Fighter Clearly Outweighs Barbarian [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Shojiteru

2015-09-30, 04:04 PM

Hell me understand. I am not doing this for myself, but others. I read on boards very complicated math that never said it simply. They made it seem as barbarian is better. When theorycrafting a good team, I looked at the two and did math myself. This is what I got:
Unmagical
Fighter: 20 str, 18 ac, half orc. GWM, GWF
Greatsword: +6 attack, damage 2d6+15
(Note, don't know how to calculate accuracy so damage only)
Average on 1 attack: 22
Average on 4: 88
Action surge: 176
All crit: 380

Barbarian: 24 str, ac 20, gwm, half orc
Note, 17 str, 15 dex, 16 con to start. Can't get all 20 and with 16 dex, gwm seems like it would be better than 1 dex.
Greataxe: +8 attack. 1d12+17 damage.
Average attack 1: 23.6
Average 2 attacks: 47
All crit: 112.

The champion would crit more but I assume less effective than barbarian. Sure more hp, but 2 more ac only. I assume barbarians resistance takes it to equal but this is offense calculations. No idea how to calculate defense like tha nor attack, so you all teaching me would be a great belp! The formulas, how to do it, and examples using these classes would be exceptional!
That is magic-less. This is with belt of the storm giant and flame tongue. Fighter gets plae +3 and barb gets bracers of defense +3.

Fighter: Half orc, 29 str, gwm, ac 21

Flame tongue greatsword: attack +9, 4d6+15 damage.
1 attack: 33
4: 132
8: 264
Crit 8: 404

Barbarian: ac 23, str 29, gwm, half orc
Flame tongue greataxe: +13 attack. Damage 1d12+2d6+22

Attack 1: 35.5
2: 71
Crit: 136

If you can get storm giant belt, barbarian can dump str and go all dex until they get that and get to 25 ac so that would be good if you know it will happen. High magic game, maybe. A +5 shield could help both but majorly lower damage output
So thats what I got. What about you smarter people? Is there something I need to fix? What about damage? How would tanking work out? I would prefer barbarian to tank but fighter offensive tank would be great. Both would be ideal.

Side note: I did the same for an archer bard I have and shadow monk.
Bard with +3 longbow and sharpshooter and bracers or archery would do 1d8+20 so 98 average in 4 hits. Only 13 ac and 8 con cause he's longranged. If he gets too close, like within 100', spells get him out.
The monk does 1d10+1d6+8 with +3 unarmed sttike and 1d6 lightning extra. Over 4 hits, he does 68 damage with 23 ac and 70 speed and 70 fly with fly boots so the damage loss is worth it, even for frontliner if he wanted despite 143 hp.

TopCheese

2015-09-30, 04:16 PM

*summons kryx*

(edit: Kryx has the most in depth damage charts I've ever seen)

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 04:42 PM

If a Barbarian doesn't rage then of course the Fighter is going to pull ahead. Considering that you are giving the Fighter 4 attacks it is unfair to not assume that Barbarians are always in rage since they get unlimited rage.

If you are looking to see who is the best in a group, DPR analysis does little to give you a good team analysis. Every class has other auxiliary things to offer that do not contribute to the damage but can help in other ways. Unless you know that the game you'll be in is all combat and literally nothing else then you should sit down and look over each class carefully and see their strengths and weaknesses and not read up on some DPR chart and just pick the highest damage dealers.

Kryx

2015-09-30, 04:50 PM

A Barbarian is literally top of many DPR charts - including my own (see DPR of classes in sig). A Fighter is right next to him in most cases when you actually tabulate Superiority Dice and Action surge
The Barbarian is so high due to reckless attacks combined with all his other goodies like rage damage and -5/+10.

You do not seem to calculate hit chance which would heavily alter any DPR.

By my numbers a 20th level GWM Barbarian does 75 DPR and a 20th level GWM Fighter does 72 DPR. Both classes are incredibly more complicated than simple numbers as the fighter can superiority dice to prone and then action surge while the Barbarian can use GWM's bonus attack and potentially Frenzy. At 20 a Barbian can be Frenzying 24/7 at which point only his Frenzy DPR matters.

Strill

2015-09-30, 05:14 PM

Shojiteru

2015-09-30, 05:28 PM

As I said, I don't know how to calculate most things. I understand it's not. All about combat, but doesn't everyone want to know what kind of.damage they do compared to others? How would you calculate usefulness of flight vs invisiblity? Combat is the only thing in numbers.

Seeing how the barbarian has more accuracy and gets advantage so much along with the other stuff, I would appreciate it if someone told me the formulas to calculate that as googling it gives various results.
In a normal turn, I figured the fighter would be superior in damage while the barbarian superior in tanking.
Also, with bonus attacks, the fighter should have a better chance at getting it along with crits due to champion, upping his numbers. Not factoring in advantage, I left a lot out. This was just something I did when looking through forums. They are full of numbers and calculations, but rarely ever have something at the end like:
First turn, barbarian best. Tanking, barbarian best. Damage, barbarian best.
Or whatever, just to simplify for those who look at the numbers and is overwhelmed. Im okay with my calculations or ones I know how to do but others' is better for those who already know the formulas.
Im still new to dnd and there is a lot of hidden math behind it all. Now I know why nerds played it at first, lol.
Advantage, accuracy.. etc.. if anyone could post a way to calculate all this then it would be great because when I get time, I go through the races and classes out of.boredem so seeing which of the random combat focused builds I make are better in combat would be superb. The others have their niche but again, can't be calculated so is campaign dependent where as there are for combat campaigns, which are the only ones that can be compared numerically

Shojiteru

2015-09-30, 05:33 PM

Btw Kryx, great stuff. Got it saved to reference when I get bored and have nothing else but dnd stuff to do. Especially when thinking of dpr pregens for the campaign I plan on making eventually

Kryx

2015-09-30, 05:41 PM

You can see how to calculate hit chance and advantage on my sheet - just look in the formula bar.

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 06:05 PM

As I said, I don't know how to calculate most things. I understand it's not. All about combat, but doesn't everyone want to know what kind of.damage they do compared to others?

I like to be a healer in the games, I don't care if I can't pull out the highest damage if my main purpose isn't about dealing damage. So no, not everyone cares that they can deal the most damage.

Also calculating DPR is easy, you just need a basic understanding of probability. It is tedious because of the amount of variables but the actual calculations isn't hard.

How would you calculate usefulness of flight vs invisiblity?

This one is very easy

Mobility vs discretion.

Do you want increased mobility or do you want to be able to move around undetected. In battle do you want to be able to keep distance advantage or be able to move around the battlefield without others knowing (or knowing well since then you'd have 300 posts about hiding)

Depending on the situation you choose one or the other. You can't truly calculate which one is more effective because of so many situations that it is meaningless to do so.

Combat is the only thing in numbers.

Everything that can be rolled is in numbers, skills are also numbers as well.

But also if you want to look at combat effectiveness do not just look at damage, there are a lot of effects that can help you out that do not deal damage at all. There are a ton of spells that can turn the tide of combat handily Sleep, Dominate Person, Wall of Force and tons of other ones that do not deal damage but can easily sway the battle to your side. Monks might not have the highest DPR but can stun quite easily, Bards might not be up there in damage but they can turn misses into hits with their inspiration.

I think that you are trying to simplify something that you or your friends have no basic grasp. Before you or your friends try to apply the crunch make sure you know the ins and outs of all the classes first, there is a lot more beneath the surface. Do not worry about damage calculations and just enjoy the game, the game can still work even if you aren't fully optimized and the book itself helps you out in that respect as well.

Alikat

2015-09-30, 06:06 PM

At 20 a Barbian can be Frenzying 24/7 at which point only his Frenzy DPR matters.

How does this work? I thought frenzy was always 6 minutes then you die or take 5 days to recover. Is there a high level mechanic that changes that?

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 06:23 PM

How does this work? I thought frenzy was always 6 minutes then you die or take 5 days to recover. Is there a high level mechanic that changes that?

When it comes to calculations, the future of the character in question isn't for consideration. DPR has no mind on what happens in the long term. If you can deal 1000 damage because you nuke everything in a 10 mile radius the DPR calculations only consider the 1000 damage, not the future consequences of your actions.

Nowhere Girl

2015-09-30, 06:25 PM

Ruslan

2015-09-30, 06:32 PM

How does this work? I thought frenzy was always 6 minutes then you die or take 5 days to recover. Is there a high level mechanic that changes that?A 20th level Barbarian has unlimited number of rages per day. Get into Rage and start Frenzying. Nine rounds later, before rage ends, use a bonus action to start a new rage. Since you are never out of rage, your rage never ends* and "When your rage ends, you suffer one level of exhaustion" never applies. Of course, when you stop for the night and have to sleep, you do have to stop raging, and at that point you get one level of exhaustion, which you recover overnight.

* this is a questionable interpretation. One might say that the initial rage still ends, even though you initiated a new rage.

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 06:40 PM

A 20th level Barbarian has unlimited number of rages per day. Get into Rage and start Frenzying. Nine rounds later, before rage ends, use a bonus action to start a new rage. Since you are never out of rage, your rage never ends* and "When your rage ends, you suffer one level of exhaustion" never applies. Of course, when you stop for the night and have to sleep, you do have to stop raging, and at that point you get one level of exhaustion, which you recover overnight.

* this is a questionable interpretation. One might say that the initial rage still ends, even though you initiated a new rage.

Also known as the Mark Ruffalo effect

Strill

2015-09-30, 06:41 PM

Never understood why people seem to default to assuming Battle Master. It always looked to me like the worst of the three choices, honestly ... a tiny handful of superiority dice, and they don't really do all that much. I guess it'd be good if you wanted to take Commander's Strike and hand your actions to a more effective character.

For my money, Eldritch Knight seems hilariously superior.

Battlemaster is far better at early levels. Four superiority dice per short rest, which can each deal damage and give you advantage on the rest of your attacks, is a huge deal.

Eldritch Knight sucks at early levels. 3 spell slots is terrible. Eldritch Knights are much better than battlemaster at later levels, however, when they get a decent number of spell slots.

TopCheese

2015-09-30, 06:52 PM

Battlemaster is far better at early levels. Four superiority dice per short rest, which can each deal damage and give you advantage on the rest of your attacks, is a huge deal.

Eldritch Knight sucks at early levels. 3 spell slots is terrible. Eldritch Knights are much better than battlemaster at later levels, however, when they get a decent number of spell slots.

They really should have separated the Battle Master extra damage mechanic and their maneuvers. Then make their maneuvers a bonus action.

Eldritch Knight (and AT) should have just gained ranger/Paladin casting slots. It is a pain how little spells you get.

Strill

2015-09-30, 06:55 PM

They really should have separated the Battle Master extra damage mechanic and their maneuvers. Then make their maneuvers a bonus action.
They did originally during testing, but no one used anything but damaging maneuvers, so they made all the maneuvers do damage, and nerfed their effects.

TopCheese

2015-09-30, 07:02 PM

They did originally during testing, but no one used anything but damaging maneuvers, so they made all the maneuvers do damage, and nerfed their effects.

That's the thing though.

Tying damage to the weapon attack and the maneuver to the bonus action you get a fighter that has the same DPR but can have interesting and useful effects. Don't have bonus action maneuvers that deal direct damage.

Kinda like how the rogue has sneak attack and cunning action. Sneak attack can benefit from cunning action but the two are separate.

Gnomes2169

2015-09-30, 07:03 PM

How does this work? I thought frenzy was always 6 minutes then you die or take 5 days to recover. Is there a high level mechanic that changes that?

Nope, each rage still only lasts for one minute, meaning that you have to start a new frenzy every minute. You just get infinite rages... So Kryx might have to redo some calculations if he assumed that the frenzy barb could infinitely frenzy.

Ruslan

2015-09-30, 07:09 PM

Battlemaster is far better at early levels. Four superiority dice per short rest, which can each deal damage and give you advantage on the rest of your attacks, is a huge deal.

Eldritch Knight sucks at early levels. 3 spell slots is terrible. Eldritch Knights are much better than battlemaster at later levels, however, when they get a decent number of spell slots.
Between level 3 and 20, Battlemaster goes from 4 superiority dice to 6, an increase of 50%
Over the same level interval, Eldritch Knight goes from 2 spell slots to 11, an increase of 450% ....

Strill

2015-09-30, 07:13 PM

Between level 3 and 20, Battlemaster goes from 4 superiority dice to 6, an increase of 50%
Over the same level interval, Eldritch Knight goes from 2 spell slots to 11, an increase of 450% ....

Yes, that's my point. Battlemaster is better early on, while Eldritch Knight is better later.

SharkForce

2015-09-30, 08:16 PM

Between level 3 and 20, Battlemaster goes from 4 superiority dice to 6, an increase of 50%
Over the same level interval, Eldritch Knight goes from 2 spell slots to 11, an increase of 450% ....

even worse, a level 20 battlemaster (with the right feats and maneuvers) can expend every last die in a single turn without even accounting for action surge.

Strill

2015-09-30, 08:20 PM

even worse, a level 20 battlemaster (with the right feats and maneuvers) can expend every last die in a single turn without even accounting for action surge.

They still get them back on a short rest.

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 08:23 PM

They still get them back on a short rest.

And in the event that you start a new fight without resting and are out of dice you can gain one.

SharkForce

2015-09-30, 08:23 PM

They still get them back on a short rest.

allow me to rephrase that. at level 3, a battlemaster can basically go nova for ~2 rounds per short rest. at level 20, they have enough resources to go nova for less than a single round (again, capable of blowing 6 superiority die without even using action surge, assuming the right feats and maneuvers).

it's great that they can fit a bit more nova into a shorter time frame. it is not so great that they run out of resources so much faster when they're higher level.

Shaofoo

2015-09-30, 08:31 PM

allow me to rephrase that. at level 3, a battlemaster can basically go nova for ~2 rounds per short rest. at level 20, they have enough resources to go nova for less than a single round (again, capable of blowing 6 superiority die without even using action surge, assuming the right feats and maneuvers).

it's great that they can fit a bit more nova into a shorter time frame. it is not so great that they run out of resources so much faster when they're higher level.

So you are saying because they can use more nova that means they are worse than when they couldn't?

Just because you can run out of resources faster doesn't mean that you should always do so. You should always gauge and use as much needed force as possible. You have full control over your dice, lack of discipline regarding such use is not a problem of the class.

More options isn't a weakness.

MaxWilson

2015-09-30, 09:03 PM

As I said, I don't know how to calculate most things. I understand it's not. All about combat, but doesn't everyone want to know what kind of.damage they do compared to others? How would you calculate usefulness of flight vs invisiblity? Combat is the only thing in numbers.

Here's an easy way to calculate things: tell the dice tool here (http://maxwilson.github.io/RollWeb/Roll/) how many attacks you want, what the to-hit number is, and how much damage it does on hit.

For example, an Archery Dex 20 fighter has +13 to hit at level 20. He has four attacks, and against an AC 19 Red Dragon he needs a 6 or better to hit, doing d8+5 on a hit. avg.4.6?d8+5 is 29.40 according to the tool. (Take off the "avg." if you want a specific roll instead of the average.) Or he can Sharpshoot with -5 to hit/+10 damage, which means he needs an 11 to hit, avg.4.11?d8+15, which is 39.90 points of damage.

Pretty simple, hey?

A 20th level Barbarian with Str 24 can hit at +13 for 2d6+11 points of damage when raging (plus Brutal Critical, although unfortunately the tool only handles normal criticals) for avg.2.6?2d6+11=27.70 damage on average. If he attacks recklessly that is avg.2.6a?2d6+11=35.11 damage, not much difference. But if he recklessly attacks at -5/+10 from GWM, he does avg.2.11a?2d6+21=43.37, which is competitive with the Sharpshooter fighter. Finally, you can double your number of attacks using Polearm master, in which case he does 3 attacks with d10 (assuming the dragon enters his reach this turn) and one with d4. avg.(3.11a?d10+21)+(1.11a?1d4+21) = 79.10, twice the damage of the fighter.

Let me know if you have any questions about writing formulas.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-01, 01:03 AM

Here's an easy way to calculate things: tell the dice tool here (http://maxwilson.github.io/RollWeb/Roll/) how many attacks you want, what the to-hit number is, and how much damage it does on hit.

For example, an Archery Dex 20 fighter has +13 to hit at level 20. He has four attacks, and against an AC 19 Red Dragon he needs a 6 or better to hit, doing d8+5 on a hit. avg.4.6?d8+5 is 29.40 according to the tool. (Take off the "avg." if you want a specific roll instead of the average.) Or he can Sharpshoot with -5 to hit/+10 damage, which means he needs an 11 to hit, avg.4.11?d8+15, which is 39.90 points of damage.

Pretty simple, hey?

A 20th level Barbarian with Str 24 can hit at +13 for 2d6+11 points of damage when raging (plus Brutal Critical, although unfortunately the tool only handles normal criticals) for avg.2.6?2d6+11=27.70 damage on average. If he attacks recklessly that is avg.2.6a?2d6+11=35.11 damage, not much difference. But if he recklessly attacks at -5/+10 from GWM, he does avg.2.11a?2d6+21=43.37, which is competitive with the Sharpshooter fighter. Finally, you can double your number of attacks using Polearm master, in which case he does 3 attacks with d10 (assuming the dragon enters his reach this turn) and one with d4. avg.(3.11a?d10+21)+(1.11a?1d4+21) = 79.10, twice the damage of the fighter.

Let me know if you have any questions about writing formulas.

Of course the great sword fighter practically doubles the barbarians output. Apples to apples and all that.

MirddinEmris

2015-10-01, 01:34 AM

Also, it's not like dragon will enter your reach EVERY turn, so this calculation will apply only to one turn and DPR for rest of the battle will probably would be lower.

djreynolds

2015-10-01, 01:46 AM

You can't go it alone. Wolf barbarians give advantage to their buddies attacks. The paladin will exploit this, as will the rogue. Shield master for barbarian is awesome. And you can pick totems as you wish. You don't have to be all wolf or bear. You can wear medium armor till you get up your dexterity. And breast plate has no stealth disadvantage, and half -plate gives a 15 for base AC.

Both are awesome. I like fighter because he easily multiclasses. 20th level is a long ways off. Barbarians can dip easily as well with rogue too. You can dip fighter for 2(action surge) or 3 for (BM) as a barbarian. Why not?

Its tough to compare both without a context. Would you rather face a barbarian and paladin duo? Or a fighter and paladin duo? That's a tough choice.

Strill

2015-10-01, 01:55 AM

Shield master for barbarian is awesome.
I don't agree. It's largely redundant since you already have reckless attack, and if giving advantage to your allies is a concern, you're much better off just taking Wolf Totem.

djreynolds

2015-10-01, 02:35 AM

I don't agree. It's largely redundant since you already have reckless attack, and if giving advantage to your allies is a concern, you're much better off just taking Wolf Totem.

But shield master is nice because it is a bonus action and you need the AC. And yes I take wolf totem for ally advantage, instead of the bear. But if you all bear then shield master is nice to have.

Kryx

2015-10-01, 03:02 AM

Endless Frenzy
My mistake - Somehow I thought endless rage + unlimited rages = 24/7 frenzying. I've remedied the situation.

The GWM Fighter has 72 DPR at 20 while the Barbarian would have has 60, or 64 if Frenzying with most levels leading up to that point within 5% of each other.
However the Polearm+GWM Fighter has 74 DPR at 20 while the Barbarian would have has 77, or 79 if Frenzying.

Battlemaster
Battle Master is by far the best combat Fighter. EK has utility and Champion has his crits, but none of that stack up to trip. Trip allowing advantage which further propels -5/+10 is by far the best option.

Superiority Dice recharge on a short rest so by my calculations for a typical day (5 encounters of 5 rounds each on average) he'd be able to use a dice to trip on 72% of rounds.

Between level 3 and 20, Battlemaster goes from 4 superiority dice to 6, an increase of 50%
Over the same level interval, Eldritch Knight goes from 2 spell slots to 11, an increase of 450% ....
You're ignoring short rests. An EK recharges on a long rest. Dice recharge on a short rest. So assuming 2 short rests per day as the system expects fighters go from 12 to 15 to 18 dice per day.

Either way an EK is more about utility and aoe spells which can be very useful, but won't increase normal DPR.

an Archery Dex .. which is 39.90 points of damage.
39.9 is exactly what I have as well for the base DPR for a fighter archer as well. But the fighter would also get action surge ~24% of the time (6/25 rounds) which increases DPR by a fair amount. Plus either dice, which aren't nearly as good for an archer as melee, or spells.

Of course the great sword fighter practically doubles the barbarians output. Apples to apples and all that.
No it doesn't. Every DPR calc has them quite close

I don't agree. It's largely redundant since you already have reckless attack, and if giving advantage to your allies is a concern, you're much better off just taking Wolf Totem.
Agreed. Shield master is mostly a waste due to reckless attacks.

MaxWilson

2015-10-01, 03:48 AM

Of course the great sword fighter practically doubles the barbarians output. Apples to apples and all that.

Under what assumptions? As I compute it, he does better than the Sharpshooter but not nearly as well as the Barbarian unless he Action Surges, which the Sharpshooter can do too.

5 GWM halberd attacks (including the Polearm Master reaction) at +6 to hit for d10+15: avg.(5.13?d10+15)+(1.13?1d4+15) = 49.50

That's respectable but still much less than the Barbarian, unless he Action Surges or spends superiority dice or similar.

Switching to pure greatsword drops him to avg.(4.13?2d6+15)=36.60, net loss compard to polearm.

Reckless Attack advantage makes all the difference.

djreynolds

2015-10-01, 03:53 AM

Shield master grants evasion on dex saves that you have advantage on from danger sense.

Reckless attack, for 1 round, while offering advantage (on melee weapon attacks using strength) comes back around when the enemy now have advantage on you, you'll need your shield's AC.

During rage you have now have advantage on strength checks and using your bonus action with shield master to shove is now even better.

Kryx

2015-10-01, 04:09 AM

Shield master grants evasion on dex saves that you have advantage on from danger sense.
We're talking about DPR, not defensive capabilities

Reckless attack, for 1 round, while offering advantage (on melee weapon attacks using strength) comes back around when the enemy now have advantage on you, you'll need your shield's AC.
Barbarians have resistance to most (sometimes all) damage. Even while giving advantage they are very tanky.

During rage you have now have advantage on strength checks and using your bonus action with shield master to shove is now even better.
That doesn't help a Barbarian's DPR as he already has advantage on attacks. It would help his allies, but then he might as well go Wolf Totem as it's significantly better.

djreynolds

2015-10-01, 04:26 AM

We're talking about DPR, not defensive capabilities

Barbarians have resistance to most (sometimes all) damage. Even while giving advantage they are very tanky.

That doesn't help a Barbarian's DPR as he already has advantage on attacks. It would help his allies, but then he might as well go Wolf Totem as it's significantly better.

When using reckless attack you have advantage for one round on melee attacks, not strength checks.

While raging you have advantage on strength checks. Shield master is a bonus action, no reason to waste an entire attack to shove when you can do a bonus action. The wolf totem gets the ability to shove after an attack at level 14.

The is best way, IMO is to dip 3 BM for trip or push, because this comes with the attack way earlier than 14th level.

But you still have a bonus attack, now pole arm master is welcome addition, but 2AC is worth it.

Once reckless attack ends, the enemy now has advantage on you and can mob you.

Kryx

2015-10-01, 05:01 AM

I really don't understand what you're trying to argue..

Shield Master's main role in DPR calculations is to provide advantage. A Barbarian can already get advantage with Reckless Attacks. If he were to ditch his Greatsword/axe for a longsword/shield his DPR would drop significantly.
Trip is in the same boat - it gives you advantage which a Barbarian already has.

I've done the math comparing S&B vs GWM/Polearm/Polearm+GWM for Fighter. S&B is about 70% as much DPR as Polearm+GWM (similar numbers for the others)

Of course you could choose to be more defensive and take a shield, but that's no where near the best DPR option.

Mara

2015-10-01, 05:14 AM

That's the thing though.

Tying damage to the weapon attack and the maneuver to the bonus action you get a fighter that has the same DPR but can have interesting and useful effects. Don't have bonus action maneuvers that deal direct damage.

Kinda like how the rogue has sneak attack and cunning action. Sneak attack can benefit from cunning action but the two are separate.

I would have been super mad if the maneuvers didn't do damage, because most of them are improvised actions in my games that can replace a single attack.

You never want abilities that reduce what everyone can do.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-01, 05:43 AM

Battlemaster
Battle Master is by far the best combat Fighter. EK has utility and Champion has his crits, but none of that stack up to trip.

A situationally useful (too many things won't be able to be tripped at all) ability usable only a tiny handful of times is nothing next to a much larger collection of spells going from 1st to 4th level that include combat buffs and defensive buffs, imo. Also, tripping doesn't help Crossbow Expert Sharpshooters, who can get a +2 bonus to hit all of the time forever (+2 to hit > all of the other fighter combat style benefits) and do it at range.

Granted Battle Masters are better at lower levels; that's actually true, but I look to the end. I like to have something to look forward to, not think, "Well, I'm as good as I'll ever be now! It's all downhill from here."

Kryx

2015-10-01, 06:16 AM

A situationally useful (too many things won't be able to be tripped at all) ability usable only a tiny handful of times
Trip: Is there something that prevents trip on monsters? I haven't noticed it.
Handful of times? It can be used 12 times per day, or 18 at higher levels. Even 12 is more than EK's 11 spells at 20.

is nothing next to a much larger collection of spells going from 1st to 4th level that include combat buffs and defensive buffs, imo.
Spells can definitely provide utility, but I don't know of any EK spells that would stack up DPR. If there are ones better than trip please do point them out.
They can add some defense - shield being the best, but the rest is likely to be used on AoEs.

Also, tripping doesn't help Crossbow Expert Sharpshooters, who can get a +2 bonus to hit all of the time forever (+2 to hit > all of the other fighter combat style benefits) and do it at range.
I said this in the very post you're quoting:
DPR ... Plus either dice, which aren't nearly as good for an archer as melee, or spells.
Archers get +2 to hit to offset cover. If a group actually plays by the cover rules I would expect cover to be equal to 1.45 extra defense on average (Assuming cover is granted half the time and of that time 70% of the time it's half cover and 30% of the time it's 3/4 cover. See DMG 250 for how that is adjudicated)

Granted Battle Masters are better at lower levels; that's actually true, but I look to the end. I like to have something to look forward to, not think, "Well, I'm as good as I'll ever be now! It's all downhill from here."
They are better at higher level as well. They get 18 dice per day while an EK gets 11 spells.

I do think it was a mistake to front-load the BM as much as they did. I'd prefer they scaled the maneuvers/dice out a bit more.

SharkForce

2015-10-01, 08:59 AM

EK can increase DPR with haste, enlarge (which also provides some combat utility), magic weapon, or absorb elements from the EE document (i think it's called that... the one that gives you resistance to damage and lets you add that damage to your sword, anyways), though all too often an enemy that is using, say, cold on you regularly, probably isn't going to take too much damage from cold (on the other hand, it synergizes quite well with the wizard dropping a fireball on top of you and the enemy... you may wish to avoid giving your party wizard ideas, however :P )

Kryx

2015-10-01, 09:39 AM

EK can increase DPR with haste, enlarge (which also provides some combat utility), magic weapon, or absorb elements
Thanks for the list! For comparison to Superiority dice:

Haste is nice, but EK doesn't get to use it til 13 and then can use it 2-3 times per day. Even then 1 more attack per round is significantly worse than advantage on attacks after the first.
Enlarge. 1d4 doesn't compare with trip in uses or effectiveness
Magic Weapon doesn't compare either, but there may be cases where magic weapons are very needed to avoid resistance

I do love the EK (though I personally would probably boost EK and AT's spell progression to match Ranger with more spells known), but for DPR terms it doesn't compare with trip at all.

SharkForce

2015-10-01, 10:13 AM

Kryx

2015-10-01, 10:16 AM

Ah, Large or smaller - there it is.

Fighter would still have some decent options if he couldn't trip, but none stack up in DPR.

Mara

2015-10-01, 10:24 AM

You know any idiot could trip with an improvised action right? Heck most GMs would run it as an attack replacement. So ek with haste would trip, then do 4 attacks.

SharkForce

2015-10-01, 10:25 AM

Ah, Large or smaller - there it is.

Fighter would still have some decent options if he couldn't trip, but none stack up in DPR.

well, it also depends a lot on party composition.

if your party includes a totem barbarian who grants you advantage anyways, tripping loses a lot of value.

if you have a rogue in the party, commander's strike goes up in value by quite a bit.

Ruslan

2015-10-01, 11:12 AM

You're ignoring short rests. An EK recharges on a long rest. Dice recharge on a short rest. So assuming 2 short rests per day as the system expects fighters go from 12 to 15 to 18 dice per day.I'm not ignoring anything, I'm looking at relative increase of resources.

- Between level 3 and level 20, the increase in available superiority dice is 50%. It doesn't matter if they're available per short rest, per long rest, or per phase of the moon. The relative increase between Battlemaster 3 and Battlemaster 20 in the availability of that particular resource (which happens to be his sub-class signature resource) is 50%.
- Between level 3 and level 20, the increase in available spell slots for an Eldritch Knight is 450%

Therefore, the relative power increase with levels of the Eldritch Knight is much greater than the relative power increase of the Battlemaster.
(One might also make the point that Battlemaster starts with d8 dice and increases them to d10 and later d12. To which I retort that Eldritch Knight starts with only 1st level spells and later has 2nd, 3rd and 4th level spells available)

One last thing that needs to be accounted for, to the completely fair, is the Relentless ability, so let's model this one in. Normally, a character is expected to fight ~6 combats per day. In how many of them does the Battlemaster start devoid of superiority dice? No more than 2 or 3, I'd say. So effectively the Relentless ability adds +2 or +3 Superiority dice per day. So he's effectively going from 12 to 20-21 superiority dice per day, an increase of 67%-75%. A bigger number than 50%, sure, but still a far cry from EK's 450% improvement.

Conclusion: Eldritch Knight scales better with levels.

2015-10-01, 11:14 AM

You know any idiot could trip with an improvised action right? Heck most GMs would run it as an attack replacement. So ek with haste would trip, then do 4 attacks.

No, most DMs would not allow you to mimic another person's class feature without taking the class feature. This upsets game balance and devalues the class system.

Especially since the "Shove" action can do the same thing. If you're going to argue for "improvising a trip", I'd just tell you to use the same rules as "Shove", but reflavor it as a trip. And yes, an EK can Shove an enemy to knock it prone (same end result as a trip), and then do its X attacks.

Kryx

2015-10-01, 11:16 AM

You know any idiot could trip with an improvised action right? Heck most GMs would run it as an attack replacement. So ek with haste would trip, then do 4 attacks.
It is an attack replacement by RAW - no DM adjudication needed. But it comes at the cost of an attack. Which means it's not good DPR for anyone but Fighter.

Even then the shove is a Strength saving throw which is going to be lower than an Athletics or Acrobatics check in nearly all cases.

But lets run with your assumption. Assuming a 50% chance to prone.
At 5 a GWM Fighter does 23 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 15.
At 11 a GWM Fighter does 47 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 39.
At 20 a GWM Fighter does 72 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 64.

So it's behind by a fair amount lower (65%, 83%, 89%), but competitive at 20.

There are spells that could make up the difference, but it would be hard to do so imo.

well, it also depends a lot on party composition.

if your party includes a totem barbarian who grants you advantage anyways, tripping loses a lot of value.

if you have a rogue in the party, commander's strike goes up in value by quite a bit.
Definitely. Though that would be ridiculous to model. It's just a note people will have to remember.

Conclusion: Eldritch Knight scales better with levels.
EK scales better compared to it's bad early levels than Battle Master scales compared to his good early levels.

That doesn't mean an EK scales to be better than a BM.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-01, 05:42 PM

No it doesn't. Every DPR calc has them quite close

It's only close for the first 30 rounds if it's a Berserker using Frenzy and the AC of the target is upwards of 20, but that immediately drops off after that point thanks to disadvantage from exhaustion, and more so if they don't keep frenzying.

Barbarians can't keep up that level of effort day in and day out.

Under what assumptions? As I compute it, he does better than the Sharpshooter but not nearly as well as the Barbarian unless he Action Surges, which the Sharpshooter can do too.

5 GWM halberd attacks (including the Polearm Master reaction) at +6 to hit for d10+15: avg.(5.13?d10+15)+(1.13?1d4+15) = 49.50

That's respectable but still much less than the Barbarian, unless he Action Surges or spends superiority dice or similar.

Switching to pure greatsword drops him to avg.(4.13?2d6+15)=36.60, net loss compard to polearm.

Reckless Attack advantage makes all the difference.

if I recall correctly, it's ~double assuming a target with an AC of up to 13, it still exceeds up to AC of I think 17.

Barbarian only keeps up using Frenzy (bonus action for that 3rd attack) and against very high ac targets, vs which it's better not to use the GWM +10 bonus. But as mentioned, it can only keep up for so many rounds before the damage output dives dramatically.

As to weapon choice you mention above, Greatsword average hit damage with gwf style is 8.333+5 (13.333), crit 21.6667, Glaive/Halberd average with same is 5.9+5 (10.9), crit is 16.8
You didn't mention the AC of the target, what AC were you assuming to arrive at those numbers?

Ruslan

2015-10-01, 06:31 PM

EK scales better compared to it's bad early levels than Battle Master scales compared to his good early levels.

That doesn't mean an EK scales to be better than a BM.Dunno where you're taking this from. On high levels, EK is so much better than BM that it's not even funny. Can't compare the power to add 1d12's to stuff with the power of 3rd and 4th level spells. Level 13 (3rd level slots) is probably the point where EK pulls ahead and never looks back.

Mara

2015-10-01, 07:23 PM

It is an attack replacement by RAW - no DM adjudication needed. But it comes at the cost of an attack. Which means it's not good DPR for anyone but Fighter.

Even then the shove is a Strength saving throw which is going to be lower than an Athletics or Acrobatics check in nearly all cases.

But lets run with your assumption. Assuming a 50% chance to prone.
At 5 a GWM Fighter does 23 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 15.
At 11 a GWM Fighter does 47 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 39.
At 20 a GWM Fighter does 72 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 64.

So it's behind by a fair amount lower (65%, 83%, 89%), but competitive at 20.

There are spells that could make up the difference, but it would be hard to do so imo.

Definitely. Though that would be ridiculous to model. It's just a note people will have to remember.

EK scales better compared to it's bad early levels than Battle Master scales compared to his good early levels.

That doesn't mean an EK scales to be better than a BM.
Compare the high level haste EK to BM. EKs get 5 attacks to the BM 4.

Osrogue

2015-10-02, 12:35 AM

It's only close for the first 30 rounds if it's a Berserker using Frenzy and the AC of the target is upwards of 20, but that immediately drops off after that point thanks to disadvantage from exhaustion, and more so if they don't keep frenzying.

Barbarians can't keep up that level of effort day in and day out.

if I recall correctly, it's ~double assuming a target with an AC of up to 13, it still exceeds up to AC of I think 17.

Barbarian only keeps up using Frenzy (bonus action for that 3rd attack) and against very high ac targets, vs which it's better not to use the GWM +10 bonus. But as mentioned, it can only keep up for so many rounds before the damage output dives dramatically.

As to weapon choice you mention above, Greatsword average hit damage with gwf style is 8.333+5 (13.333), crit 21.6667, Glaive/Halberd average with same is 5.9+5 (10.9), crit is 16.8
You didn't mention the AC of the target, what AC were you assuming to arrive at those numbers?

This has always confused me, but why doesn't anyone count Retaliation into Berserker DPR?

MaxWilson

2015-10-02, 12:43 AM

Thanks for the list! For comparison to Superiority dice:

Haste is nice, but EK doesn't get to use it til 13 and then can use it 2-3 times per day. Even then 1 more attack per round is significantly worse than advantage on attacks after the first.
Enlarge. 1d4 doesn't compare with trip in uses or effectiveness
Magic Weapon doesn't compare either, but there may be cases where magic weapons are very needed to avoid resistance

I do love the EK (though I personally would probably boost EK and AT's spell progression to match Ranger with more spells known), but for DPR terms it doesn't compare with trip at all.

Let's check this out.

Crossbow Expert Sharpshooter Eldritch Knight with Magic Weapon IV, compared to GWM Polearm Master Battlemaster with Trip. I'll use an AC 19 Adult Red Dragon as the baseline, and an AC 16 Mind Flayer as a point of comparison so you can see trends.

Vs. Red Dragon:

Crossbow dude gets avg.5.11?d6+15=47.12 baseline, can add Magic Weapon IV (+2 bonus) for avg.5.9?d6+17=62.38. It lasts for an hour.

Trippy greatsword Battlemaster gets avg.6.13?d10+15=50.85 baseline damage. If he had advantage on all attacks from Mounted Combatant or something that would be avg.6.13a?d10+15=81.94 damage, well ahead of the Sharpshooter. Computing Precise Attack plus Trip... is actually really hard. The dragon has a +8 on Strength saves vs. a Trip DC of 19, so he has a 50% chance of tripping and falling whenever the battlemaster hits him. (Let's ignore for now the fact that Tripping doesn't actually work on Huge creatures like dragons.) So on average, the fighter will start getting advantage after he's made two successful attacks on the dragon and burned two superiority dice, getting an extra 2d12 damage in the process. But the fighter only hits 1/3 of the time when he's power attacking, unless he also burns a die on Precise Strike, so it would take him about six attacks on average to trip the dragon, which means by the end of his sixth attack the dragon is tripped and he'll get advantage the next round--but the dragon will be up already by then. Plus, we still haven't accounted for Precise Strike.

I'm just going to handwave it and say, "Let's say he uses Precise Strike and regular attacks to trip the dragon by the end of his third attack; and then he power attacks for his last three attacks." avg.(3.8?d10+5+d12)+(3.13a?d10+15)=75.92, almost as good as Mounted Combatant, which also doesn't work against dragons BTW, and significantly better than the Eldritch Knight. However, the Battlemaster has just burned pretty much all of his superiority dice in one round. Unlike the Eldritch Knight who can do his thing for 600 rounds, the Battlemaster can only do his for one round before falling back to baseline.

Vs. Mind Flayer

Crossbow dude does avg.5.8?d6+15=61.00 baseline damage, which increases to avg.5.6?d6+17=77.75 with Magic Weapon IV.

Trippy battlemaster has a baseline damage of avg.(6.10?d10+15)=69.30 damage against a mind flayer, again assuming that the mind flayer is going to enter his reach (maybe a bad assumption for a mind flayer). If he's spending superiority dice, he has a 90% chance of tripping a mindflayer, and about a 2/3 chance of hitting on the first (non-power-)attack even if he doesn't spend superiority dice, so let's just say his first attack is a Trip and the rest are power attacks with advantage. avg.(1.5?d10+5+d12)+(5.10a?d10+15)=98.62 damage.

Same pattern holds here, slightly less pronounced: the crossbow expert does about 15-20% less damage than the trippy battlemaster, but he can keep it up for much longer. The lower the opponent's AC, the smaller the battlemaster's relative advantage. It turns out that +4 to hit and +2 to damage is a pretty good substitute for advantage from Trip--and of course it stacks with any actual advantage that you get from shooting at opponents who are Faerie Fired/restrained/etc.

In conclusion:

Battlemaster: bursty.
Eldritch Knight: consistent.

I'm a consistency fan, so EK is my archtype of choice.

djreynolds

2015-10-02, 12:47 AM

MaxWilson

2015-10-02, 01:02 AM

First off my apologies to Kryx and Strill, I didn't realize the thread was DPR.

That said, a fighter's feats clearly gives more damage options and he real only needs 2 stats, attack and con. Just imagine a fighter mounted on a horse with a lance, and he can have polearm master and sentinel and GWM and GWS and crit or superiority dice.

Battle masters are a nasty opponent to face off against.

I'm always surprised that Mounted Combatant doesn't get more attention. It is a very nice feat both offensively and defensively. Advantage on attacks, and the opportunity to bring your warhorse into combat without getting it killed almost instantly, meaning that you can fight with a lance (d12 one-handed), can melee kite the enemy, and can even potentially have an extra one or even two attacks per round (one of them with a knockdown effect) if you have a mount which is intelligent enough to attack independently like a paladin's steed or a sufficiently-bright and -well-trained warhorse.

The main downside is that it doesn't work anywhere you can't bring your horse (or griffin), so no use in goblin tunnels or wizard's towers. And it only halfway works on Large enemies (gives defensive but not offensive benefits), although at least most Large enemies cannot go in places where you can't bring your horse.

djreynolds

2015-10-02, 01:16 AM

I'm always surprised that Mounted Combatant doesn't get more attention. It is a very nice feat both offensively and defensively. Advantage on attacks, and the opportunity to bring your warhorse into combat without getting it killed almost instantly, meaning that you can fight with a lance (d12 one-handed), can melee kite the enemy, and can even potentially have an extra one or even two attacks per round (one of them with a knockdown effect) if you have a mount which is intelligent enough to attack independently like a paladin's steed or a sufficiently-bright and -well-trained warhorse.

The main downside is that it doesn't work anywhere you can't bring your horse (or griffin), so no use in goblin tunnels or wizard's towers. And it only halfway works on Large enemies (gives defensive but not offensive benefits), although at least most Large enemies cannot go in places where you can't bring your horse.

Agreed, but a fighter has 7 feats at his disposal, can leave dexterity at 10. No reason not to take mounted combatant, sentinel, polearm master, GWM and have 3 feats left for ASI. Coupled with battlemaster maneuvers leaves very little discussion for killing options.

Now can you battlemaster maneuvers from horseback. Imagine pushing with your horse and coming back around to trample them.

Kryx

2015-10-02, 03:00 AM

It's only close for the first 30 rounds if it's a Berserker using Frenzy and the AC of the target is upwards of 20, but that immediately drops off after that point thanks to disadvantage from exhaustion, and more so if they don't keep frenzying.
Several things that you have incorrect:

According to DMG's xp per adventuring day guidlines the number of encounters per day actually averages to 5.13. You can see the discussion here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446568-Thought-Process-around-Optimizing-a-Greatsword-Wielder-WIP-PEACH&p=19897551#post19897551).
The average AC of an enemy at 20 is 19, as DMG 274 covers.
My Frenzy DPR assumes 1.5 Frenzies a day on average. It never goes into extreme cases.

Frenzy means next to nothing for Polearm+GWM. Polearm+GWM Barbarian without frenzy ranges between 5-20% better than Fighter Polearm+GWM depending on level.

Barbarians can't keep up that level of effort day in and day out.
If your game ignores adventure guidelines then a fighter would drop off as he's not longer tripping which is a HUGE part of his DPR - more than rage is for a Babarian.

EK scales better compared to it's bad early levels than Battle Master scales compared to his good early levels.

That doesn't mean an EK scales to be better than a BM.
Dunno where you're taking this from. On high levels, EK is so much better than BM that it's not even funny.
Literally the math is in the very post you quoted. If we're going to have a debate of EK vs BM then please look at the math I have provided.

But lets run with your assumption. Assuming a 50% chance to prone.
At 5 a GWM Fighter does 23 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 15.
At 11 a GWM Fighter does 47 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 39.
At 20 a GWM Fighter does 72 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 64.

So it's behind by a fair amount lower (65%, 83%, 89%), but competitive at 20.

There are spells that could make up the difference, but it would be hard to do so imo.

Compare the high level haste EK to BM. EKs get 5 attacks to the BM 4.
Sure. Redoing my numbers from above as some small adjustments to the assumptions discussed in another thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?446568-Thought-Process-around-Optimizing-a-Greatsword-Wielder-WIP-PEACH&p=19897551#post19897551) changed them slightly.

At 5 a GWM Fighter does 22 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 18.
At 11 a GWM Fighter does 46 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 39.
At 20 a GWM Fighter does 70 damage. If we remove the first attack and increase the chance of proning (because there is no attack) then the DPR is 63.

If we add haste at 14 an ek could cast it 4 times at 20, using all of his 3rd and 4th level slots. That would increasse his DPR to 71 if we ignore the casting time of 1 action and concentration. In practice an action casting time would ruin any DPR gained from haste. Even if we assume it doesn't EK can only compete at 20, but not 5 or 11.

This has always confused me, but why doesn't anyone count Retaliation into Berserker DPR?
Good point. It is a Berserker feature that could indeed be valuable. Though for Polearm and Polearm+GWM the value would be hugely diminished as they already use their reaction for OA and Polearm Provoke. Adding another option would compete with those - it would really only matter for GWM.
I guess I don't include it because I intend for my Barbarian DPR to easily switch to a Totem Barb for when people shout "OMG ALL YOUR DAMAGE IS FROM BERSERKER" like happened above. :P

Crossbow Expert Sharpshooter Eldritch Knight with Magic Weapon IV, compared to GWM Polearm Master Battlemaster with Trip.
You are no longer comparing EK vs BM. You are comparing 2 entirely different builds. The only way to compare them is on a melee build each as BM can't optimize ranged for crap due to lack of maneuvers and EK can do either as equally proficient.

I think some of your assumptions are a bit off. I recently re-calculated rounds/encounters and encounters/day and came up with 25.7 rounds per day according to the DMG xp guidlines. See my sheet for the math (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=2091322934). Assuming 600 rounds a day is not what the DMG recommends and shouldn't be considered. You also seem to ignore cover which I have calculated to be an average of 1.45 on average based on the DMG's cover rules (entirely depends on fight).

@djreynolds: I don't mean to overwhelm this thread with DPR. That was the main topic discussed by the OP, but there are many other factors to consider like defense, utility, etc as well.
Combat wise Barbarian holds up better than a fighter in the average adventuring day. The Fighter would be a bit more versatile either due to spells or superiority dice choices.
Mounted combat is ignored because it's very very campaign dependent. It is great in an open world setting. It is awful on a pirate ship or in dungeons.

Mara

2015-10-02, 03:41 AM

You are trying to account for too much that assumes a lot about peoples campaigns.

Sure use expected AC. That's fine. But you should simplify it to peak DPR and "at-will" dpr. Instead of these 1.5 frenzy over 6 encounters stuff. Maybe one encounter, I have to grapple or shove people off a cliff. DPR over a day calculations assumes too much. I would probably stab myself and roll wizard if all my martial did every round was stab people, dropping dpr of that martial to 0.

Kryx

2015-10-02, 03:56 AM

You are trying to account for too much that assumes a lot about peoples campaigns.
I'm following the DMG guidelines. If you do not follow them then of course your numbers will be different
In a day with combat, how many combats do you typically have between long rests? (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469399-How-many-combats-does-your-5e-group-typically-have-between-long-rests-if-you-have-at-least-one ) is a poll about number of combats per day. Most people actually play with significantly less than the DMG recommends. That would average around 15 rounds a day based on that poll.

Sure use expected AC. That's fine. But you should simplify it to peak DPR and "at-will" dpr. Instead of these 1.5 frenzy over 6 encounters stuff. DPR over a day calculations assumes too much. I would probably stab myself and roll wizard if all my martial did every round was stab people, dropping dpr of that martial to 0.
"At-will" DPR completely ignores Superiorty dice, action surge, rage, frenzy, spells, ki, every short/long rest ability in the game. Please show me how at-will DPR is more accurate. You'd be forced to ignore 10-50% of every class.

5e is balanced around an adventuring day. Please see DMG 82. If you do not use it then that's your choice, but the adventuring day is the standard that 5e uses and the standard by which classes and features should be judged.

Strill

2015-10-02, 04:21 AM

Kryx

2015-10-02, 04:25 AM

That poll is really interesting. I wonder if this is an area where the devs have failed to cater to their audience. I'd be interested in seeing an Unearthed Arcana with more options for balancing games with fewer encounters per day.
You'd have to adjust everything. Long rest spells would have to be halved, likely half of every other resources as well.

I also think that poll is heavily biased. I can't think of a PF adventure or D&D adventure that has 1 encounter per day on a consistent basis.
Take LMoP for example - Redbrand Hideout has several encounters in that area. I think people lack understanding of what an encounter is, so they may consider that area to be "1 combat".

djreynolds

2015-10-02, 04:32 AM

Very true, playing within the rules really high-lites the champion and rogue. Wizards are powerful, but really only have so many spells. Cantrips have really increased not just their power but stat needs. You can forgo the bow essentially and the elven wizard, though I usually will play that.

Critical hits are always. Superiority die recycle every short rest. 7 feats is just an awesome class feature of the fighter. Easily maxed strength and con, resilient wisdom. Champions go all day long. Remarkable athlete is better than what people think especially coupled with alert and that initiative bonus, you can stop a lot of surprise rounds from happening

Kryx

2015-10-02, 04:56 AM

Playing within the rules doesn't highlight the rogue or champion very much. Neither has DPR resources.

Mara

2015-10-02, 05:35 AM

I'm following the DMG guidelines. If you do not follow them then of course your numbers will be different
In a day with combat, how many combats do you typically have between long rests? (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469399-How-many-combats-does-your-5e-group-typically-have-between-long-rests-if-you-have-at-least-one ) is a poll about number of combats per day. Most people actually play with significantly less than the DMG recommends. That would average around 15 rounds a day based on that poll.

"At-will" DPR completely ignores Superiorty dice, action surge, rage, frenzy, spells, ki, every short/long rest ability in the game. Please show me how at-will DPR is more accurate. You'd be forced to ignore 10-50% of every class.

5e is balanced around an adventuring day. Please see DMG 82. If you do not use it then that's your choice, but the adventuring day is the standard that 5e uses and the standard by which classes and features should be judged.
Peak and "at-will" dpr. For 20 berserker peak is 4 attacks. "At-will" is just raging (19 would be the same).

Like in PF where bard and barbarian DPR is always assuming music and rage because it doesn't really run out.

With the two metrics you can get a range of expected damage with a class for when you want to do damage. I find that much more useful than one number that estimates where you will fall on average between those two numbers based on tons of assumptions (maybe I would only frenzy once day always).

Kryx

2015-10-02, 05:58 AM

I do use normal DPR and peak DPR and combine them.. Have you looked at my sheet?
Barbarian for example is only raging a certain amount of the time. He has DPR for no rage, DPR for rage, and DPR for rage+frenzy. At level 6 that's 78% of the normal adventuring day. (he has 4 rages which would last the average 5 rounds per encounter which is 20 rounds/25.7 rounds in a day or 77.8%)

You're free to use those numbers if you choose to not play by the DMG guidelines.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-02, 04:58 PM

This has always confused me, but why doesn't anyone count Retaliation into Berserker DPR?

Well, I try to start with the bare bones and compare possible add-ons.

I didn't include it (or other reaction attacks) because they're a dependent variable based on the actions of other characters.

Side note: I guess I find it less likely that Retaliation will happen terribly often because the Barbarian while raging has resistance to the three most common melee damage types. So if enemies are trying to best apply their force, they'd ignore the Barbarian until after everyone else who was less of a hard target was downed. (i.e. Focus-fire from least to most in order of those who are best at absorbing damage).

Several things that you have incorrect:
•According to DMG's xp per adventuring day guidlines the number of encounters per day actually averages to 5.13. You can see the discussion here.
•The average AC of an enemy at 20 is 19, as DMG 274 covers.
•My Frenzy DPR assumes 1.5 Frenzies a day on average. It never goes into extreme cases.

Frenzy means next to nothing for Polearm+GWM. Polearm+GWM Barbarian without frenzy ranges between 5-20% better than Fighter Polearm+GWM depending on level.

Ok? Each frenzy adds 1 level of exhaustion and long rests only remove one level, so without some major magic those are going to accumulate and impair the Barbarian's damage output. Similarly, if there are 5.13 encounters that's at least 5 different uses of frenzy required to maintain dps, so it definitely has dropped off by the 4th encounter.

The DMG says that's the suggested AC of a single CR 20 creature. Most encounters won't be vs a single creature, so most won't have an AC of 19, it likely would be less.

Frenzy DPR drops by about a third assuming that.

Polearm is a straight up inferior use of the bonus action, 1d4+11 (13.5, 16 crit) vs 2d6+11 (18, 25 crit), and you've hamstrung yourself by using a polearm which is only a d10 (1d10+11; 16.5, 22 crit) causing a loss of around 1.5 damage per hit (3 per crit).

If your game ignores adventure guidelines then a fighter would drop off as he's not longer tripping which is a HUGE part of his DPR - more than rage is for a Babarian.

What? This is non sequitur from the post you quoted ("Barbarians can't keep up that level of effort day in and day out.")

Why would a Barbarian accumulating exhaustion have anything to do with adventure guidelines and what does tripping have to do with anything at all?

Kryx

2015-10-02, 05:23 PM

Ok? Each frenzy adds 1 level of exhaustion and long rests only remove one level, so without some major magic those are going to accumulate and impair the Barbarian's damage output.
Encounter days don't always follow encounter days. 1.5 would assume you have 2 encounter days every 3 days. That's even a bit much imo.
This also assumes no greater restoration from another party member.

Similarly, if there are 5.13 encounters that's at least 5 different uses of frenzy required to maintain dps.
Please look at the sheet. The way you're wording your objections makes me think you haven't.
Frenzy isn't all the time. It is 24% of the time.

Most encounters won't be vs a single creature, so most won't have an AC of 19, it likely would be less.
The AC provided in the DMG is the average AC for that CR. It is not the highest nor the lowest. It is not for the boss or the minion, but average.

Polearm is a straight up inferior use of the bonus action
No, actually it's the best form of DPR besides Polearm+GWM which costs another feat and is generally only 5% better DPR. I've done the math that takes all resources into consideration. Offhand forum math won't be able to account for that.
Things that you have missed with your offhand forum math:

Chance to hit
Advantage to hit (Reckless Attacks)
-5/+10 (you seem to have +11 from somewhere, but stat + 10 would be ~13-15)
Rage (though maybe this is the 5+6=11)

Why would a Barbarian accumulating exhaustion have anything to do with adventure guidelines and what does tripping have to do with anything at all?
A Barbarian doesn't accumulate exhaustion - that's the whole point!
And again, Frenzy is crap for DPR by RAW. It literally adds <5% DPR on Polearm and Polearm+GWM. It is inconsequential to the Barbarian vs Fighter debate.

PoeticDwarf

2015-10-03, 12:48 AM

djreynolds

2015-10-03, 01:41 AM

I know this is about DPR.

The beauty of the champion is no resources. He's always on.

Kryx

2015-10-03, 02:22 AM

The beauty of the champion is no resources. He's always on.
On a standard adventuring day Champion is weaker than equivalent classes. On a shorter than normal adventuring day he's significantly weaker. Only on a super long adventuring day 50+ rounds he would potentially be competitive (I'd have to do the math).

I don't see what you're trying to get at unless a group plays for a crazy amount of rounds each day.

djreynolds

2015-10-03, 03:52 AM

My champion is the "go to guy". He can do it all, but not the best. He can fill where needed. He's not our groups main damage dealer, but can effectively use a bow, or tank, or melee and kill. Archery style is often overlooked for a strength build, but with 7 feats, you can have a 16 dexterity coupled with archery. I can sword and board, but I can use that great sword as well. Sentinel, GWM, Shield Master. I can change before battle my layout. He's versatile. I can take advantage of terrain and just shoot arrows. That's powerful.

Yes, he loses damage out put to the others, but he can still do it all. Great number 2.

TopCheese

2015-10-03, 07:12 AM

See I don't think the exact number of DPR really matters, what really matters is the number of rounds it takes to kill something (on average).

So if you have 76 DPR and another has 70 DPR, that difference may not matter depending on the HP of the target. This assumes you are the only one damaging the target of course... Lets say the Rogue is picking a series of locks, the wizard is dealing with another creature and the cleric is talking to a deity to make sure that deity doesn't get involved.

If your target has 256 HP it would take the two DPRs above both an average of 3.xy rounds to kill it, round up to 4. Thus that 76 and 70 DPR, on average against that creature, is equal to each other.

Because there really isn't a bonus for bringing a creature down below 0 HP. Most enemies die at 0 HP unless you call a mercy hit or whatever.

So there would have to be a big enough difference in the DPR to make some seperation. Damage per round isn't what you need to finish with, Rounds Till Death is what you should look at. DPR is a part of it but it doesn't give you the entire picture.

I would say take the average HP per CR and compare it to classes at level 3, 5, 10, 15, and 20 (or whatever). Then find out how long it takes for those classes to kill the average HP.

If the average DPR for class A and B is 50 and 100 respectfully but the average HP of enemies is 40... Then they are equal to each other because on average they will kill a creature in one round. Just because B does 50 more points doesn't matter because on average dead is still dead. (I'm thinking A is a basic build and B is an optimized build... Kinda exaggerated, yes, but it gets the point across).

Kryx

2015-10-03, 08:05 AM

TopCheese

2015-10-03, 08:17 AM

Damage compared to average hp would have the same result as DPR. The DPR numbers would all be divided by the same hp.

I've never seen overkill type models. I doubt that they would be of too much use as you'd have to simulate other party members for it to be realistic. But maybe I'm wrong.

You can just assume other party members are busy with other tasks and the person you are looking at is tasked with keeping the enemy busy for however many rounds.

How many rounds does it take to kill the enemy?

If the DPR of two classes are close enough to keep it within the same number of rounds then that difference in DPR doesn't matter at all. On average at least.

76 DPR on average would be equal to 60 DPR because they both get the job done in the same amount of time (if they both killed the average creature in the same number of rounds). This would mean the class with the higher DPR actually had wasted damage and isn't very efficient with their abilities. As in, they are putting in more effort for the same result.

On average of course.

The difference in numbers don't matter until that range between number A and number B is high enough to change the outcome (and kill a creature 1 or more rounds faster on average).

If 71 DPR kills a creature in 2 rounds but 70 DPR kills the same creature in 3 rounds then you have a big enough difference between the two that it matters on average.

But if 71 and 70 DPR kills the creature in 2 rounds then there is effectively no difference between the two class's DPR.

Doing this you may find that sure, barbarian and fighter can do more average DPR, but having a sorcerer who has a bit lower DPR and a range of other options works just as well because that sorcerer can, on average, kill the same creatures in the same number of rounds and that effectively there is no difference between the fighter or barbarian and the sorcerer in terms of killing things.

On average.

Kryx

2015-10-03, 08:50 AM

76 DPR will be different from 60 in so many cases. Only in a limited amount of cases will it be the same effect.

300/76 = 3.9 rounds to kill
300/60 = 5 rounds to kill

The numbers are really the same, just a different way of looking at them. But rounding down and throwing away the rest is not the right way to do it.

On the topic of average HP: I think averages work great for AC, but not HP for the reasons mentioned in the post above.

GoodbyeSoberDay

2015-10-03, 08:56 AM

I'm always surprised that Mounted Combatant doesn't get more attention. It is a very nice feat both offensively and defensively. Advantage on attacks, and the opportunity to bring your warhorse into combat without getting it killed almost instantly, meaning that you can fight with a lance (d12 one-handed), can melee kite the enemy, and can even potentially have an extra one or even two attacks per round (one of them with a knockdown effect) if you have a mount which is intelligent enough to attack independently like a paladin's steed or a sufficiently-bright and -well-trained warhorse.

The main downside is that it doesn't work anywhere you can't bring your horse (or griffin), so no use in goblin tunnels or wizard's towers. And it only halfway works on Large enemies (gives defensive but not offensive benefits), although at least most Large enemies cannot go in places where you can't bring your horse.It's a very table-dependent feat, which makes it hard to theorycraft about on the boards. It ranges from the best feat in the game to "meh, situational," mostly based on how much time you spend inside and what type of enemies you face.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 11:03 AM

Trip: Is there something that prevents trip on monsters? I haven't noticed it.
Handful of times? It can be used 12 times per day, or 18 at higher levels. Even 12 is more than EK's 11 spells at 20.

Eh, seriously? Any creature bigger than Large ... which means that a lot of times when things get really serious, that's when your best trick goes bye-bye. Also any creature who is outright immune to the prone condition, if there are any.

Note that it also allows a Strength saving throw, so even Large or smaller enemies are effectively immune with a high enough Strength save bonus. Note also that it explicitly calls out "Large or smaller," which means that RAW, even if you become larger than Medium somehow, you still can't trip anything larger than Large.

The Battle Master Trip maneuver is also hilariously inferior to the Totem barbarian's Wolf totem version in every way except level at which you can acquire it, as the Totem version can be spammed as often as you land hits while in a Rage, has only the same limitations that the Battle Master version has in terms of which creatures can be affected, and doesn't even allow a save. Open Hand monks can also make enemies save or go prone far more times per day than a Battle Master can if they want to, and their version isn't even size-restricted. And finally, of course, there is the Shield Master feat, which is also blatantly superior to Trip for anyone willing to carry a shield, as it is infinitely spammable and only costs a bonus action.

But hey, at least you get an ability you can use only a few times before needing to take a Short Rest and that won't work at all on the really big enemies, such as most of the most dangerous ones in the game.

Spells can definitely provide utility, but I don't know of any EK spells that would stack up DPR. If there are ones better than trip please do point them out.
They can add some defense - shield being the best, but the rest is likely to be used on AoEs.

Why in the world would you cast AoEs? Maybe if there's a group of enemies really tightly clustered together ... personally, I'd say dump Int, boost Con instead, and ignore every spell that allows a save of any kind. You only get a few, so this won't be that difficult to manage. Focus on buffing and utility, and remember, you can grab a few wonderful gems when you get to the levels that allow you to pick from any school. You know, like Mirror Image? Or Fly? Or Haste? How about Greater Invisibility? Hey, I bet Haste might also help our DPR ... well, not initially, admittedly, but after the first four rounds (at which point we've caught up with and begin to pass all other fighters in terms of number of attacks delivered) it will. I wonder which combats would go beyond four rounds? Oh! Probably the hardest ones, where our ability to squeeze out the highest possible DPR matters the most, no?

Also, Haste provides magnificent battlefield mobility, a +2 bonus to AC, and advantage on Dexterity saving throws. In other words, it's a perfect spell to supercharge a fighter for the toughest battles.

Archers get +2 to hit to offset cover. If a group actually plays by the cover rules I would expect cover to be equal to 1.45 extra defense on average (Assuming cover is granted half the time and of that time 70% of the time it's half cover and 30% of the time it's 3/4 cover. See DMG 250 for how that is adjudicated)

Is this an awkward time to point out that archers don't actually have to attack from range? I mean, they can, and they often will, but they're free to get close if they want or need, and Crossbow Expert basically turns your ranged weapon into a melee weapon in every way except that you don't get Opportunity Attacks. Also, 5e is different in that you can move before, after, and even between attacks. Is the enemy really so entrenched that even with all of that, the archer can't reposition in order to get a shot off without being impacted by cover? Well, if so, then the meleers probably can't even reach that enemy at all.

In fact, the rules as written don't distinguish between applying cover to ranged or melee attacks. You can actually have cover against a melee attack! So the only difference between ranged and melee weapons here is that melee weapons can be used for OAs, while ranged weapons permit one to attack from much farther away at his or her discretion.

Oh, and also a +2 to attack forever, which is ridiculously superior to every other Combat Style option due to bounded accuracy.

They are better at higher level as well. They get 18 dice per day while an EK gets 11 spells.

You are assuming your DM grants you three Short Rests per day like clockwork, and you are also assuming that you manage to perfectly expend exactly all six Superiority Dice between rests. That's a lot of assuming. The latter assumption is probably easier to make true, but it's mostly made reliably true by immediately going nova the first time you can, which is not an efficient use of your abilities.

Furthermore, Superiority Dice have effects that last for, at most, into the next round. Spells that the Eldritch Knight will very likely want to cast can generate effects that last on the order of like an entire minute. And on top of that, the BM's maneuvers available to take are the same at 20th level as at 1st, while the EK gets access to increasingly more powerful spells. Both in terms of duration and in terms of power, the limited resources of a BM are in no way remotely as powerful or versatile as the limited resources of an EK.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 11:24 AM

I think some of your assumptions are a bit off. I recently re-calculated rounds/encounters and encounters/day and came up with 25.7 rounds per day according to the DMG xp guidlines. See my sheet for the math (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=2091322934). Assuming 600 rounds a day is not what the DMG recommends and shouldn't be considered. You also seem to ignore cover which I have calculated to be an average of 1.45 on average based on the DMG's cover rules (entirely depends on fight).

Of course I'm ignoring cover--it's a Sharpshooter, ignoring cover is kind of their thing.

I'm ignoring range as well, which tilts things in the Tripping Battlemaster's favor, since in reality he will lose rounds by not being in range of anybody.

It's ridiculous to assume a static number of rounds per day during analysis. I won't do that. You can analyze DPR within a particular round, or even better you can analyze whole-party loss ratios within a round, and those combined with enemy choices are what determine how many rounds of combat are in your day. Simple example: against a fire giant, who does more DPR?

Party A:
Sentinel + Defensive Duelist fighter 12 with rapier and shield and AC 21, spends his turns Dodging.
Crossbow Expert Sharpshooter fighter 12, spends his turns shooting at the giant

Party B:
GWM Battlemaster with a greatsword and AC 18
Another GWM Battlemaster with a greatsword and AC 18

Party A will undeniably do less DPR than Party B--but Party A is also undeniably better at fighting the fire giant. Taking 1/6 the damage means that Party B would have to inflict six times as much damage per round as Party A in order to be as good. B isn't inflicting anywhere near six times as much damage, it's more like 3 times as much (twice as many attackers, and each attacker is approx 50% more efficient) during nova rounds and 2 times as much after the nova ends. Party A ends with fewer resources expended and less damage taken than party B. So what if it takes twice as many rounds to finish the combat? There are cases where combat length matters ("you have thirty seconds to storm the guardbox before reinforcements get here"), but with 14,400 rounds in a day, it usually does not matter--and assuming a static 25 rounds per day leads to faulty analysis and faulty conclusions, and therefore faulty decisions.

And finally, of course, there is the Shield Master feat, which is also blatantly superior to Trip for anyone willing to carry a shield, as it is infinitely spammable and only costs a bonus action.

Shield Master is good, but it's not strictly superior to Trip. Trip has several advantages over Shield Master bashing: adds extra damage, can be attempted multiple times per round, combines with GWM for extra damage, and can be used on an opportunity attack for a lightweight Sentinel-type movement restriction.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 11:33 AM

Of course I'm ignoring cover--it's a Sharpshooter, ignoring cover is kind of their thing.

I'm ignoring range as well, which tilts things in the Tripping Battlemaster's favor, since in reality he will lose rounds by not being in range of anybody.

These are actually really good points that I didn't even factor in, and I had already concluded (even without considering them) that a ranged Eldritch Knight is, in terms of sheer optimization, probably overall superior to every other type of fighter.

From what I can see, if you want to go melee, the most optimal options are classes like paladin, barbarian, warlock (Pact of the Blade, obviously), monk ... basically every martial option except rogue and ranger. The Archery combat style is just too amazingly good unless you have some compelling reason not to use it (like Smites, Rage, etc.) ... or you really, really want to be a Sentinel and tank.

And if you do, Bearbarians still do that better anyway.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 11:40 AM

These are actually really good points that I didn't even factor in, and I had already concluded (even without considering them) that a ranged Eldritch Knight is, in terms of sheer optimization, probably overall superior to every other type of fighter.

From what I can see, if you want to go melee, the most optimal options are classes like paladin, barbarian, warlock (Pact of the Blade, obviously), monk ... basically every martial option except rogue and ranger. The Archery combat style is just too amazingly good unless you have some compelling reason not to use it (like Smites, Rage, etc.) ... or you really, really want to be a Sentinel and tank.

And if you do, Bearbarians still do that better anyway.

We have compatible playing styles it seems. I also think that Eldritch Knight is the best kind of fighter, and that a Eldritch Knight archer is the best kind of Eldritch Knight because of Shield/Absorb Elements/Expeditious Retreat/Counterspell/Magic Weapon/etc.

And yeah, GWM Polearm Master Barbearians are great for offensive melee, while Paladin/Sorcerers are great as defensive tanks with an offensive nova capability.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 11:50 AM

We have compatible playing styles it seems. I also think that Eldritch Knight is the best kind of fighter, and that a Eldritch Knight archer is the best kind of Eldritch Knight because of Shield/Absorb Elements/Expeditious Retreat/Counterspell/Magic Weapon/etc.

And yeah, GWM Polearm Master Barbearians are great for offensive melee, while Paladin/Sorcerers are great as defensive tanks with an offensive nova capability.

Agreed. One thing I think people fail to fully take into account is how huge a permanent +2 to hit is in 5e. To put it into perspective, in 3.x, a +5 weapon added an amount to your to-hit that was equivalent to 25% of a level 20 fighter's BAB (5 being 25% of 20, of course). In 5e, BAB has been replaced with your Proficiency bonus, which for all characters caps at just +6. A +2 to hit is equivalent to 33.3% of that number (or one-third)! In other words, the numbers for both to-hit and AC in 5e are so much smaller than in 3.x that a +2 to hit in 5e is much BIGGER than a +2 to hit was in 3.x. From a certain perspective, you can argue that it's a bigger boost to your accuracy in 5e than a +5 weapon was in 3.x!

In fact, this is exactly why some people complain that magic weapons granting from +1 to +3 actually break the system's bounded accuracy.

bid

2015-10-03, 01:09 PM

Oh, and also a +2 to attack forever, which is ridiculously superior to every other Combat Style option due to bounded accuracy.
That +2 cancels half-cover.

If you manage to position yourself correctly, you'll do 9.5 damage vs 11.5 from S&B which roughly cancels out if S&B hits on 9/20 while you hit on 11/20. If it's easier to hit, S&B come ahead.

No, archery come ahead because of SS, not before.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 01:47 PM

Agreed. One thing I think people fail to fully take into account is how huge a permanent +2 to hit is in 5e. To put it into perspective, in 3.x, a +5 weapon added an amount to your to-hit that was equivalent to 25% of a level 20 fighter's BAB (5 being 25% of 20, of course). In 5e, BAB has been replaced with your Proficiency bonus, which for all characters caps at just +6. A +2 to hit is equivalent to 33.3% of that number (or one-third)! In other words, the numbers for both to-hit and AC in 5e are so much smaller than in 3.x that a +2 to hit in 5e is much BIGGER than a +2 to hit was in 3.x. From a certain perspective, you can argue that it's a bigger boost to your accuracy in 5e than a +5 weapon was in 3.x!

In fact, this is exactly why some people complain that magic weapons granting from +1 to +3 actually break the system's bounded accuracy.

Personally, I feel that the biggest thing people fail to take into account is that ranged weaponry enables more sophisticated tactics, whether that is shooting from behind cover, utilizing terrain features like heavy obscurement and darkness, kiting or dispersing the party, or dividing the enemy to defeat them in detail. Every time I see "assume X rounds of combat per day" I die a little bit inside.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 02:21 PM

That +2 cancels half-cover.

If you manage to position yourself correctly, you'll do 9.5 damage vs 11.5 from S&B which roughly cancels out if S&B hits on 9/20 while you hit on 11/20. If it's easier to hit, S&B come ahead.

No, archery come ahead because of SS, not before.

It will never be easier for any kind of attack to hit than for archery because if the target has half cover, everyone is affected equally by it. Read the rules again: you can absolutely have cover against a melee attack!

Well, everyone is affect equally except Sharpshooters, who actually completely ignore everything up to and including three-quarters cover (and why would we ever not take Sharpshooter as an Archery fighting style fighter?), so really, archery actually pulls farther ahead over melee when you start considering cover.

So here, let's look at what Polearm Master plus Great Weapon Fighting has compared with Crossbow Expert plus Sharpshooter. Why those two, you ask? Because they both get a bonus action additional attack, and they both get the ability to take a -5 to attack to add +10 to damage. In short, they're the two choices with easily the highest DPS potential.

Given Jeremy Crawford's official ruling that you need a hand free to load your crossbow even though Crossbow Expert removes the loading property (and I actually agree with that ruling, incidentally), hand crossbow and shield is not an option, which is really good news for the halberd/glaive users, because that would just make things even more unfair. So that leaves us with this:

Great Weapon Fighting plus Polearm Master

- reroll 1s and 2s on damage rolls
- +2 average damage per attack (except the bonus action attack, which is actually at -1 average damage unless you happen to score a critical and trigger the Great Weapon Master bonus attack that round instead)
- OAs on enemies who enter your reach

Sharpshooter plus Crossbow Expert

- +2 to hit(!!!) ... with the way bounded accuracy works, this is HUGE!!!
- ignore all cover up to and including three-quarters (again, remember that melee can be affected by cover, but with Sharpshooter, ranged almost can't)
- attack from RANGE if you like, opening up considerably more tactical options ... but you're also free to shoot point-blank without penalty if the situation warrants it

Look, the reality is, +2 to hit blows the very slightly higher average damage per successful hit and the rerolls of 1s and 2s out of the water all by itself. Most of your damage is eventually coming from static bonuses anyway; the type of die you roll for damage is just icing. And that +2 to hit also translates into making the -5 to hit/+10 to damage option viable much more frequently, which translates into ... even more damage.

Cover, to the extent it's included, just widens the gap and puts ranged farther ahead, because melee can be impacted by cover as well, but Sharpshooters can't be unless it's total cover.

And all of that is without even considering the enormous advantages granted by wielding what is effectively, for all purposes except OAs, a reach weapon that has a 120-foot reach, or the fact that all else being equal, Dexterity is a better attribute than Strength for nearly all purposes.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 02:25 PM

Personally, I feel that the biggest thing people fail to take into account is that ranged weaponry enables more sophisticated tactics, whether that is shooting from behind cover, utilizing terrain features like heavy obscurement and darkness, kiting or dispersing the party, or dividing the enemy to defeat them in detail. Every time I see "assume X rounds of combat per day" I die a little bit inside.

Well, yes, and that's where the kind of thinking that goes on on these boards falls flat in actual play, because they're essentially acting as though every fight takes place in a tiny, featureless box (except when they start trying to add cover to claim that ranged falls behind, even though cover just tilts the scales even more in favor of ranged the way 5e works). In real play, combat is much more fluid and tactical.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 03:02 PM

Well, yes, and that's where the kind of thinking that goes on on these boards falls flat in actual play, because they're essentially acting as though every fight takes place in a tiny, featureless box (except when they start trying to add cover to claim that ranged falls behind, even though cover just tilts the scales even more in favor of ranged the way 5e works). In real play, combat is much more fluid and tactical.

What I'm afraid of is that their method of analysis may in fact reflect their gameplay. That kind of game would bore me to tears.

or the fact that all else being equal, Dexterity is a better attribute than Strength for nearly all purposes.

Now, this part I can't agree with. Dexterity is good for saves and initiative, but it turns out that Athletics is significantly better than Acrobatics in play due to Grappling/Pushing opportunities. I find that they both have a role.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 03:23 PM

Now, this part I can't agree with. Dexterity is good for saves and initiative, but it turns out that Athletics is significantly better than Acrobatics in play due to Grappling/Pushing opportunities. I find that they both have a role.

Grappling and pushing are effective, yes, but they're also very situational since they're completely ineffective against many enemies (including the toughest ones). Call it a bias (and it is), but I really dislike situational abilities unless I have so many of them that I can always find something useful (as with spells on a spellcaster).

Still, you do have a point. I just personally prefer "always on" benefits ... and Dexterity is better at providing those. As well, let's not forget that it also helps with Stealth, which is a very useful tool tactically even for those who aren't rogues.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 03:54 PM

Grappling and pushing are effective, yes, but they're also very situational since they're completely ineffective against many enemies (including the toughest ones). Call it a bias (and it is), but I really dislike situational abilities unless I have so many of them that I can always find something useful (as with spells on a spellcaster).

Still, you do have a point. I just personally prefer "always on" benefits ... and Dexterity is better at providing those. As well, let's not forget that it also helps with Stealth, which is a very useful tool tactically even for those who aren't rogues.

Good point about Stealth. I don't think I have ever created a 5E character without Stealth proficiency--it's just that useful.

The thing I've found surprising about grappling/pushing is how frequently situations come up where they are useful, particularly for a melee tank with ranged support. Example: I've got a platonic party that I use for tests, with three ranged-ish characters (well, the monk is more scout-specialized than combat-specialized, but she does prefer ranged combat) and a melee tank which is a Paladin of Devotion 7/Wild Sorc 4.

Recently, they fought two Chuuls and some lesser creatures in a chokepoint. After the lesser creatures were killed outside the chokepoint, the Chuuls failed a morale check and instead of fleeing, they went berserk and overran the paladin (Athletics opposed checks) and got within range of the wizard, who had been insufficiently cautious about keeping the range open given the terrain.

The wizard could have spent a spell slot and his concentration to Expeditous Retreat himself to safety, but the paladin was able to Grapple (Athletics again) either one or two of the Chuuls (I forget) long enough for the other PCs to get control of the situation and kill the Chuuls.

Things like that occur often enough for me to have changed my mind about the relative value of Strength and Dexterity.

Then there is the utility of Pushing a creature Prone so you can kite it more effectively; or Pushing something off a cliff face or into a Wall of Fire. 5d8 fire damage is often higher damage and more reliable damage than d8+5, and it also removes the creature from the battlefield temporarily, allowing you to defeat the enemy in detail. And naturally, 6d6 or 10d6 falling damage is even better--a party which is good at Athletics can arrange affairs such that their combats are more likely to take place on or near precipitous drops. Yes, it's situational, but the ability to treat certain situations as favorable is a distinct, non-situational advantage when it comes time to determine tactics.

bid

2015-10-03, 04:14 PM

It will never be easier for any kind of attack to hit than for archery because if the target has half cover, everyone is affected equally by it. Read the rules again: you can absolutely have cover against a melee attack!
Except that 90% of the time, the half-cover will be your melee pal getting in the way.

I notice you haven't said a thing about the +2 damage from dueling style. I guess you've conceded that point.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 04:17 PM

Except that 90% of the time, the half-cover will be your melee pal getting in the way.

Why would he do that? He doesn't care about clear lines of fire at all? He doesn't even care about getting accidentally shot? (DMG "hitting cover" rules.)

Or is he fighting in a chokepoint?

It's kind of a moot point though, since you and Nowhere Girl and I would all agree that Sharpshooter is a no-brainer for an archer if he has the option.

+2 damage from dueling style isn't terrible, but I personally prefer Defense for a melee character. It makes tanks better at their primary job, which is tanking.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 04:19 PM

Then there is the utility of Pushing a creature Prone so you can kite it more effectively; or Pushing something off a cliff face or into a Wall of Fire. 5d8 fire damage is often higher damage and more reliable damage than d8+5, and it also removes the creature from the battlefield temporarily, allowing you to defeat the enemy in detail. And naturally, 6d6 or 10d6 falling damage is even better--a party which is good at Athletics can arrange affairs such that their combats are more likely to take place on or near precipitous drops. Yes, it's situational, but the ability to treat certain situations as favorable is a distinct, non-situational advantage when it comes time to determine tactics.

You're not wrong by any means ... I just personally hate having abilities I can only use sometimes. It's a bias, and I know it is; I would never claim it's an entirely rational position.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 04:21 PM

Except that 90% of the time, the half-cover will be your melee pal getting in the way.

But since you're a Sharpshooter, you don't care.

It's a good thing you're not a meleer, because if the situation is such that you couldn't just step to the side to shoot around your melee pal, then you probably couldn't step around him to attack in melee either!

I notice you haven't said a thing about the +2 damage from dueling style. I guess you've conceded that point.

I didn't because +2 damage <<<<<<<< +2 to hit. Dueling style isn't useless, but the benefit it provides is still extremely inferior to the benefit provided by the Archery style.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 04:23 PM

Why would he do that? He doesn't care about clear lines of fire at all? He doesn't even care about getting accidentally shot? (DMG "hitting cover" rules.)

Or is he fighting in a chokepoint?

It's kind of a moot point though, since you and Nowhere Girl and I would all agree that Sharpshooter is a no-brainer for an archer if he has the option.

Exactly, and in the case of a chokepoint, the Sharpshooter is actually objectively superior because he/she can keep on attacking unhindered, whereas a melee character would be stuck unless perhaps using a reach weapon.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 04:30 PM

You're not wrong by any means ... I just personally hate having abilities I can only use sometimes. It's a bias, and I know it is; I would never claim it's an entirely rational position.

Fair enough. It would probably bug me if Grappling was all the paladin could do, as opposed to being one of twenty things he can do which ends up being useful four or five times out of twenty, more often than most of his other things.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 05:28 PM

Fair enough. It would probably bug me if Grappling was all the paladin could do, as opposed to being one of twenty things he can do which ends up being useful four or five times out of twenty, more often than most of his other things.

Admittedly, the "climb onto the back of an enemy" option in the DMG has potential to fill in the gap. I've even thought about whether it might be fun to try to do a Totem barbarian using just a single sword with the other hand free ... using that hand for grappling when fighting a small enough opponent and then instead using it for hanging on when fighting a much larger opponent. The final Eagle ability might be really nice for that, too, since it could be used to basically anime super leap onto the back of a gargantuan enemy, eliminating any "how are you getting all the way up there?" questions. Plus, that would be absolutely epic.

However, the actual efficacy of such a style would be very dependent on the DM, as in terms of just raw numbers in a vacuum, it would be quite inferior to the more traditional approaches. Theoretically, though, given a DM willing to work with it, I think it could be amazingly effective, as many enemies would struggle to be able to hit you at all if you're clinging to their backs, and we already know how good being able to grapple and shove prone someone is when that is an option.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 06:24 PM

Yeah. If one of my players said, "I want to climb on the dragon's back, right between the wings so it can't get at me easily," I'd say, "Sure. Opposed Athletics check, just like a Push prone. If you succeed he'll have disadvantage on attempts to bite you, but you automatically move where he moves as if he had grappled you." Seems fair, doesn't it?

But when I said "One of twenty things he can do," I meant that he has a lot of other options including Quickened Blur, Sanctuary, Thunderclap, hitting things with his Sacred Weapon, Fire Bolt, Turn Undead, sneaking, etc. He is already a versatile character so having good Athletics is another option he has, instead of the only trick he knows.

bid

2015-10-03, 06:42 PM

I didn't because +2 damage <<<<<<<< +2 to hit. Dueling style isn't useless, but the benefit it provides is still extremely inferior to the benefit provided by the Archery style.
And I just showed you that hitting 9/20 makes +2 damage just as good as +2 hit. I guess you must usually hit on 16+ to believe otherwise.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 06:53 PM

And I just showed you that hitting 9/20 makes +2 damage just as good as +2 hit. I guess you must usually hit on 16+ to believe otherwise.

Did you forget the part where Sharpshooter can trade attack bonus for extra damage? If the target is easy to hit ... -5 to hit for +10 to damage per attack. If the S&B fighter is hitting on a 9 or better for +2 damage, the Sharpshooter is now hitting on a 12 or better for +10 damage. Or whatever numbers. Take note: with the Archery combat style, the -5/+10 trade is effectively a -3/+10 trade. Great Weapon Fighters wish they had it this good.

No matter how you play with the math, when it comes to dps and tactical options on a fighter, Archery/Crossbow Expert/Sharpshooter is always going to be saying, "Anything you can do, I can do better."

bid

2015-10-03, 06:57 PM

Why would he do that? He doesn't care about clear lines of fire at all? He doesn't even care about getting accidentally shot? (DMG "hitting cover" rules.)
It's more that I don't believe in the existence of furniture.

It's kind of a moot point though, since you and Nowhere Girl and I would all agree that Sharpshooter is a no-brainer for an archer if he has the option.
He'd better have it. It's better than boosting Dex.

+2 damage from dueling style isn't terrible, but I personally prefer Defense for a melee character. It makes tanks better at their primary job, which is tanking.
That +1 AC can make miracle if your AC is capped and you manage to get hit less than 5/20. That +2 damage is better if you're getting hit too easily, race for the kill.

bid

2015-10-03, 06:59 PM

Did you forget the part where Sharpshooter can trade attack bonus for extra damage?
Hello! :smallannoyed: Did you read what I said: "No, archery come ahead because of SS, not before." ?

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 07:03 PM

Hello! :smallannoyed: Did you read what I said: "No, archery come ahead because of SS, not before." ?

Well then I'm not sure what your point is. Dueling gets a +2 to damage that will never match up to the +2 to attack because archers can trade attack bonus for twice as much damage back, decimating easy-to-hit targets.

Archery is better. On a fighter, unless you're trying to tank, Archery is always better. And, in fact, if you are trying to tank, barbarian is better.

MaxWilson

2015-10-03, 09:34 PM

Well then I'm not sure what your point is. Dueling gets a +2 to damage that will never match up to the +2 to attack because archers can trade attack bonus for twice as much damage back, decimating easy-to-hit targets.

Archery is better. On a fighter, unless you're trying to tank, Archery is always better. And, in fact, if you are trying to tank, barbarian is better.

I believe bid's point is that in a game where Sharpshooter is disallowed, Archery style is less advantageous relative to Dueling style. Which is absolutely true.

It's more that I don't believe in the existence of furniture.

Furniture should be more common in D&D than it generally is, especially outside Theatre of the Mind, but it would tilt the balance even further toward ranged weaponry because Sharpshooters will be unimpaired by melee warriors will be hampered in both mobility and attacks. Personally though I find the idea of kicking a desk in front of you and then fighting the guards over the top of it to be pretty cool.

djreynolds

2015-10-03, 10:15 PM

You know, I hate to say it. But I'm starting to really like the barbarian, if really for one reason.

He really doesn't need a shield. In fact, tactically he's better off. The fighter does. I'm sold.

Though I prefer one for shield master. This is the barbarians real strength. His damage reduction makes up for the shield loss, like a wash say. And RAW he can throw javelins and hand axes at targets as he moves to kill, and just carry his heavy weapon.

A fighter with a great sword just can't compete in soaking up damage and he really needs that shield. Now I don't know feat selections people are taking or if they use SPBI. But I don't know if the fighter can take the action to don or doff and shield in a fight with a barbarian and may have to go sword and board just off set the barbarian's damage out put.

So perhaps a fighter can do a lot of damage with a greatsword, but he can't make up for the damage loss and therefore must go sword and board, with duelist but more likely defense. And now it becomes a war of attrition with a barbarian. And that shield master, without a dip in rogue for expertise, becomes useless because of the barbarian's strength save and indomitable might.

You win. I'm sold. A straight up fighter can't match a barbarian DPR without facing potentially serious damage loss.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 10:16 PM

I believe bid's point is that in a game where Sharpshooter is disallowed, Archery style is less advantageous relative to Dueling style. Which is absolutely true.

Oh, well, yes. Removing feats changes a lot of things, definitely.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-03, 10:28 PM

You know, I hate to say it. But I'm starting to really like the barbarian, if really for one reason.

He really doesn't need a shield. In fact, tactically he's better off. The fighter does. I'm sold.

Oddly enough, I was just thinking (taking my thought before and slightly modifying it) of how effective it might be to be a barbarian with a shield and no weapon in the other hand.

Take the Tavern Brawler feat to start (turning your unarmed attacks into a d4 and your shield into an improvised d4 weapon), and then for enemies small enough to shove/grapple, start with a shove (with advantage on the check due to rage), then deliver a shield bash or punch/kick (with advantage due to prone enemy), then grapple as a bonus action (again, with advantage on the check due to rage). Subsequent turns become an exercise in basically holding the victim down and bashing his head in with your shield.

For enemies too large to grapple/shove, your free hand becomes the thing you use to hold onto their back while bashing them in the back with your shield instead! And since shields can be magical, if it's a game that will include enemies that can only be hurt by magical weapons, you'll eventually be able to get a shield that can hurt them. Plus, you get, you know ... the actual defense bonus from having a shield.

I'm just not sure how useful it would be in practice compared with just killing more quickly as a Polearm Master/Great Weapon Master, but it's an amusing idea all the same. Of course, you'd have to make sure to try to convince your DM to allow you to paint your shield red, white and blue with a white star in the middle.

djreynolds

2015-10-03, 10:34 PM

Mr Kryx is correct.

A fighter needs that shield to off set damage, unless he has access to stoneskin or something else.

A paladin can heal himself.

A barbarian can get by without one and therefore can inflict more damage. A fighter needs that shield or he better roll all 20's.

In a battle with a barbarian, a fighter may wish to bring a horse.

Citan

2015-10-04, 04:41 AM

Eh, seriously? Any creature bigger than Large ... which means that a lot of times when things get really serious, that's when your best trick goes bye-bye. Also any creature who is outright immune to the prone condition, if there are any.

Note that it also allows a Strength saving throw, so even Large or smaller enemies are effectively immune with a high enough Strength save bonus. Note also that it explicitly calls out "Large or smaller," which means that RAW, even if you become larger than Medium somehow, you still can't trip anything larger than Large.

(scrubbed the rest, too long post of ranting... Full post on previous page

Hi.
Well, what is certain is that you loathe Battlemaster.
But, hey, it's not because you don't know how to use it that it's bad you know (I'm joking)...
Discussion here has been focused on the Trip manoeuver, but many more can be used to good effects. You also tend to forget that their DC is based on STR or DEX, making them easily to max.

Sure, Eldricht Knight can be played with low INT, but that limits severely the choice of spells. Not that it's bad in itself (I tend to have the same strategy ;)), but still... And Haste is good obviously, but not before lvl 14. It's late, very late.

Also, theorycrafting is nice, but how many people will get to lvl20? For most people, it's much better to multiclass into a caster with their Fighter if they really want to play with spells (EK 11 / Caster 9). As a pure EK, 7 Mirror Image per day or 4 Haste a day is good indeed if you can manage all your fights casting only either. Chances are that you'll have to use other spells during an encounter, which makes slots depleting fast.

The Battlemaster manoeuvers can easily be all depleted before a short rest, without all spent in one turn. And some Manoeuvers may bring far more to the table if you have any strong hitter in your party.

Also, it seems logical to me to take into account 2 short rests per day. Sure, any DM has no obligation to respect that, but since we are all theorycrafting here, we have to find a common ground for hypothesis. So might as well follow the official advice. (Also, in my games, it's the PLAYERS who decide when to take short rests. Although the DM could prevent it if they are in unsecure area or the narration forces them to hurry on).

That makes 18 superiority dice per day, mind you. :)

As a side note, considering here again that the portion of characters going to 20 is very slim, taking three levels of Spell-less Hunter could bring more bang for the buck compared to straight BM20 (for Manoeuvers lovers). You get 8 dice per short rest and a 4rth attack which, while not as consistent as lvl 20 Fighter, should come online often enough into the thick of it. :)

(If the discussion was intended to focus only on pure classes, then obviously my arguments on dipping are void though.)

djreynolds

2015-10-04, 05:06 AM

But the barbarians ability to soak up damage is so impressive, its hard to imagine greatsword vs greatsword without the fighter taking too many hits and damage. And that indomitable strength is a real impressive class feature along with advantage to strength rolls while raging. I think you have to go sword and board, or as one suggested, resort to kiting with arrows or spells. Or a tactical advantage. But on even ground, it'd be tough. Be nice if superiority dice could affect strength saves or damage. But you need speed vs the barbarian, and he's already fast and can dash when needed.

Kryx

2015-10-04, 12:27 PM

Every time I see "assume X rounds of combat per day" I die a little bit inside.
On vacation so can only reply a bit, but you should read the DMG if this makes you queezy. There they provide the exact amount of encounters per day (6-8 medium/hard).

They also give xp budgets per day. Using those one only has to estimate how many of each encounter and rounds per encounter type (not difficult, I use 10% easy, 40 medium, 40 hard, 10 deadly based on the DMG suggestions. From there easy is 1-3 round, medium 3-5, hard 5-7, deadly 7-9). It's not difficult or magic, but nearly all 5e's balance system.
Even if you make different assumptions than mine your numbers would be nearly identical to mine. To be different you'd have to grossly mis-size rounds per encounter type or stray from the DMGs's medium/hard system.

Kryx is correct.

A fighter needs that shield to off set damage
I haven't said this. I've always said Fighter and Barbarian are nearly identical in DPR.

MaxWilson

2015-10-04, 01:08 PM

On vacation so can only reply a bit, but you should read the DMG if this makes you queezy. There they provide the exact amount of encounters per day (6-8 medium/hard).

The DMG says something more nuanced than you think it says. But that's a moot point because of the below:

They also give xp budgets per day. Using those one only has to estimate how many of each encounter and rounds per encounter type (not difficult, I use 10% easy, 40 medium, 40 hard, 10 deadly based on the DMG suggestions. From there easy is 1-3 round, medium 3-5, hard 5-7, deadly 7-9). It's not difficult or magic, but nearly all 5e's balance system.
Even if you make different assumptions than mine your numbers would be nearly identical to mine. To be different you'd have to grossly mis-size rounds per encounter type or stray from the DMGs's medium/hard system.

It's precisely the above assumption that makes me die a little inside whenever I see it. The clear implication is that the players in question are not using any kind of tactics whatsoever, are not adjusting to the situation, have no real agency or opt not to exercise it--they're just hammering straight ahead into melee and rolling attacks and damage every round. If your games are as simplistic as your analysis, I couldn't stand to play in them--or rather, I couldn't stand to play combat. They might be really fun on the social or exploration pillars, but when it comes to combat I'd be like, "Can you guys just roll my attacks for me while I go get a burger? Text me if I die."

I find play and counterplay interesting, and very often the tactics chosen will affect the length of the combat in a way that invalidates your assumptions above. I gave an illustration earlier of two parties fighting a fire giant; Party A has lower DPR than party B but performs far better with less resource expenditure. Other examples of tactics that affect combat length might include retreating from a barbarian to burn out his Rage; retreating from a spellcaster to wait out a Flaming Sphere; luring an opponent into a previously-identified trap; Polymorphing an opponent into a rat and saving it until you find another opponent to toss it toward before releasing the spell.

Though I prefer one for shield master. This is the barbarians real strength. His damage reduction makes up for the shield loss, like a wash say. And RAW he can throw javelins and hand axes at targets as he moves to kill, and just carry his heavy weapon.

A fighter with a great sword just can't compete in soaking up damage and he really needs that shield. Now I don't know feat selections people are taking or if they use SPBI. But I don't know if the fighter can take the action to don or doff and shield in a fight with a barbarian and may have to go sword and board just off set the barbarian's damage out put.

So perhaps a fighter can do a lot of damage with a greatsword, but he can't make up for the damage loss and therefore must go sword and board, with duelist but more likely defense. And now it becomes a war of attrition with a barbarian. And that shield master, without a dip in rogue for expertise, becomes useless because of the barbarian's strength save and indomitable might.

You win. I'm sold. A straight up fighter can't match a barbarian DPR without facing potentially serious damage loss.

Comment in passing about Shield Master: I think it would be cool if a Shield Master could don/doff his shield with his bonus action, just like Captain America, instead of a full action.

I think you're underestimating the fighter's durability. In order for the barbarian to match a GWM fighter's DPR, he relies on Rage and Reckless Attack. When he is using Reckless Attack, he takes far more damage in melee than the fighter does, which is partially or completely mitigated by Rage. Whether the barbarian or the fighter takes more damage in any given fight depends upon the details of that fight and whether the fighter is an Eldritch Knight. To use the example from earlier, a raging reckless AC 18 GWM Barbearian 12 takes about 20 points of damage per round from a Fire Giant (2x +11 for 6d6+7) while inflicting about 30 points of damage in return (26 without GWM), while a Blurred AC 18 Crossbow Expert Sharpshooter Eldritch Knight takes about 11.5 points of damage per round if he Shields or 27.5 if he does not (and he has Second Wind to negate the 17 points of damage) while inflicting 34 points of damage in return. Against foes with lower to-hit the analysis tilts sharply toward the Eldritch Knight: against 2 Hill Giants instead of 1 Fire Giant, the barbearian will about 43 damage while taking 16, while the Eldritch Knight will do 52 while taking 11 (or 3 if he bothers to Shield, but he shouldn't). Against foes with higher to-hit, or with non-AC-based attacks like a Red Dragon, the opposite will hold and the barbearian will have the advantage.

In short, they perform about the same, except that the Eldritch Knight has more tactical options, including taking partial cover, which will make the Fire Giant perform similarly to the Hill Giant, possibly decreasing the threat to a level where the Eldritch Knight will not even bother to expend Shields.

Kryx

2015-10-04, 03:19 PM

If you believe the numbers I provided do not represent an average then please do provide an average for each encounter type.
Though I'm pretty sure you'll just say "everyone plays differently". While that is true there is an expected average from the game.

If that is too much of a problem then I'm sure we can look at the adventures provided by 5e and direct how long given encounters would take.

As I've said before DPR on a round by round basis is meaningless as the classes with resources would easily outpace the ones without them. I was using that way before and it made the fighter appear nearly half as strong as he really is.

Xetheral

2015-10-04, 04:51 PM

They also give xp budgets per day. Using those one only has to estimate how many of each encounter and rounds per encounter type (not difficult, I use 10% easy, 40 medium, 40 hard, 10 deadly based on the DMG suggestions. From there easy is 1-3 round, medium 3-5, hard 5-7, deadly 7-9). It's not difficult or magic, but nearly all 5e's balance system.
Even if you make different assumptions than mine your numbers would be nearly identical to mine. To be different you'd have to grossly mis-size rounds per encounter type or stray from the DMGs's medium/hard system.

(Emphasis added.) The bolded claim can only be mathematically true if the variables "number of encounters per day" and "average length of encounters" are either uncorrelated or negatively correlated. If they are positively correlated then the standard deviation of the average number of combat rounds per day increases rapidly (i.e. the distribution becomes more flat), which will result in different assumptions leading to wildly different numbers.

Even if they are uncorrelated or negatively correlated, there are then still all the objections that MaxWilson brought up.

If you believe the numbers I provided do not represent an average then please do provide an average for each encounter type.
Though I'm pretty sure you'll just say "everyone plays differently". While that is true there is an expected average from the game.

If that is too much of a problem then I'm sure we can look at the adventures provided by 5e and direct how long given encounters would take.

An average that applies if you choose to follow the suggestions in the DMG is different than an expected average. Even if there were an expected average, that still doesn't make it a particularly useful figure. The average's utility for creating relevant DPR figures will depend entirely on the distribution. With a flat-enough distribution, knowing the average doesn't help much.

As I've said before DPR on a round by round basis is meaningless as the classes with resources would easily outpace the ones without them. I was using that way before and it made the fighter appear nearly half as strong as he really is.

It's fine to say that one model produces numbers that are off by a factor of 2 from the results of another model, but without data on actual play there is no empirical way to conclude which model more accurately reflects how strong the fighter "really is". (And of course, how strong the fighter "really is" is going to be characterized by a distribution, rather than just an average.)

Shojiteru

2015-10-04, 11:26 PM

The barbarian has a limited amount of rages before 20. Until then, they get only a few per long rest.. Long rest means they are useless most of the time. There bonus damage is about the same as dueling fighting style so not that big. Relentles attack means they are weak in defense. They are super MAD and need 5 ask to get 20 str, con and 18 dex, so they can't really max out. Armour is better since they can't keep up their dex and str. How do you they beat fighter? If they go all out, their defense drops drastically and if they up that, their offense is no where near good.
The same can be said about the fighter, however. To get best DPR, their both horrible defensively now but the extra feats, like Tough, that fighter can take can get him on par with Barbarian. He can't get that resistance but that's limited to a few minutes per long rest. Also, advantage for barbarian loses his defense a lot while it's not that hard to get advantage as long as you are in a party, which you should be and not solo, so that shouldn't be accounted for. They both could get it easy.
Also, GWM would mainly be for fighter, unless barbarian wants to drop dex then he is stuck in medium armour and then his AC would drop below Fighters until he gets to 20.
Before level 20, what features make barbarian good aside from rage, which is limited for long rests and HD which can be gotten via Tough?
I may seem biased, but I'm more curious and seeking enlightenment.
When barbarian is over fighter in DPR, is his defense over fighter at that point? When the barbarian is more tankier than fighter, is his offense suffering? How do you work around the extreme MAD of str, dex, con and sometime cha which intimidate and frighten want, making it even worse.
Using the 3 15s, wis, int, and cha are 8 making the barbarian truly a BSF while fighter can get all stats respectable, 10-12 while still maxing con and str and getting like 3 feats in.
Maybe I missed some things in the numbers and i'll go review them once again

MaxWilson

2015-10-04, 11:46 PM

If you believe the numbers I provided do not represent an average then please do provide an average for each encounter type. Though I'm pretty sure you'll just say "everyone plays differently". While that is true there is an expected average from the game.

You're inviting me to commit my own fallacies if I don't like yours?

No, I don't think so. Rounds per combat is an uninteresting and fallacious metric. Loss ratios are much better, especially if you compute them on a per-party basis. But you have to run a min/max algorithm (in the game theory sense, not the colloquial D&D sense of "min/max" as munchkinizer) in order to get conservative values--unless you're willing to assume that the monsters have a relatively fixed strategy and won't adapt to PC behavior, which is a good assumption for some monsters but not others.

I'm gradually working on a simulator though. Plugging in a party, a tactic, and a set of monsters will give you a more accurate read on party power than simplistic "rounds per combat" calculation ever will. If anyone is interested I'll share a link to it, maybe next weekend. Currently it's still not ready--I'm having trouble with the parser.

bid

2015-10-05, 12:24 AM

Also, GWM would mainly be for fighter, unless barbarian wants to drop dex then he is stuck in medium armour and then his AC would drop below Fighters until he gets to 20.
Medium armor is AC 17, which you can only reach with Dex14 Con20. And forget that if you find some magic armor.
Even if you cap Con and use a shield, you'd still have AC 21 unarmored, same as a +2 armor. You could just push to Dex16 which is enough for naked AC 20 and get MAM for magic armor.

Nah, you can easily start 16-14-16 and stay in medium armor, with 2 ASI to cap Str and none for Con it leaves enough for 3 feats. GWM and reckless are always on to clear mooks, you rage for boss fights only. Don a shield and stay reckless, you're getting 75% of the damage for a fighter which balances for that 1 AC difference out if you get hit 4/20. Anything more and you're ahead.

Shojiteru

2015-10-05, 03:09 AM

Medium armor is AC 17, which you can only reach with Dex14 Con20. And forget that if you find some magic armor.
Even if you cap Con and use a shield, you'd still have AC 21 unarmored, same as a +2 armor. You could just push to Dex16 which is enough for naked AC 20 and get MAM for magic armor.

Nah, you can easily start 16-14-16 and stay in medium armor, with 2 ASI to cap Str and none for Con it leaves enough for 3 feats. GWM and reckless are always on to clear mooks, you rage for boss fights only. Don a shield and stay reckless, you're getting 75% of the damage for a fighter which balances for that 1 AC difference out if you get hit 4/20. Anything more and you're ahead.

So getting the max AC of 24 without shield is pointless after all. The thing that you said, "you're getting 75% of the damage for a fighter which balances for that 1 AC difference out if you get hit 4/20" seems to imply that you get 75% damage for a mere 1 AC or instead you do 75% more while having 1 AC less. Assuming the former, 1 AC is worth 15% damage means that A is very important.
Sorry, its late and I haven't went to bed yet so I'm probably not reading properly.

I would probably want to max out con and dex and get Tough feat for ultimate tank. I would only do that if it's high level to get giant strength though, or atleast gauntlets sometimes in the future. Then run around unstoppable

bid

2015-10-05, 09:29 AM

The thing that you said, "you're getting 75% of the damage for a fighter which balances for that 1 AC difference out if you get hit 4/20" seems to imply that you get 75% damage for a mere 1 AC or instead you do 75% more while having 1 AC less. Assuming the former, 1 AC is worth 15% damage means that A is very important.
Sorry, its late and I haven't went to bed yet so I'm probably not reading properly.
Ok, that thing was confusing, it was late for me too ><
- rage resistance means you're getting 50% of the damage of a fighter of same AC
- reckless advantage means you're (for instance) going from 10/20 hit to 300/400 hit, 0.5 -> 0.75 = hit 50% more often
- overall, that's 50% * 1.5 = 75%

Now, assuming a monster does 20 damage per hit:
- fighter gets hit 10/20 for 10 damage average
- barbarian gets hit 10/20 -> 300/400 for 15 -> 7.5 damage average
(the 2 arrows are reckless giving advantage and resistance reducing damage)

Finding when +1 AC compensates for resistance + advatange:
- fighter gets hit 5/20 for 5 damage average
- barbarian gets hit 6/20 -> 204/400 for 10 -> 5 damage average

For instance, fighter AC 21 and reckless barbarian AC20 would receive the same damage vs monster hit +16. If the monster has a lower hit, fighter will receive more damage than the reckless barbarian.

MaxWilson

2015-10-06, 05:35 PM

For instance, fighter AC 21 and reckless barbarian AC20 would receive the same damage vs monster hit +16. If the monster has a lower hit, fighter will receive more damage than the reckless barbarian.

By "lower hit" you mean "lower target number," right? I.e. a higher to-hit bonus.

It takes a barbearian quite a long time to get up to AC 20 though. Likely no earlier than level 8, maybe level 12 if you spent your level 8 feat on GWM or Polearm Master.

The marginal value of +1 AC increases as the hit percentage shrinks--going from getting hit on a 13-20 to being hit on 15-20 is less valuable than going from 17-20 to 18-20. It's the same analysis you do when comparing Dodge to Blade Ward: Blade Ward is better against things that usually hit you already, and Barbearian resistance is the same way.

Fighters therefore take less damage against hordes, and barbarians take less damage against big single targets like dragons. (Although later on, fighters' extra attacks and feats give them some options that are good against big single targets, such as spending a couple of attacks to grapple/prone the target, and the barbarian is almost certain to have GWM which is good against hordes, so don't take that generalization more seriously than it's intended.)

endur

2015-10-06, 05:57 PM

This thread is of course literally true in that the average fighter will be carrying more gear (heavy armor, shield, more weapons) than the average barbarian.

The average barbarian should be a better swimmer, climber, etc. since they will be carrying less gear. :)

From a combat perspective, both the fighter and the barbarian have lots of interesting abilities. Have fun!

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-06, 06:30 PM

This thread is of course literally true in that the average fighter will be carrying more gear (heavy armor, shield, more weapons) than the average barbarian.

Well, but keep in mind that many more fighters will be prioritizing Dexterity over Strength compared with barbarians. This could tilt the scales the other way, as more muscle = more weight.

I submit that more research is needed before a definitive answer can be given to the important question of "which class literally weighs more?"

TopCheese

2015-10-06, 07:21 PM

Well, but keep in mind that many more fighters will be prioritizing Dexterity over Strength compared with barbarians. This could tilt the scales the other way, as more muscle = more weight.

I submit that more research is needed before a definitive answer can be given to the important question of "which class literally weighs more?"

But more Dex doesn't mean you don't have muscles. In order to be dexterous you need a good bit of muscle, look at Olympic athletes that perform feats of dexterity. Some of the best are absolutely ripped. Dexterity without the muscle to back it up is pointless.

Which is why I'm not a fan of how ability scores work in D&D, but whatever.

But regardless, the fighter wouldn't exactly be a string bean if they focused on dexterity.

Coidzor

2015-10-06, 08:09 PM

Well, but keep in mind that many more fighters will be prioritizing Dexterity over Strength compared with barbarians. This could tilt the scales the other way, as more muscle = more weight.

I submit that more research is needed before a definitive answer can be given to the important question of "which class literally weighs more?"

Racial demographics are also going to be important as well. The prominence of Goliaths, Half-Orcs, and Mountain Dwarves amongst the ranks of Barbarians may skew Barbarians towards higher biomass individuals than Fighters which have a number of options attracting Elves and other similarly lighter than average individuals.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-06, 08:52 PM

Racial demographics are also going to be important as well. The prominence of Goliaths, Half-Orcs, and Mountain Dwarves amongst the ranks of Barbarians may skew Barbarians towards higher biomass individuals than Fighters which have a number of options attracting Elves and other similarly lighter than average individuals.

The halflings especially will tend to skew the numbers heavily in the direction of lighter for fighters. Of course, halfling barbarians aren't impossible, but ...

Coidzor

2015-10-06, 10:03 PM

The halflings especially will tend to skew the numbers heavily in the direction of lighter for fighters. Of course, halfling barbarians aren't impossible, but ...

They'd probably tend to multiclass a little in order to pick up the TWF fighting style, yeah, though sword and boarding as a dexbarian is apparently also viable, IIRC.

Shojiteru

2015-10-06, 10:39 PM

As long as we know the monk is the lightest. No need for muscle when you have soft martial arts. They are superior to hard martial arts.

Mara

2015-10-06, 11:41 PM

As long as we know the monk is the lightest. No need for muscle when you have soft martial arts. They are superior to hard martial arts.Monks just have all pink tissue muscle.

djreynolds

2015-10-07, 01:10 AM

I hate to be wrong, just ask my ex-wife.

But in straight up duel, no multi-classing, I just don't think a fighter can go great-sword vs great-sword, vs a barbarian and come out victorious.

I love the champion and battle-master and the barbarian. I love martial characters.

A fighter is dependent on gear and the ability to change gear to the combat environment. And that's awesome, that's very fighter-esque. I love that. A fighter can take 3 ASI and 4 feats. Mounted combatant, Sharpshooter, great weapon master, and sentinel. No body else can do that and max out their attack stat.

But the barbarian can really get along with one feat and doesn't need a shield because of his damage reduction. And now he can pour all of his attack assets into one style of play. Two-handed weapon destruction.

A fighter can match him in DPR, but is out of his mind giving up his shield to go toe-to-toe. A fighter is not some crazy person, he is sound tactical master. A barbarian is halving damage, shield or no shield. A fighter can't do that. A fighter is reliant on tactics and feats and attrition. A straight fighter is going to have a tough time shoving around a barbarian, that's fact. He must tank up and wear the barbarian down slowly. And yes a sword and board fighter do this, but a not great sword fighter. That's why a fighter brought a shield and long sword along with his great sword and a crossbow and a pole-arm and horse.

Its just two styles of play. IMO, just have both on your team. They make good buddies. One of the fighter's greatest assets is his ability to easily multiclass. 14 champion and 6 rogue is an awesome build. Uncanny dodge in full plate. Expertise in athletics. Rapier and board. 3 attacks. Plenty of feats.

Also I have come to view dexterity in this fashion. Dexterity is muscle tone. Strength is power. Hand eye coordination is dependent on muscle tone, dexterity. So ripped muscle is tone and that's dexterity as well. And 8 is the new 10.

MeeposFire

2015-10-07, 01:21 AM

djreynolds

2015-10-07, 01:40 AM

I apologize if I did not make myself clear.

What I am saying is a great sword fighter will have a difficult time fighting a great sword barbarian, because a barbarian's damage reduction means he does not need a shield. A fighter has no way to cut his damage in half. A fighter needs that shield and therefore cannot keep up with the DPR of the barbarian without suffering lots of potential damage.

One is not better than the other, but in terms of DPR, the fighter loses to the barbarian because he's going to take a lot of damage. Both can hit hard with great sword along with rage, superiority dice, critical hits and advantage and all that. But a barbarian is halving that damage received. So as a fighter I would simply change out my gear and fight with a shield, and win by attrition.

Now obviously this is without multi-classing, magic items, changing rest periods, and enforced SPBI. And no help from colleagues. But a great sword or great axe barbarian can cause more DPR, IMO, simply because a fighter has no way mitigate damage done to him. That's at least the spirit of the thread. That though a fighter can lay down the smack with a great sword he would receive too much damage to make it a sensible course of action for himself.

I prefer and play a champion.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-07, 06:05 PM

Encounter days don't always follow encounter days. 1.5 would assume you have 2 encounter days every 3 days. That's even a bit much imo.
This also assumes no greater restoration from another party member.

The average (meaning it doesn't matter if you have none one day) is 6.5 encounters per adventuring day. That's more than enough to exhaust the Barbarian to death. Actually it's just not assuming spells are getting layered on each character. In the same way that I'm not assuming they're hasted, or have magic weapon, and so forth. It should not be assumed that there's a greater restoration just hanging around.

Please look at the sheet. The way you're wording your objections makes me think you haven't.
Frenzy isn't all the time. It is 24% of the time.

I know it's not all the time, I was demonstrating that. The Berserker needs the use of Frenzy (not just Rage) in order to reach competitive DPR levels, as Frenzy represents 33% of their DPR.

The AC provided in the DMG is the average AC for that CR. It is not the highest nor the lowest. It is not for the boss or the minion, but average.

Yeah, and a single encounter at 20 is more likely to feature something other than a single CR 20 creature. So the average AC of a CR 20 creature is for practical purposes, moot.

No, actually it's the best form of DPR besides Polearm+GWM which costs another feat and is generally only 5% better DPR. I've done the math that takes all resources into consideration. Offhand forum math won't be able to account for that.
Things that you have missed with your offhand forum math:
1.Chance to hit
2.Advantage to hit (Reckless Attacks)
3.-5/+10 (you seem to have +11 from somewhere, but stat + 10 would be ~13-15)
4.Rage (though maybe this is the 5+6=11)

Frenzy is actually closer to a 9% increase over and above the use of a polearm even if we work on the questionable assumption that hitting with the butt end constitutes the use of a heavy weapon per GWM, and it saves you a feat, of which a Barbarian only gets 5 and will have allocated 2 to increasing their starting 16 (assuming human) strength to 20.

A Barbarian doesn't accumulate exhaustion - that's the whole point!
And again, Frenzy is crap for DPR by RAW. It literally adds <5% DPR on Polearm and Polearm+GWM. It is inconsequential to the Barbarian vs Fighter debate.

Only in your pie in the sky hypothetical wherein the Barbarian somehow avoids almost all of the 6+ encounters per adventuring day.

Grappling and pushing are effective, yes, but they're also very situational since they're completely ineffective against many enemies (including the toughest ones). Call it a bias (and it is), but I really dislike situational abilities unless I have so many of them that I can always find something useful (as with spells on a spellcaster).

There's always the creative use of contests, climbing an enemy, etc...

Mr Kryx is correct.

A fighter needs that shield to off set damage, unless he has access to stoneskin or something else.

A paladin can heal himself.

A barbarian can get by without one and therefore can inflict more damage. A fighter needs that shield or he better roll all 20's.

In a battle with a barbarian, a fighter may wish to bring a horse.

A Barbarian AC can be: 19 (half plate + shield + 2 dex mod) or 24 (+5 dex mod, +7 con mod, +2 shield)
Unfortunately, the latter would require hitting stat cap in 2 stats, excluding their strength. With only 5 ASI, that isn't happening.
Variant Human for 16 con, 15 dex, 14 str would take 2 ASI for CON, 2.5 for Dex, leaving only .5 for Str.

So realistically, we're looking at anywhere between 17 and 19 AC on the Barbarian. If they go with GWM and Polearm Mastery we're looking at only 3 ASI for a total of +6 points which could get their str to 20 and their con to 17, leaving dex at 15 and their AC at 17 (no shield, wearing medium armor).

By comparison, the Fighter wearing plate has 18 AC. If they're a champion they're almost certainly going to have the +1 for wearing armor, taking them to 19. And because fighters have plenty of feats to spare, they'll probably pick up Heavy Armor mastery, reducing normal pierce/slash/bludgeon by 3. Not quite resistance, but it's something, especially when combined with Survivor which is ticking for 5-10 hp/round. (so, the Champion absorbs at least 13 hp per round, which is better than Resistance if an opponents attack deals less than 26 points of damage.

The Barbarian must use reckless attack to keep up their damage so they will also be suffering from opponents having advantage, the Fighter won't.

endur

2015-10-07, 07:08 PM

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-07, 07:19 PM

Exhaustion is so horrible that I think you either need to assume for comparison purposes that the barbarian didn't take frenzy, or compare the fighter against two barbarians, one with frenzy/exhaustion, and one without frenzy/exhaustion.

If your campaign includes one fight a day, and after the fight the day is over, frenzy is awesome.

Even if it does, I'm not actually sold on the idea that frenzy is all that amazing. It may be competitive at least then, but bearbarians are still rocking resistance to everything but psychic forever while wolf barbarians are granting permanent advantage to all of their melee allies ... and most of the benefits of frenzy (bonus action attack and even frequently reaction attack) can actually be gained via Polearm Master instead anyway. It's like totem barbarians are saying, "Cool story, bro. So I just took a feat and got almost all of your abilities."

Since most of your damage is coming from static bonuses and not your weapon damage die, you don't really lose a huge amount in the trade-off.

Oh, and then later on you can become able to see for a mile or track better than any ranger ever will, and later still, you can melee facehug enemies and force them to hit only you (or else just suck), knock down everything Large or smaller automatically forever, or ... fly. Like ... actually fly, because apparently you're so angry, even gravity isn't sure it wants to risk provoking you.

Honestly, even with the ridiculous exhaustion penalty removed entirely, I'm not sure I'd say berserker barbarians are all that great. Totem still seems a little more useful overall.

djreynolds

2015-10-08, 01:49 AM

But the thread isn't just about DPR, its about DPR.

There's no debate here about a fighter being better than a barbarian or vice versa, both serve different roles. Both are great. I had thread about the champion, I love the class. But a barbarian is two-handing his heavy weapon. A fighter may or may not be. Thus a barbarian will have an edge in DPR. Doesn't mean he is going to beat the fighter.

A fighter must use a shield because he lacks the damage reduction of the barbarian. Can he drop the shield? Sure he can, but he has no damage reduction. This is not about frenzy, I don't know anyone who uses that instead of the totems.
While raging a barbarian has resistance, not -3 to damage, but he is halving that damage.

I watched today as our group's barbarian ate up two critical hits and did not die. Perhaps a fighter's more probable higher AC would prevent this conversation, because he wouldn't get hit because he's long sword and shielding it and took the defensive fighting style and is wearing plate armor. Most fighters are using a shield, and should be, they cannot use GWM all that often versus high damage output enemy.

IMO, fighter uses tactics, surges, and attrition to win. A barbarian throws himself into battle. I hear the best way to kill a barbarian is, "Kill his buddies off and then kite him to death." Sounds like good advice.

Unless you dip rogue for expertise in athletics, and who would not, cause I always do, you not shoving around a barbarian. You're not tripping him, or disarming him. He's too strong. What you're doing is tanking up and taking hits until he slows down and ceases raging. At higher levels, he can rage a while. No one is trading great sword blows with a barbarian.

Now if you play with SPBI, most barbarian's will have to wear medium armor, but that will be half-plate which is as good as chain mail. Perhaps he will have one feat, GWM is my pick.

A fighter will have many feats for many combat environments. Ranged, melee, and mounted and perhaps sentinel and even shield master as well.

Both are great combatants, and I'll take both. My fighter will strike with advantage and my barbarian will tank. And if I can have a paladin in there as well, even better.

Kryx

2015-10-08, 07:11 AM

A fighter doesn't NEED a shield. A barbarian has damage reduction, but grants advantage on all attacks against him.

In practice those are likely equal.

broodax

2015-10-08, 08:07 AM

I don't think y'all (Vogon and Endur) have actually looked at the math yet. The math in Kyrx's sheet only has the barbarian using frenzy in 1.5 fights per day. You could argue, maybe, that he should be megaconservative and have the barbarian use only 1 per day. Heck, I'll check. Yep, still beats a fighter at only 1/day. But the point is that all of the arguments about frenzy only being on part of the time miss the fact that it's already taken into account and frenzy is a good, competitive choice.

That said, I think in any real game you absolutely don't take it, for all the reasons Nowhere Girl sites - but even without frenzy, the barb is still competitive.

Shojiteru

2015-10-08, 01:24 PM

Fighter can wear Armour of Invulnerability and get the reduction of a barbarian. For 10 minutes, get complete immunity. Sure this is unmagical, but with heavy armour master, tough, great weapon master, great weapon fighter, 20 str, 20 con, 19 AC, that fighter is doing damage and tanking at barbarian level.
Fighters' 2 extra feats can help even them out since barbarians have so much trouble trying to figure out if they should go offense, defense, or in between.
Sure frenzy may be good, but then that barbarian won't get the reduction of bear totem. The barbarian has to have a lot figured out before they even make their character while the fighter can figure it out along the way.
Barbarians are great and so are fighters. I think barbarians are a but too dependant on rage, which only lasts 1 minute. Without rage, they aren't impressive.

You should probably decide if you want to fight all throughout the battle, even long ones with chases and drawn out combat or time your moment properly to do all out. Reckless at the wrong time or rage too early and your screwed.

TopCheese

2015-10-08, 02:25 PM

Fwiffo86

2015-10-08, 03:35 PM

Coidzor

2015-10-08, 04:16 PM

TopCheese

2015-10-08, 04:22 PM

JoeJ

2015-10-08, 04:30 PM

Only to the extent of growing ability Scores as feats are optional.

Plus really all it shows that one class synergizes better with outside sources than another class. If any boost is coming from that outside source it still isn't the class that is doing it.

Synergizing well with certain feats is an ability of the class.

Shojiteru

2015-10-08, 04:40 PM

Has anyone attempted comparing the two without the use of feats/spells/magic items/etc?

Seems to me, that a feat that can be taken by both classes is essentially not helpful to the argument at all. Base the discussion on the only things that can't be shared, the actual class abilities instead.

Just a thought.

With just the class features, barbarian would probably do more in short encounters while fighter for the longer ones.
One of the fighters class features is his ability to get 2 extra as I than the barbarian while barbarian can barely get his state up. Looking only at the features, barbarian needs str, con, dex, and cha. You can ditch cha but dex is still needed. Ditch that too to wear armour and now you are more aai efficient at the cost of losing a base feature.
It seems they gave too much to the barbarian. Sure you a can focus on different aspects and they gave versatility, but they gave it in the limited space of their features. Fighter is versatile without losing their core stuff.
If they only a gave 1 or 2 cfighting style to fighter then you can use archery without the fighting style but having dueling would be pointless cause you don't want to use a sword.
I just feel they could have given barbarian versatility without making him choose " okay, I can wear medium armour or unarmoured. If I go in armoured, I need to dump str but wait, then I can't rage. I will go armoured and just ditch my core feature that should always be an option."

Who is laughing when caught with their pants down behind the bushes?

I like both classes, but barbarians need magic items to compete in some instances with fighter while it goes both ways. Both are good, barbarian just requires a bit more forethought and planning.

TopCheese

2015-10-08, 04:57 PM

Who is laughing when caught with their pants down behind the bushes?

Probabaly the fighter, my barbarians don't typically wear pants.

Shojiteru

2015-10-08, 08:04 PM

Probabaly the fighter, my barbarians don't typically wear pants.

That's cool, just don't walk into town or the first woman you meet will yell rapist.

djreynolds

2015-10-09, 01:22 AM

Resistance is so good... it is unfair. Action surge and critical hits, what if you roll all 5's. Resistance is half damage.

I like both classes. But I prefer fighter. But I also will always multi-class. Barbarian's capstone says wait, for a fighter after 12th level, it says become a rogue and get uncanny dodge and cunning action and expertise.

Both classes are great and everyone here is clearly looking for anything. You can't go wrong with these two classes.

When I discuss character's I'm assuming everyone is using standard point buy in, in that instance, a fighter is a beast.

A barbarian with SPBI is getting, IMO, one or possibly, maybe, two feats and the rest ASI. But his class features make up for that.

A fighter though is using 2 ASI (assuming a 16 in dex or str) and selecting 5 combat feats.

Those 5 feats allow me the ability to avoid fighting "here" and taking the fight to "there."

Meaning, I'm not going to play the barbarian's game. And I'm certainly not fighting solo anyhow.

Both classes rock, I prefer fighter/rogues myself.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-09, 06:35 AM

Even if it does, I'm not actually sold on the idea that frenzy is all that amazing. It may be competitive at least then, but bearbarians are still rocking resistance to everything but psychic forever while wolf barbarians are granting permanent advantage to all of their melee allies ... and most of the benefits of frenzy (bonus action attack and even frequently reaction attack) can actually be gained via Polearm Master instead anyway. It's like totem barbarians are saying, "Cool story, bro. So I just took a feat and got almost all of your abilities."

Since most of your damage is coming from static bonuses and not your weapon damage die, you don't really lose a huge amount in the trade-off.

Oh, and then later on you can become able to see for a mile or track better than any ranger ever will, and later still, you can melee facehug enemies and force them to hit only you (or else just suck), knock down everything Large or smaller automatically forever, or ... fly. Like ... actually fly, because apparently you're so angry, even gravity isn't sure it wants to risk provoking you.

Honestly, even with the ridiculous exhaustion penalty removed entirely, I'm not sure I'd say berserker barbarians are all that great. Totem still seems a little more useful overall.

The problem with Polearm Mastery reliance is that it drops your damage output (maybe not more than 9%, but still) and it requires a feat, which Barbarians really don't have to spare, either reducing their damage further or sacrificing defense.

A fighter doesn't NEED a shield. A barbarian has damage reduction, but grants advantage on all attacks against him.

In practice those are likely equal.

Well, the tradeoff is technically that the Barbarian gets advantage and suffers disadvantage. If the additional damage incurred > additional damage output, it's a net loss; if they're equal, it's a wash (although it still might be worth doing if it means ending the fight earlier for some reason).

I don't think y'all (Vogon and Endur) have actually looked at the math yet. The math in Kyrx's sheet only has the barbarian using frenzy in 1.5 fights per day. You could argue, maybe, that he should be megaconservative and have the barbarian use only 1 per day. Heck, I'll check. Yep, still beats a fighter at only 1/day. But the point is that all of the arguments about frenzy only being on part of the time miss the fact that it's already taken into account and frenzy is a good, competitive choice.

That said, I think in any real game you absolutely don't take it, for all the reasons Nowhere Girl sites - but even without frenzy, the barb is still competitive.

You can't use .5 of a Frenzy. Either he uses 1 and, so long as he gets a long rest in, it's a wash or he uses 2 and accumulates exhaustion which leads to disadvantage on attack rolls down the line, severely cutting damage. In either case, your assumption is that the Barbarian always has advantage and that the Fighter never has advantage. If the Fighter has advantage, his output then well exceeds the Barbarian.

TopCheese

2015-10-09, 07:15 AM

That's cool, just don't walk into town or the first woman you meet will yell rapist.

That has so many bad sexist stereotypes that it isn't even funny.

Edit: better tell Tarzan that wearing a loin cloth makes him a rapist.

Fwiffo86

2015-10-09, 08:45 AM

There is that. But there's also the bit where a Fighter is a bit less MAD than a barbarian, at least potentially, and gets more opportunities to grab feats faster, so the differences in ability score priorities and amount/rate of ASI accrual is probably relevant to at least some extent.

I look at it this way (since we don't play with feats in the first place at our table) the additional ASI are a huge factor for the warrior. Sure, the barbarian gets damage resistance, but when you can max multiple stats with ease, have extra attacks over all (again, because attacks aren't being mutated by feats) the fighter wins out for me.

Damage resistance is nice, but in the case of reckless attack, you are reducing incoming damage overall I suppose, but also increasing the likelyhood of crits. To what extent, I can't say, largely because I don't feel napkin math is worth doing. I would say that the increased crit chance is at least somewhat comparable to the damage resistance gained from having a shield.

Personally, I feel the best defense is to not get hit in the first place. I put my chips in with higher AC (in some cases MUCH higher) than with damage resistance on an encounter counter.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-09, 09:06 AM

The problem with Polearm Mastery reliance is that it drops your damage output (maybe not more than 9%, but still) and it requires a feat, which Barbarians really don't have to spare, either reducing damage further or sacrificing defense.

It's really not a huge loss overall. A variant human can snag Polearm Mastery and Great Weapon Master and still have enough left to max Str and Con by 20. Sure, there is a minor DPS loss, but the gains are pretty enormous given everything totem offers.

And I am not even taking into account exhaustion. Even if berserkers didn't have that to deal with, they wouldn't necessarily be a better choice. WITH it, they are just crap, and I can't take seriously any comparison of fighter and barbarian that uses a RAW berserker barbarian because even a relatively mediocre fighter is probably better overall in actual play than an optimized berserker.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 10:13 AM

That has so many bad sexist stereotypes that it isn't even funny.

Edit: better tell Tarzan that wearing a loin cloth makes him a rapist.

It's not really sexist if it is true and Tarzan.. Yea, I assume he is one because well.. Monkeys are in general and he was raised by them. I doubt an ape would ask permission...

Mara

2015-10-09, 10:18 AM

It's not really sexist if it is true and Tarzan.. Yea, I assume he is one because well.. Monkeys are in general and he was raised by them. I doubt an ape would ask permission...

Tarzan was a masterpiece of offensive content. The movie and TV adaptations did not convey the author's intended message. Do not assume that that is a bad thing.

Coidzor

2015-10-09, 10:19 AM

It's not really sexist if it is true and Tarzan.. Yea, I assume he is one because well.. Monkeys are in general and he was raised by them. I doubt an ape would ask permission...

How you run your games is on you. Also, monkeys and apes are not the same thing.

Further, read some Edgar Rice Burroughs.

Kryx

2015-10-09, 10:45 AM

You can't use .5 of a Frenzy.
If you're going to argue on and on please read what you're responding to. Frenzy adds next to no damage for Polearm and Polearm+GWM. It doesn't matter. At all.

Beyond that if you do care about the 5% boost from frenzy then 1.5 is an average that assumes not every day is a combat day. If every day is a combat day for you then take away the .5. Though as said above next to nothing changes.

Now I would recommend as a houserule to let frenzy be taken without the bonus action cost. I have it on my houserules part and it makes frenzy actually a good build.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 11:27 AM

Tarzan was a masterpiece of offensive content. The movie and TV adaptations did not convey the author's intended message. Do not assume that that is a bad thing.

Are you saying a man raised in the wild would have the notion of consent that one in a city would? I doubt he would court her rather than take her is all. Animals rape when compared to human standards.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 11:29 AM

How you run your games is on you. Also, monkeys and apes are not the same thing.

Further, read some Edgar Rice Burroughs.

They are both animals so I don't see the difference. You can say dog 1 is different from dog 2 but that is just to be the guy who likes saying everything is different.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 11:31 AM

If you're going to argue on and on please read what you're responding to. Frenzy adds next to no damage for Polearm and Polearm+GWM. It doesn't matter. At all.

Beyond that if you do care about the 5% boost from frenzy then 1.5 is an average that assumes not every day is a combat day. If every day is a combat day for you then take away the .5. Though as said above next to nothing changes.

Now I would recommend as a houserule to let frenzy be taken without the bonus action cost. I have it on my houserules part and it makes frenzy actually a good build.

Isn't it sort of a problem when you have to use house rules just to make something a good build? Not a specific target toward frenzy, which I see as stupid unless you know for sure you will be resting after the combat and without that knowledge it should never be used. Instead, just some classes in general. A lot of things need house rule to be effective... Like a trident for example

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-09, 12:06 PM

They are both animals so I don't see the difference. You can say dog 1 is different from dog 2 but that is just to be the guy who likes saying everything is different.

The difference is rather more stark than the difference between dogs. The term "ape" refers to hominoids, including gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans but also humans. "Monkey" refers to, well ... monkeys, which are primates but not hominoids.

Simply put, all dogs are dogs (despite how they may differ from one another), but no monkeys are apes.

However, unless you're an anthropologist, I wouldn't necessarily actually expect you to be aware of this distinction (though if you were and still didn't know, I'd be positively horrified), so I'm mostly just replying to clarify what the previous poster meant.

Nowhere Girl

2015-10-09, 12:18 PM

Isn't it sort of a problem when you have to use house rules just to make something a good build? Not a specific target toward frenzy, which I see as stupid unless you know for sure you will be resting after the combat and without that knowledge it should never be used. Instead, just some classes in general. A lot of things need house rule to be effective... Like a trident for example

Wild mages are problematic as well, especially since WotC decided to stick in the errata a clause that prevents them from even trying to use their metamagic to soften the impact of a bad wild surge result.

As a general rule, if a class punishes you for using its core mechanic and/or actively tries to kill you and/or your allies when you use its abilities, I consider that class fundamentally broken. Berserkers and wild mages aren't just bad. Elements monks are bad. Berserkers and wild mages are broken. They don't work.

Yes, you can play one and muddle through (provided you don't actually cause a TPK in the case of the wild mage, which is entirely possible), but they're designed in a way that makes them fundamentally self-destructive, and that is just poor game design.

Fwiffo86

2015-10-09, 12:21 PM

Wild mages are problematic as well, especially since WotC decided to stick in the errata a clause that prevents them from even trying to use their metamagic to soften the impact of a bad wild surge result.

As a general rule, if a class punishes you for using its core mechanic and/or actively tries to kill you and/or your allies when you use its abilities, I consider that class fundamentally broken. Berserkers and wild mages aren't just bad. Elements monks are bad. Berserkers and wild mages are broken. They don't work.

Yes, you can play one and muddle through (provided you don't actually cause a TPK in the case of the wild mage, which is entirely possible), but they're designed in a way that makes them fundamentally self-destructive, and that is just poor game design.

Please provide a possible example of a Wild Surge TPK. I have thus far seen absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. It is my understanding that by the time you make rolls that "could" cause damage, your HP/Level is more than adequate to soak.

Theodoxus

2015-10-09, 12:53 PM

Berserkers... are broken. They don't work.

Just curious if you've actually played one, or just arm chair quarterbacking a theorycrafted build?

I only ask because I'm playing one. I use Frenzy sparingly, but I do use it. I have PAM & GWM, I'm playing a SPBI H-Orc. I've found that while the bonus attack proccing from GWM is decently often, and PAM's bonus attack is ok - when facing a boss/sub-boss - when their minions are wiped out - turning on Frenzy has allowed me to one shot a sub-boss and severely cripple a boss.

Sure, the lack of party assisting abilities that Totem brings are probably being missed, but when our arcane support (Bard and Wizard) were missing from our last session, I turned the tide and kept a TPK from occurring (much to the mild consternation of the DM).

As for building to maximizing stats, I don't see the need. We're in a magic-item-less campaign. We have healing pots, and that's about it. Bounded Accuracy alleviates the need to maximize your stats. If we had magic items around, getting a belt of strength or some magic armor, or even a magic polearm would skew the need to ASIs even more towards feats.

That's my experience, anyway - I mean, anecdotal stories can't beat theorycrafting, I know, but someone should try to speak truth to power...

CoggieRagabash

2015-10-09, 01:11 PM

Please provide a possible example of a Wild Surge TPK. I have thus far seen absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. It is my understanding that by the time you make rolls that "could" cause damage, your HP/Level is more than adequate to soak.

From my recent adventures as a third level wild magic sorcerer, I was primed for a wild magic surge thanks to an earlier use of Tides of Chaos, but we got ambushed by some foes in a narrow hallway. I deemed casting a spell now to be an acceptable risk to smooth out the encounter, since most of the wild magic table is relatively harmless, completely aesthetic or even helpful. By God my GM decided to call in that Tides of Chaos favor, and I managed to roll the 2% chance to drop a fireball. 33 damage to four of our level three babies. Those who didn't save dropped, and those who managed their saves were knocked down pretty much immediately by enemies following up.

Fortunately there were another two members who hadn't got hit who managed to somehow hold the line long enough to get someone back up and turn it around. But it very easily could have gone the other way with one more poor roll, to be honest.

The party enforced a 20 yard buffer between my character and the rest of the party for casting the rest of the campaign. :smallredface:

JoeJ

2015-10-09, 01:13 PM

Please provide a possible example of a Wild Surge TPK. I have thus far seen absolutely no evidence to back up this claim. It is my understanding that by the time you make rolls that "could" cause damage, your HP/Level is more than adequate to soak.

I haven't seen anyone play a Wild Magic Sorcerer at all, but the surge table includes casing Fireball centered on yourself, casting Confusion centered on yourself, doing 1d10 necrotic damage to everybody within 30 feet, and giving everybody within 30 feet vulnerability to piercing damage for the next minute. At higher levels any of these should be survivable, but at first level they could easily be killers.

JoeJ

2015-10-09, 01:23 PM

A lot of things need house rule to be effective... Like a trident for example

How exactly is a trident not effective? Are spears also not effective?

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-09, 03:33 PM

It's really not a huge loss overall. A variant human can snag Polearm Mastery and Great Weapon Master and still have enough left to max Str and Con by 20. Sure, there is a minor DPS loss, but the gains are pretty enormous given everything Totem offers.

And I am not even taking into account exhaustion. Even if berserkers didn't have that to deal with, they wouldn't necessarily be a better choice. WITH it, they are just crap, and I can't take seriously any comparison of fighter and barbarian that uses a RAW berserker barbarian because even a relatively mediocre fighter is probably better overall in actual play than an optimized berserker.

Yes, that is a variant. And they could only get both to 20 if they used all 5 ASI. (2 ASI for 16 to 20 and 2.5 for 15 to 20), leaving their dex at 14 (max ac...still 17).

If you're going to argue on and on please read what you're responding to. Frenzy adds next to no damage for Polearm and Polearm+GWM. It doesn't matter. At all.

Beyond that if you do care about the 5% boost from frenzy then 1.5 is an average that assumes not every day is a combat day. If every day is a combat day for you then take away the .5. Though as said above next to nothing changes.

Now I would recommend as a houserule to let frenzy be taken without the bonus action cost. I have it on my houserules part and it makes frenzy actually a good build.

Don't tell me I didn't read the post, I read it, it was nonsensical for the reason given.

Frenzy is a 9% dpr boost over Polearm Master, not 5%.

The huge benefit of Frenzy is that the character gets two attacks with a 2 handed weapon at level 3, everyone else is waiting to level 5.

A lot of things need house rule to be effective... Like a trident for example

The purpose of the trident is that it requires Martial weapon proficiency to use well, whereas the almost identical Spear can be used by anyone with Simple weapon proficiency. The importance of this is that it allows the DM to seed weapons that only those with martial weapon proficiency can use effectively (i.e. in a Gladiatorial Arena style situation). It also has some side benefits: A target is less likely able to throw a thrown trident back at you with proficiency (many targets could throw spears well), same if disarmed, the person who disarms you is less likely to be able to use the weapon against you.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 03:50 PM

How exactly is a trident not effective? Are spears also not effective?

Spears are very effective for a monk. Those who get proficiency in martial weapons would use something like a longsword. Why use a trident when you can use a spear? Aside from flavour, it being martial should make it better than a simple weapon. I know that's not how it was intended, but in what case would you pick a trident over any other martial weapon? Like the net and whip, some weapons should be made more appealing to pick outside aquaman, dominatrix, and anyone who fights weakling where weapons are prohibited

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 03:55 PM

The purpose of the trident is that it requires Martial weapon proficiency to use well, whereas the almost identical Spear can be used by anyone with Simple weapon proficiency. The importance of this is that it allows the DM to seed weapons that only those with martial weapon proficiency can use effectively (i.e. in a Gladiatorial Arena style situation). It also has some side benefits: A target is less likely able to throw a thrown trident back at you with proficiency (many targets could throw spears well), same if disarmed, the person who disarms you is less likely to be able to use the weapon against you.

If you put it that way, you shouldn't throw your weapon in the first place if you think they would throw it back cause going the extra 20 feet to hit would be better, unless you carry multiple weapons. After being thrown, you should take out your secondary weapon and close the gap so range is no longer needed. If disarmed, again, backup weapon. I don't know why they would use a weapon like that against you unless they have daggers and are unable to have a d5 weapon themselves. Otherwise, disarm then kick away so you have no weapons and have to suffer OA to get your weapon back, disarm them, or fight bare handed.

JoeJ

2015-10-09, 04:01 PM

Spears are very effective for a monk. Those who get proficiency in martial weapons would use something like a longsword. Why use a trident when you can use a spear? Aside from flavour, it being martial should make it better than a simple weapon. I know that's not how it was intended, but in what case would you pick a trident over any other martial weapon? Like the net and whip, some weapons should be made more appealing to pick outside aquaman, dominatrix, and anyone who fights weakling where weapons are prohibited

Look at it from a simulationist perspective, not a gamist one. You'd pick some weapons only if you're going for style over combat effectiveness. The net and trident combination is straight up inferior to pretty much any military weapon ever, because it were intended for entertainment, not warfare.

Shojiteru

2015-10-09, 04:02 PM

The difference is rather more stark than the difference between dogs. The term "ape" refers to hominoids, including gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans but also humans. "Monkey" refers to, well ... monkeys, which are primates but not hominoids.

Simply put, all dogs are dogs (despite how they may differ from one another), but no monkeys are apes.

However, unless you're an anthropologist, I wouldn't necessarily actually expect you to be aware of this distinction (though if you were and still didn't know, I'd be positively horrified), so I'm mostly just replying to clarify what the previous poster meant.

There are differences sure but that doesn't mean they are that big. A cat can be similar to a dog and have more similarities than another dog. That's not the point. An ape and a monkey are commonly mistaken for each other and used interchangeably in everyday speak. Only those who care about proper use of words would actively fight to stop all misuses. That would be high impossible though as old habits die hard and would need to only teach it to children so in decades, everyone speaks properly. Other than that, it's pointless to point out obvious differences. I may say who when I mean whom and I know it's wrong and unless you're a teacher, there is no reason to correct it.

Fwiffo86

2015-10-09, 05:26 PM

From my recent adventures as a third level wild magic sorcerer, I was primed for a wild magic surge thanks to an earlier use of Tides of Chaos, but we got ambushed by some foes in a narrow hallway. I deemed casting a spell now to be an acceptable risk to smooth out the encounter, since most of the wild magic table is relatively harmless, completely aesthetic or even helpful. By God my GM decided to call in that Tides of Chaos favor, and I managed to roll the 2% chance to drop a fireball. 33 damage to four of our level three babies. Those who didn't save dropped, and those who managed their saves were knocked down pretty much immediately by enemies following up.

Fortunately there were another two members who hadn't got hit who managed to somehow hold the line long enough to get someone back up and turn it around. But it very easily could have gone the other way with one more poor roll, to be honest.

The party enforced a 20 yard buffer between my character and the rest of the party for casting the rest of the campaign. :smallredface:

This is interesting, but it is not a TPK. As near as I can figure, none of the party were permanently extinguished. Am I correct? This was survived by more than one character, with some completely unharmed. This is not what I was looking for, though highly entertaining.

MaxWilson

2015-10-09, 10:25 PM

Tarzan was a masterpiece of offensive content. The movie and TV adaptations did not convey the author's intended message. Do not assume that that is a bad thing.

Vile slander. (Well, libel anyway.) Tarzan had a very uplifting message, especially the end. "My mother was an ape."

Wild mages are problematic as well, especially since WotC decided to stick in the errata a clause that prevents them from even trying to use their metamagic to soften the impact of a bad wild surge result.

You do realize there's nothing to prevent you from Counterspelling a wild surge, right? You can Counterspell yourself if a wild surge makes you cast Fireball.

I find that paladin/wild mage is a pretty sweet combination for a party tank. Fantastic saves, paladin spells that don't cause surges, free advantage from Tides of Chaos, and if a Fireball does go off when you Shield, hey, free Fireball! It won't hurt your fellow PCs but it will hurt the enemy. There are some other surge results that can potentially hurt, such as Polymorph into a potted plant, but 1.) you can Counterspell them, and you can also use Tides of Chaos to resist with advantage; 2.) that's why you have party-mates. One of them can Dispel, or grab the potted plant and retreat.

SharkForce

2015-10-09, 11:01 PM

There are differences sure but that doesn't mean they are that big. A cat can be similar to a dog and have more similarities than another dog. That's not the point. An ape and a monkey are commonly mistaken for each other and used interchangeably in everyday speak. Only those who care about proper use of words would actively fight to stop all misuses. That would be high impossible though as old habits die hard and would need to only teach it to children so in decades, everyone speaks properly. Other than that, it's pointless to point out obvious differences. I may say who when I mean whom and I know it's wrong and unless you're a teacher, there is no reason to correct it.

behold, i give you the key to discerning whether something is a monkey or an ape:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--szrOHtR6U

(a bit silly, to say the least, but safe, as long as you are in a place where watching videos in general is not going to be a problem).

bid

2015-10-09, 11:34 PM

behold, i give you the key to discerning whether something is a monkey or an ape:
So a cat is not an ape, and it never asks for permission. Maybe it's a monkey?

And Tarzan's mother having a tail is slander.

Shojiteru

2015-10-10, 10:08 AM

Vile slander. (Well, libel anyway.) Tarzan had a very uplifting message, especially the end. "My mother was an ape."

You do realize there's nothing to prevent you from Counterspelling a wild surge, right? You can Counterspell yourself if a wild surge makes you cast Fireball.

I find that paladin/wild mage is a pretty sweet combination for a party tank. Fantastic saves, paladin spells that don't cause surges, free advantage from Tides of Chaos, and if a Fireball does go off when you Shield, hey, free Fireball! It won't hurt your fellow PCs but it will hurt the enemy. There are some other surge results that can potentially hurt, such as Polymorph into a potted plant, but 1.) you can Counterspell them, and you can also use Tides of Chaos to resist with advantage; 2.) that's why you have party-mates. One of them can Dispel, or grab the potted plant and retreat.

I believe the problem is when multiclass is needed to make the original class work. Why need to go palidin to make wild surge good? Btw, if you need to hse 2 spell slots to hse 1 spell, it is horrible. Wwhat if you don't have level 3 spells yet? If a level 1 party had that problem, a single fireball would kill them all, half damage or not. Personally, if a wild mage was in my party, they are to remain 60 feet away from us at all time or we may just kill him because he would be purposefully endangering the entire party. That's how the characters would see it. Why else would you cast a spell, knowingly risking the lives of your comrades to cast a single spell? Unless we go against a threat more dangerous than you, dont cast no spells ever.

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-10, 03:37 PM

Look at it from a simulationist perspective, not a gamist one. You'd pick some weapons only if you're going for style over combat effectiveness. The net and trident combination is straight up inferior to pretty much any military weapon ever, because it were intended for entertainment, not warfare.

From a simulationist perspective, a spear should be one of the better weapons in the game. I have never understood why spears have always been such a undervalued weapon in D&D. I think it's all the "Conan" influence.

JoeJ

2015-10-10, 04:01 PM

From a simulationist perspective, a spear should be one of the better weapons in the game. I have never understood why spears have always been such a undervalued weapon in D&D. I think it's all the "Conan" influence.

It is one of the better weapons in the game. It does good damage, it can be wielded with either one or two hands (so it can be paired with a shield), and it can be thrown. And they're inexpensive, too. The only melee weapons that are better are those that require advanced training to use (i.e. martial weapons).

MaxWilson

2015-10-10, 05:07 PM

I believe the problem is when multiclass is needed to make the original class work. Why need to go palidin to make wild surge good? Btw, if you need to hse 2 spell slots to hse 1 spell, it is horrible. Wwhat if you don't have level 3 spells yet? If a level 1 party had that problem, a single fireball would kill them all, half damage or not. Personally, if a wild mage was in my party, they are to remain 60 feet away from us at all time or we may just kill him because he would be purposefully endangering the entire party. That's how the characters would see it. Why else would you cast a spell, knowingly risking the lives of your comrades to cast a single spell? Unless we go against a threat more dangerous than you, dont cast no spells ever.

There's a big difference between "I need to use two spell slots to use one spell [every time]" and "2% of the time I need to use two spell slots for one spell, if I've used Tides of Chaos recently and am therefore guaranteed a wild surge, if the situation is such that I absolutely cannot risk turning into a potted plant for a fraction of a second." It's just really not a big deal in practice, and in the rare cases where it would be a big deal, spell slot economy is probably not the biggest worry on your mind.

Kill your fellow PCs if that floats your boat, but my experience with paladin/wild sorcs is that they more than pull their own weight. At my table, the paladorc is a good candidate for MVP. ("Unfortunately" so is everyone else. So hard to decide.) That came as a surprise to me because initially I thought the party was just fine with three PCs, but he has added quite a lot of goodness.

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-10, 05:23 PM

It is one of the better weapons in the game. It does good damage, it can be wielded with either one or two hands (so it can be paired with a shield), and it can be thrown. And they're inexpensive, too. The only melee weapons that are better are those that require advanced training to use (i.e. martial weapons).

At best, a spear is a mediocre weapon in D&D, even when compared to other simple weapons.

A spear does the same damage as a quarterstaff even though it has a steel point at one end. But with a quarterstaff you get an advantage with the Pole Arm Master feat. From a simulationist point of view, that's bull@#$%.

The great club also does the same two hand damage as a spear - 1d8. In the real world a wooden staff or club is not going to pierce steel armor. A steel tipped spear will. But D&D simplistic combat system can't model that.

MaxWilson

2015-10-10, 05:31 PM

The great club also does the same two hand damage as a spear - 1d8. In the real world a wooden staff or club is not going to pierce steel armor. A steel tipped spear will. But D&D simplistic combat system can't model that.

Also in the real world, you don't need to pierce armor to hurt the person wearing it. Blunt trauma happens.

Coidzor

2015-10-10, 05:33 PM

JoeJ

2015-10-10, 05:35 PM

At best, a spear is a mediocre weapon in D&D, even when compared to other simple weapons.

A spear does the same damage as a quarterstaff even though it has a steel point at one end. But with a quarterstaff you get an advantage with the Pole Arm Master feat. From a simulationist point of view, that's bull@#$%.

And the reason you can't decide not to use the point and say that your spear is now a quarterstaff is, what now?

But regardless, if you have a feat you've got advanced training, or the equivalent. You can also probably use a sword, or cast a spell.

The great club also does the same two hand damage as a spear - 1d8. In the real world a wooden staff or club is not going to pierce steel armor. A steel tipped spear will. But D&D simplistic combat system can't model that.

A greatclub can only be used with two hands, and it can't be thrown. And in the real world, it's quite possible to batter somebody to death without ever piercing their armor. D&D simplistic combat system models that aspect of battle just fine.

Coidzor

2015-10-10, 05:39 PM

And the reason you can't decide not to use the point and say that your spear is now a quarterstaff is, what now?

Usually the DM, I should think.

JoeJ

2015-10-10, 05:44 PM

Usually the DM, I should think.

If you bash somebody with a spear instead of stabbing them, how is that not a quarterstaff? That's how I'd rule, anyway, and I can't imagine why any other DM would have a problem with it.

Coidzor

2015-10-10, 05:50 PM

If you bash somebody with a spear instead of stabbing them, how is that not a quarterstaff? That's how I'd rule, anyway, and I can't imagine why any other DM would have a problem with it.

How many of them would invoke the improvised weapon rules, though?

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-10, 06:16 PM

Yeah, spears not benefiting from pole arm mastery and versatile weapons not benefiting from great weapon mastery are definitely head-scratchers.

Separating spears from longspears and just making the latter into pikes was a good thought on their part, though.

Versatile weapons do benefit from the fighting style, however

MeeposFire

2015-10-10, 06:19 PM

Versatile weapons do benefit from the fighting style, however

Technically the cleave like aspect of the feat works with all weapons and the power attack could work with a onehanded weapon if it just so happens to get the heavy quality.

Coidzor

2015-10-10, 07:13 PM

Versatile weapons do benefit from the fighting style, however

That merely exacerbates the head-scratchitude rather than mollifying it.

Shojiteru

2015-10-10, 07:16 PM

There's a big difference between "I need to use two spell slots to use one spell [every time]" and "2% of the time I need to use two spell slots for one spell, if I've used Tides of Chaos recently and am therefore guaranteed a wild surge, if the situation is such that I absolutely cannot risk turning into a potted plant for a fraction of a second." It's just really not a big deal in practice, and in the rare cases where it would be a big deal, spell slot economy is probably not the biggest worry on your mind.

Kill your fellow PCs if that floats your boat, but my experience with paladin/wild sorcs is that they more than pull their own weight. At my table, the paladorc is a good candidate for MVP. ("Unfortunately" so is everyone else. So hard to decide.) That came as a surprise to me because initially I thought the party was just fine with three PCs, but he has added quite a lot of goodness.

They are multiclassed though and are good. Single classed would be different. You dont have the features of your other class. I assumed sorcers were wildely accepted as bad. A wizard or bard can be better sorcers than a sorcer. They get 15 spells and a bard can get 8 of those and just call himself a sorcer. Metamagic isnt that useful when only having so few points. I admit i neclver played one and though i thought a dragon one would make a cool off tank maybe since i never looked into it. The other classes do sorcerer better than sorcerer.

Maybe its just biased and too much time reading forums. I still think wild mage would be funny for someone who is really unlucky but in actual play, i see no reason not to put a restraini g order on the wild mage or kill him out of anger because he killed a few pcs and forced the rest of you to retreat. He may do it himself thougb and turn into a potted plant in the middle of fighting the boss.

Shojiteru

2015-10-10, 07:21 PM

I admit wild sorcerer can be fun rp wise if your party is tolerate, i still say in no way is frenzy ever worth it unless you metagame and get the dm to tell you when you have the last encounter for the day or second to last so you know when you can frenzy. Elemental monk is still just a normal monk with maybe 1 or 2 spells happening per day so you can still do the other class feature. Might aswell get magic initiate or multi class to be a better element monk than the elemental monk.

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-10, 08:14 PM

And in the real world, it's quite possible to batter somebody to death without ever piercing their armor. D&D simplistic combat system models that aspect of battle just fine.

No.

Do an experiment for me. Go get a hammer and a hardhat. Put on the hardhat and have someone hit you repeatedly on the top of the head with the hammer. You will be fine.

Now remove the hardhat and have him hit you once. Let me know what your medical bill is.

And this is a steel hammer versus a plastic hard hat.

Now imagine a wooden club versus a steel helmet...

JoeJ

2015-10-10, 08:32 PM

MaxWilson

2015-10-10, 09:33 PM

No.

Do an experiment for me. Go get a hammer and a hardhat. Put on the hardhat and have someone hit you repeatedly on the top of the head with the hammer. You will be fine.

...no. No, you will not.

While hardhats provide the best hope of protection from TBI, they can’t protect you if you don’t wear them at all times or if you wear an inferior or damaged hardhat. Sometimes TBIs [traumatic brain injuries] happen even though someone is wearing proper head protection, much in the same way football players can sustain a concussion despite wearing protective helmets.

The construction industry is one of the most dangerous work environments. A study of U.S. workplace-related TBIs published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found the construction industry had the highest number of TBIs on the job.

Doof

2015-10-10, 10:29 PM

No.

Do an experiment for me. Go get a hammer and a hardhat. Put on the hardhat and have someone hit you repeatedly on the top of the head with the hammer. You will be fine.

Now remove the hardhat and have him hit you once. Let me know what your medical bill is.

And this is a steel hammer versus a plastic hard hat.

Now imagine a wooden club versus a steel helmet...

I think you're really mixing up the real world analogy with how Armor is handled in D&D. The complete protection that your hardhat provides is NOT represented by how much damage weapons do to your head, but by the Armor Class that reduces the frequency of effective hits landing on the head.

Therefore, a wooden greatclub should do the same range of damage upon landing a successful hit whether the target wears a full plate armour or buck naked.

edit: not same damage but same 'range of' damage

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-10, 11:32 PM

And then go look up the word "mace" in the dictionary.

Oh... so suddenly we are talking about a steel headed mace instead of a wooden great club. The fact you had to change weapons kind of proves my point about a wooden staff/club in the real world being weaker than a steel tipped spear.

Well, as I am sure you know, a medieval steel headed mace had 4 or 6 flanges on it. Each flange came to a point. This focused the force of the blow on the point to either pierce the armor or cause a deep enough inset in the steel to contact the skull beneath the helmet.

Same thing with a real war hammer, not a fantasy one. The business end of a medieval war hammer was the spike.

Either weapon is not a true blunt weapon the way a club or a maul is.

D&D combat system has always been very poor at modelling the effect of armor. Armor in D&D just makes it harder "to hit" your opponent. In the real world, someone wearing full 15th century full plate would be very easy to hit because the wearer can't move quickly. But the armor makes it harder to do damage cushioning blows and protecting the skin.

Which is why in D&D, a quarterstaff is a better weapon than a spear. In the real world, the opposite is true.

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-10, 11:45 PM

...no. No, you will not.

I am a roofer. Hardhats work. I have seen pieces of a chimney fall two stories and bounce off a hardhat with no damage to the wearer. An everyday hammer is not going to fracture it or cause the suspension to fail.

JoeJ

2015-10-10, 11:46 PM

Oh... so suddenly we are talking about a steel headed mace instead of a wooden great club. The fact you had to change weapons kind of proves my point about a wooden staff/club in the real world being weaker than a steel tipped spear.

Then go look up war club. As for being weaker than a spear, you're going to more evidence than just your assertion.

Well, as I am sure you know, a medieval steel headed mace had 4 or 6 flanges on it. Each flange came to a point. This focused the force of the blow on the point to either pierce the armor or cause a deep enough inset in the steel to contact the skull beneath the helmet.

Some did. Others didn't.

Which is why in D&D, a quarterstaff is a better weapon than a spear. In the real world, the opposite is true.

And your evidence for this supposed superiority?

napoleon_in_rag

2015-10-11, 12:13 AM

And your evidence for this supposed superiority?

Well, to make a spear, you take a staff and add a point to it. If a staff was better, no one would take the time to do this.

Maybe the fact that every army from the stone age onward used a type of spear as a weapon. If you consider a musket with a bayonet as a type of spear, its use continued into the 19th century.

Do you have any evidence that a staff is better?

JoeJ

2015-10-11, 12:18 AM

Well, to make a spear, you take a staff and add a point to it. If a staff was better, no one would take the time to do this.

Maybe the fact that every army from the stone age onward used a type of spear as a weapon. If you consider a musket with a bayonet as a type of spear, its use continued into the 19th century.

Do you have any evidence that a staff is better?

Did I say it was better? You're the one who claimed a staff is better than a spear, not me.

djreynolds

2015-10-11, 12:37 AM

In D&D a quarterstaff qualifies for all elements of the pole arm master feat. A pike qualifies for just one. A quarter-staff is also a monks weapon. All quarterstaff, can be cheesed with a shield because it is versatile, and benefit from pole arm master while being wielded one-handed.

Quarter-staff is clearly better than a spear or trident in 5E.

It sucks, its cheesy but its RAW and RAI for most players, who cares really.

I allow the spear or trident if used to get the reach opportunity attack of the pole arm master feat, just like the pike qualifies for.
And if you can use the quarterstaff and get this and a quarterstaff with a shield and get this, then I allow the spear and trident.

I do not allow the quarterstaff used one-handed with a shield to benefit from the bonus 1d4 strike, IMO, you must use the weapon two handed to achieve this with your primary attack being slashing or a blunt swing in nature and the bonus attack blunt but obviously in slashing movement. Otherwise the pike would get this and it does not because its only "attack" is piercing. I have been watching pole-arm fighting, and there 500 videos of a guy doing it 500 different ways... plenty of evidence for it or against it.

Now let's be reasonable, if you want to use the butt of your spear go ahead, if you want to use the side of your pike to simulate the blade of glaive, for obviously a decreased damage die, then go ahead. I don't care. Its all obviously silly and needs to be reworked and it has not been done. But the guys on this forum are level headed and always give good advice.

Now if your telling me you quarterstaff can be used like a helicopter, I will just have to kill you off in the game.

You are the DM, and its your game. If you think it works then it does, if not, then it doesn't. If half your table is going to walk because they cannot play Doc Holiday with hand crossbows, then you may have to allow it for that game and just give monsters resistance to piercing damage.

If you allow a quarterstaff with shield to get all the benefits of pole-arm master, then I cannot see why you can't allow the spear or trident.

JoeJ

2015-10-11, 01:31 AM

Coidzor

2015-10-11, 02:45 AM

if your DM is not hung up on RAW instead of RAF.

In that case the DM in question would be even weirder if they did that but didn't just fix the feat in the first place.

djreynolds

2015-10-11, 02:56 AM

No disagreement there. But in our little world of D&D, the quarter-staff is powerful.

Which sucks because some many players want to player the iconic Spartan? If they want to say that, that a long spear is a pike... fine. But allowing a player to use a quarter staff and shield and pole arm master, than a spear that is versatile should benefit as well. Even a trident. Many of the feats just need to be re-written or RAI by a level-headed DM and gamers.

But quarter-staff is abused at lower levels, at higher levels its all a wash.

Buy using a spear or trident with crossbow master, I'm assuming to negate the disadvantage is a nice perk.

But the strength of the spear is that it is in between a pike and javelin, can be used one or two handed and thrown. But should benefit from reach if quarterstaff does.

I find if the player defends the concept with of fighting with a shield and quarter staff, and its not just a means to use shillelagh and their casting stat to attack, go ahead fine.

If player comes to me and says I want to play "300" and fight spear and shield and use pole arm master, cool, but sell me on it first. And if I say your a fighter or paladin, you can only wear breast plate or lower (no half-plate) and if ranger or barbarian you can wear light armor only or hide, is that worth it to you. Does that sacrifice seem fair for the benefit? Does it fit the visual you're looking for?

Shojiteru

2015-10-12, 09:49 AM

The spear is the father of all weapons and the quarterstaff the grandfather. A spear is the ultimate weapon no matter what. They are preffered in almost every from of combat. Knights used spears just like samurai. No matter what part of the world you are in you will find spears.

Quarterstaff is inferior. The spear can do everything a quarterstaff can do and more.

Btw a hard hat is no where near a steel helmt. A hardhat is the helmt of modern meaning it is more advanced. A medieval helmet would vibrate with yournhead inside and give you concussions. Metal armour is to stop blades and sharp objects. A smack with a log would be like having a trashcan put over your head then hitting the trashcan. Vibrations to your ears make you lose balance and hearing and blurs vision while making your brain hit the edges of your skull. Seriously. Do a google search before saying a hardhat is less protective than a steel helmet when not talking about hitting someone in the face/neck.

Give me a hammer vs someone in a steel helmet and hard hat. Ill hit the helmet and get visibly nowhere. Ill hit the hardhat in the face and laugh. Hat vs helmet.

Mara

2015-10-12, 10:01 AM

The spear is just better in the PH.

With advanced training you can use the more balanced quarterstaff to greater effect.

Via improvised weapon rules you could also use a spear as a quarterstaff if the DM is willing.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-12, 11:20 AM

That merely exacerbates the head-scratchitude rather than mollifying it.

I like to think of it as a feature, perhaps that's an oversight, or perhaps GWM takes advantage of the weight of the weapon. You could always tweet Crawford and ask why they were included for the fighting style but not also the feat

Coidzor

2015-10-12, 10:30 PM

I like to think of it as a feature, perhaps that's an oversight, or perhaps GWM takes advantage of the weight of the weapon. You could always tweet Crawford and ask why they were included for the fighting style but not also the feat

I doubt that tweets would be a good medium for any answer that doesn't amount to a nonanswer in that case.

Mato

2015-10-12, 10:36 PM

JoeJ

2015-10-12, 11:05 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLX5Z7vBafc

That's fine, except that the D&D quarterstaff includes more than just the heavy European quarterstaff. The Japanese bo staff, which is, if anything, lighter than many spears, is also a "quarterstaff" by the rules (DMG p. 41).

Kane0

2015-10-13, 12:29 AM

recapdrake

2015-10-13, 01:05 AM

*Steps into barbarian vs fighter damage thread*
*Sees bickering over the value of spears vs quarterstaves*

Why are you people not using mauls, greataxes and greatswords? If your weapon of choice does not provoke humorous compensation jokes, why is your warrior in possession of it?
This is D&D people! This high fantasy game cares not for your assertions that a pointy stick is better than a blunt stick! If his stick is better than your stick, then you need a bigger stick!

Yeah I'm just as confused as you are mate, shall we attempt to get back on subject everyone?

In all seriousness though I have no clue how Champion fighter doesn't beat out frenzy raging barbarian. Also really really don't know why OP was even looking at armor class in any way whatsoever while building with DPR in mind like savage attacker probably could have been taken rather than some of those points in dex.

Kryx

2015-10-13, 01:31 AM

In all seriousness though I have no clue how Champion fighter doesn't beat out frenzy raging barbarian.
Because a Champion Fighter only really gets crit chance which is horrible in comparison to superiority dice uses like trip.

Coidzor

2015-10-13, 01:57 AM

Theodoxus

2015-10-13, 02:11 PM

Because a Champion Fighter only really gets crit chance which is horrible in comparison to superiority dice uses like trip.

I'd rather recklessly attack than hope for a trip.

So, just curious. If the BBEG was a Berserker Barbarian (built as a PC), would you rather face him one v one as a Fighter (any archetype) or a Barbarian (either type).

If he was a fighter? I'm assuming the premise of the OP was about PvP... or perhaps personal preference, I'm not sure. I do know, having played both a BM Fighter and a Berserker Barbarian, I like both, they're both fun and competitive, can shine in a party full of arcane casters and provide hilarity. The barbarian hits a lot harder, the BM provided a lot more party utility (of course, they were built to do different things - which is my point. Either outshines the other, depending on what you build them to do - just as neither outshines the other... If it weren't so, they're be no need for two separate classes...

MaxWilson

2015-10-14, 01:47 AM

Because a Champion Fighter only really gets crit chance which is horrible in comparison to superiority dice uses like trip.

A good house rule for Champions: their bonus to Athletics is cumulative with Athletics proficiency. That way it is basically half-Expertise, and quite good for jumping/grappling/etc.

I'd rather recklessly attack than hope for a trip.

So, just curious. If the BBEG was a Berserker Barbarian (built as a PC), would you rather face him one v one as a Fighter (any archetype) or a Barbarian (either type).

Eldritch Knight, of course. Expeditious Retreat + Sharpshooter + Shield >> Rage + Frenzy + Advantage.

djreynolds

2015-10-14, 03:05 AM

The power of the barbarian is while raging they have resistance to all damage from slashing, blunt, piercing. That's half. It includes the critical hits of his enemy. At 20th, if this where the fight is, his rage is unlimited. I would not take frenzy, I would take totem. Bear at 3 may ruin the use of that flaming sword. Bear at 6. Wolf totem at 14 allows a shove with no save if the attack hits. A champion or battle-master may trip, but the barbarian can use his strength score (which could be RAI 24 at 20th level) to avoid most of these attempts and he has advantage on strength checks.

Now a champion's 18th level survivor is powerful and always working, but is it enough to eat-up the damage out put of the barbarian. And a barbarian can choose whether or not to come out of rage at 20th, and can go down to 1 hit point.

So in the end it will come down to DPR, and IMO, the fighter is best served with a shield, to benefit from the +2 AC making the barbarian's GWM -7/+10 in essence, and shield master to hopefully prone the barbarian (which is almost a "critical hit" to beat the barbarian's indomitable might) and increase his chance to land a critical hit with advantage. The battle-master's 5 superiority dice will dry up quickly in this fight.

Also in this battle, a fighter's feat selection would be changed up for me with two crazy feats that I would never select nor recommend. Athletics, not really the best feat, could prove beneficial in recovering from the barbarian's shove. I would fight sword and rapier, with strength, and grab defensive duelist and hopefully the DM would allow it as RAI, and once a turn I could add +6 to my AC for one attack.

But a champion must "turtle" in this fight and hope that his critical hits are enough. The battle-master's 5 dice could dry up and there's no guarantee that he can trip the barbarian.

Vogonjeltz

2015-10-15, 12:57 AM