread more than doubled it's post count in like 6 hours today

On the point of the thread though... I think a lot of it has to do with flavor honestly. Samurai occupies a very specific mind space that doesn't fit into many campaigns easily without reskinning (totally doable, but when people want to play a 'Samurai' they want to play a Samurai, not a reskinned Samurai as a Western Knight or something like that.

Battlemaster OTOH is versatile, generic, and applicable to any kind of setting, even one where Samurai is a "normal" fighter.

Thematically as well they both occupy a similar space as the "rounded fighter" with BM getting proficiency in artisan's tools and Samurai an Int/Wis skill. Samurai wins here though because it gets proficiency in Wis saving throws.

Battlemaster is slightly more powerful earlier, so it also sees its peak in the levels where most games play or die.

Samurai is super powerful... eventually.

I mean the nova potential is staggering at level 15 if it is really optimized with Fighting Spirit, Action Surge, and Rapid Strikes, GWM, Polearm mastery, and if you took magic initiate or multi-classed a bit to pick up Hunter's Mark or some such...

Assuming Hunter's Mark is up before combat
Round 1 = 3 attacks at advantage + Action Surge 2 attacks at advantage + 2 attacks Rapid Strike + Bonus action attack (Polearm master) = 8 Attacks for 7d10+98+1d4+14+8d6... oof, that is just round 1

 

[Paul Farquhar]

On the point of the thread though... I think a lot of it has to do with flavor honestly. Samurai occupies a very specific mind space that doesn't fit into many campaigns easily without reskinning (totally doable, but when people want to play a 'Samurai' they want to play a Samurai, not a reskinned Samurai as a Western Knight or something like that.

It talks about refluffing in the original subclass text, and there isn't really anything particularly samurai-ish about the subclass. It's basically just badly named.

 

[Salthorae]

It talks about refluffing in the original subclass text, and there isn't really anything particularly samurai-ish about the subclass. It's basically just badly named.

Yes, but that takes "effort" and "reading".

Also, regardless of what the subclass text says, most casual gamers and even non-casual gamers who I've met just skip over it because it says "SamuraI" on the tin not "1 round Nova fighter that develops a ton in later levels". It took me a long time to give its abilities due consideration as well because of the name on the tin.

What would you re-name it to give it more appeal?

 

[Don Durito]

Some people like having a signature schtick, though.

No doubt. But I read the OP's question as meaning "people in general" and not "all people everywhere". I . did so on the basis that while the first seems reasonable, although I can't be actually sure it is true, the latter seems ridiculous. The principles of charitable reading presume I don't leap to the unjustified conclusion that the OP is an idiot, and therefore I went with the "people in general" interpretation of 'everyone'.

Therefore, when exlaining a factor why I think "everyone" prefers the Battlemind, I do not have to account for all people.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yes, but that takes "effort" and "reading".

Also, regardless of what the subclass text says, most casual gamers and even non-casual gamers who I've met just skip over it because it says "SamuraI" on the tin not "1 round Nova fighter that develops a ton in later levels". It took me a long time to give its abilities due consideration as well because of the name on the tin.

What would you re-name it to give it more appeal?

Now that is the big question, and goes to the heart of the fluff vs mechanics issue. I would probably have not included it at all, on the grounds of being insufficiently distinctive. If a player wants to make a samurai, Champion, Battlemaster or Banneret do everything you would want it to. There is no samurai shaped hole. In comparison the Kensei monk actually feels both distinctive and Wuxia-ish.

I would have put more effort into making sure the Arcane Archer didn't suck instead.

 

[Garthanos]

For me in real life Samurai fighting style is kind of bursty so the one round nova fits. This could be seen as a distinction in itself even though the general populous might not make the connection. I mean there is a crown oath paladin if you want to get a magical boost from an oath which might be seen as akin to the oath of the Bushi or the Thane. In 4e depending on details of fighting style i wanted for a Samurai I might take a Weaponmaster or a Ranger or another class. (Heck maybe even a Slayer).

I think it is important if you want to explore the game broadly and role play various types to eventually figure out that the name of a a class really isn't important

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Samurai is basically Japanese for knight, and wide variety of fighting styles would be appropriate (including archery, something a European knight would have considered a pastime for peasants).

It's really more of a Background (noble) and alignment (lawful) thing.

The Xanathar's subclass makes me think "elvish" if it makes me think of anything at all.