High Level Play- Lack of Damage Scaling/Sluggfest Query

[Haldir]

I have recently come out of retirement for a 5e VOIP game using roll20. I am a veteran and longtime fan of 3.5, and I humbly entreat the Playground for its opinion on the lack of damage scaling compared to HP scaling.

The 5e system very much lacks options for damage to increase, other than on spells and classes that grant extra attacks. Yet health still scales very much with levels. I'm running a sharpshooter cleric who pumped Dex and Wis, and for this first game I was overwhelmingly useful to the party.

Is this going to fall off? Is the constant added hitdice going to turn the game into a sluggfest where I am pounding out attack roll after attack roll just to knock off minions? The character is designed to eventually transition into a primary caster, but I still worry about the dynamics of the game being... let's say... tedious for attacking characters who rely on their weapons.

[Ninja_Prawn]

other than on spells and classes that grant extra attacks.

...So, everyone? It's also worth bearing in mind that monster AC doesn't really scale - at high levels you should be hitting a lot more often.


I'm running a sharpshooter cleric who pumped Dex and Wis, and for this first game I was overwhelmingly useful to the party.

Is this going to fall off?

Probably a bit. I've never played at high level, but cleric is not supposed to be king of DPR and there should come a point where the 'patches' that keep you competitive (such as sharpshooter) start to run out. I am under the impression that fighters and warlocks are supposed to provide the best at-will DPR at very high levels.

[MrFahrenheit]

I have recently come out of retirement for a 5e VOIP game using roll20. I am a veteran and longtime fan of 3.5, and I humbly entreat the Playground for its opinion on the lack of damage scaling compared to HP scaling.

The 5e system very much lacks options for damage to increase, other than on spells and classes that grant extra attacks. Yet health still scales very much with levels. I'm running a sharpshooter cleric who pumped Dex and Wis, and for this first game I was overwhelmingly useful to the party.

Is this going to fall off? Is the constant added hitdice going to turn the game into a sluggfest where I am pounding out attack roll after attack roll just to knock off minions? The character is designed to eventually transition into a primary caster, but I still worry about the dynamics of the game being... let's say... tedious for attacking characters who rely on their weapons.

So here's the thing in my experience as a DM (started with 3.5, been running a 5e game now for over a year)...if you remain single classed, your damage output as an archer will definitely drop off. Clerics are spell casters first and foremost. There are ways to optimize for damage (magical weapon+spirit guardians+divine strike with your bow), but in comparison to the martials, you'll be relying far less on the bow/sharpshooter combo for damage. That being said, even the slightest multiclass into ranger, fighter or rogue for just 2-3 levels (depending on the dip) can vastly increase your archery potential.

[Grod_The_Giant]

...So, everyone? It's also worth bearing in mind that monster AC doesn't really scale - at high levels you should be hitting a lot more often.
That's actually not entirely true- I ran the numbers at one point, and if you compare expected PC attack to average monster AC (as per the DMG table), you pretty consistently need to roll an 8 to hit. That's why things like the Archery combat style and Bless remain good at all levels- +2 is a 10% increase at first and a 10% increase at 20th.

[MrStabby]

Yes, combat takes longer at higher levels but I think this is more down to positioning and tactical depth and that there are more defensive activated abilities in play. I don't think this is a huge effect though.

Tactical plans become more complex than "Roll High for Initiative".

Relative to everyone else your damage will drop off but you will excel in controlling the battlefield, shutting down opponents and using divination spells to get a huge advantage - all functions which become much more important at higher levels.

[WickerNipple]

A cleric archer isn't going to scale that much. Using a bow as a cleric is only a good option until your cantrips start scaling, and then it will be quickly be left in the dust.

Clerics scale plenty well via cantrips and spells like spiritual weapon.

[Haldir]

The original query was about HP, not AC. Lvl 10 fighter can reliably have 80 hitpoints, but only expect to deal 20 or so with a bonus attack, thats maxing the attack stat but not maxing Con for the target. Meaning in a slanted scenario it still takes four hits to kill an equally leveled target.

Tl;dr - it seems like hitpoints scale beyond damage output, making high level play more tedious.

Also, i don't like Sacred Flame as a cantrip. Dex saves are too common.

[MaxWilson]

The original query was about HP, not AC. Lvl 10 fighter can reliably have 80 hitpoints, but only expect to deal 20 or so with a bonus attack, thats maxing the attack stat but not maxing Con for the target. Meaning in a slanted scenario it still takes four hits to kill an equally leveled target.

Tl;dr - it seems like hitpoints scale beyond damage output, making high level play more tedious.

Also, i don't like Sacred Flame as a cantrip. Dex saves are too common.

Hit points certainly do scale beyond a cleric's weapon damage output, yes, making a Sharpshooter Cleric's combat tedious at high levels.

That's not really true in general--HP scale roughly as the 3/2 power of CR, and it's possible for PC damage output to exceed that scaling. A CR 24 ancient red dragon has 546 HP and AC 22 (assuming pure vanilla, no spells). For example, a 20th level Battlemaster supported by Foresight and Magic Weapon III will average 179.37 points of damage against AC 22 using GWM + Action Surge if using Precise Strike to turn misses into hits, or possibly more than that if he uses his dice to increase damage. If he crits for a bonus attack (very likely) that will climb to 201.79. If he's got Magic Initiate (Hex) that climbs further to 230.23. He can do that two rounds in a row, which means that he is 84% of the way towards soloing a monster 4 CR higher than himself in two rounds.

That's an extreme case relying on spike damage, just to illustrate the point, but here's the underlying reality: monster HP scales somewhat faster than most PCs' at-will damage (cantrips or basic attacks), so to a certain extent high-level combats relying purely on cantrips will be increasingly tedious. If you have a problem with that, you have two options:

(1) Ask your DM to skip to the end of a combat once you've "solved" it; or
(2) Use something other than cantrips or weak weapon attacks.

A Sharpshooter cleric is a weird build because your at-will attack scales even worse than everyone else's cantrips do, so in your case you'll have even more incentive to switch to something else. Other posters have recommended Spiritual Weapon; I might add that Animate Dead is pretty good. By level 10 you could easily have ten skeletons doing a potential total of 10d10+20 (75) damage per round using heavy crossbows, which still fits your theme of "cleric who likes to shoot things with bows," only vicariously. I speak from experience as a DM when I say that that tends to make combats very short and non-tedious, from a certain perspective. (It's a lot of die-rolling but it's easy to roll all the dice simultaneously; especially if I just rule that the skeletons do average damage, 7 points per hit. Then you just roll all the dice, count up all the ones over 14 or whatever, and multiply by seven.)

If you dislike violating corpses you could choose another way to use your spells.

[Biggstick]

The original query was about HP, not AC. Lvl 10 fighter can reliably have 80 hitpoints, but only expect to deal 20 or so with a bonus attack, thats maxing the attack stat but not maxing Con for the target. Meaning in a slanted scenario it still takes four hits to kill an equally leveled target.

Tl;dr - it seems like hitpoints scale beyond damage output, making high level play more tedious.

Also, i don't like Sacred Flame as a cantrip. Dex saves are too common.

If you don't mind my asking, what kind of Cleric are you? This would allow those here to better guide you on what route you could go.

If you want to run a primarily damage based Cleric that is utilizing Sharpshooter, you'll need to multiclass with a martial class that has 2 attacks. Two options that jump out right away are Fighter and Ranger. If you're going up to Fighter or Ranger 5, you might as well go for level 6. Six levels of Fighter get you two ASI's, Archery fighting style, some BM dice, Action Surge and Second Wind. Six levels of Ranger gets you one ASI, Archery fighting style, Hunter's Mark, and 3 caster spell levels (useful if you plan on picking up the other 14 levels of Cleric).

The reason I mention these two classes in particular is the Archery Fighting style. It's a big part of being able to consistently hit with that Sharpshooter.

[Tanarii]

That's actually not entirely true- I ran the numbers at one point, and if you compare expected PC attack to average monster AC (as per the DMG table), you pretty consistently need to roll an 8 to hit. That's why things like the Archery combat style and Bless remain good at all levels- +2 is a 10% increase at first and a 10% increase at 20th.What CR were you using for "average monster AC (as per the DMG table)"? Assuming that parties will be facing Solo CR = party level creatures seems like a big stretch. Certainly not what I'd call 'average monster'. Edti: Far more common (and deadly) seems to be many monsters of lower CR.

[MaxWilson]

If you don't mind my asking, what kind of Cleric are you? This would allow those here to better guide you on what route you could go.

If you want to run a primarily damage based Cleric that is utilizing Sharpshooter, you'll need to multiclass with a martial class that has 2 attacks. Two options that jump out right away are Fighter and Ranger. If you're going up to Fighter or Ranger 5, you might as well go for level 6. Six levels of Fighter get you two ASI's, Archery fighting style, some BM dice, Action Surge and Second Wind. Six levels of Ranger gets you one ASI, Archery fighting style, Hunter's Mark, and 3 caster spell levels (useful if you plan on picking up the other 14 levels of Cleric).

The reason I mention these two classes in particular is the Archery Fighting style. It's a big part of being able to consistently hit with that Sharpshooter.

And a ranger can have 3 attacks (counting Horde Breaker) by level 5. A War Cleric 2(?)/Ranger 5 could theoretically make four attacks on most rounds using his bonus action War Cleric attack--I'm AFB but doesn't that kick in around level 2?

[Grod_The_Giant]

What CR were you using for "average monster AC (as per the DMG table)"? Assuming that parties will be facing Solo CR = party level creatures seems like a big stretch.
I was doing a 1:1 comparison- CR x compared to level x. I think it's a reasonable approximation for" level appropriate"-- more than a mook but less than a boss.

[Tanarii]

I was doing a 1:1 comparison- CR x compared to level x. I think it's a reasonable approximation for" level appropriate"-- more than a mook but less than a boss.CR X is for party of 4 of level X. In other words, a Solo medium difficulty encounter.

[N810]

Well don't forget that *(unless your DM is a jerk) You should have some pretty awesome Magic gear by lvl20. :smallamused:

[Haldir]

If you don't mind my asking, what kind of Cleric are you? This would allow those here to better guide you on what route you could go.

If you want to run a primarily damage based Cleric that is utilizing Sharpshooter, you'll need to multiclass with a martial class that has 2 attacks. Two options that jump out right away are Fighter and Ranger. If you're going up to Fighter or Ranger 5, you might as well go for level 6. Six levels of Fighter get you two ASI's, Archery fighting style, some BM dice, Action Surge and Second Wind. Six levels of Ranger gets you one ASI, Archery fighting style, Hunter's Mark, and 3 caster spell levels (useful if you plan on picking up the other 14 levels of Cleric).

The reason I mention these two classes in particular is the Archery Fighting style. It's a big part of being able to consistently hit with that Sharpshooter.

Right now it's a Fighter1/Cleric1 with Archery style, but the character itself isn't relevant so much as the idea that combats will become increasingly long for other members of the party. As I said in the original post, the character is designed to transition into a primary caster, but for now I am using thrown daggers for 2D4 + 3 +20 damage in a single turn with only a -3 to hit, so not really bad for my level.

Based on the Red Dragon math used by MaxWilson, I think I can conclude that melee and physical weapon characters require considerable optimization and caster support to contribute in a time-effective manner.

[Grod_The_Giant]

CR X is for party of 4 of level X. In other words, a Solo medium difficulty encounter.
Point taken, but if the progression is so static for lv=CR, it would remain so for lv=CR-x. The only way you get a meaningful attack bump is it the GM increases the gap between you and the monsters.

[Tanarii]

Point taken, but if the progression is so static for lv=CR, it would remain so for lv=CR-x. The only way you get a meaningful attack bump is it the GM increases the gap between you and the monsters.

Which is exactly what I see typically occurring, and indeed I prefer myself. Average CR doesn't increase as fast as player level. Instead number of enemies tend to go up. Edit: campaign dependent and YMMV. :smallwink:

[Vogonjeltz]

The original query was about HP, not AC. Lvl 10 fighter can reliably have 80 hitpoints, but only expect to deal 20 or so with a bonus attack, thats maxing the attack stat but not maxing Con for the target. Meaning in a slanted scenario it still takes four hits to kill an equally leveled target.

Tl;dr - it seems like hitpoints scale beyond damage output, making high level play more tedious.

Also, i don't like Sacred Flame as a cantrip. Dex saves are too common.

Clerics are probably the lowest DPR class regardless of their domain, so I think you've chosen the worst case scenario if your ultimate concern is killing things quickly.

That being said, because the Cleric has potentially high defense and plenty of healing/support spells, they're good at attrition and helping their teammates, but they're simply not anywhere near the cutting edge of offense.

[MaxWilson]

Right now it's a Fighter1/Cleric1 with Archery style, but the character itself isn't relevant so much as the idea that combats will become increasingly long for other members of the party. As I said in the original post, the character is designed to transition into a primary caster, but for now I am using thrown daggers for 2D4 + 3 +20 damage in a single turn with only a -3 to hit, so not really bad for my level.

Based on the Red Dragon math used by MaxWilson, I think I can conclude that melee and physical weapon characters require considerable optimization and caster support to contribute in a time-effective manner.

It's actually the spellcasters who are likely to fall behind--weapon-users are just fine at damage, even unoptimized, unless you're actually worse than I think you are at it. (E.g. a Fighter who uses a one-handed mace and a shield with Protection style and then complains about not doing much damage has no leg to stand on, because he hasn't even tried to boost his damage, although I have seen such complaints happen. And such a fighter will still be doing as much or more damage than a cleric's cantrip every round.)

Consider a basic Rogue, which is about the simplest weapon-user you can make. Unlike a Champion he doesn't even have to track his Action Surges or Second Wind. A Dex 20 Swashbuckler with Stealth Expertise will have +17 on stealth checks plus Reliable Talent, so let's just say he gets to sneak attack at advantage every turn (because he always beats the dragon's passive Perception so the only thing needed is cover/concealment/heavy obscurement; and I'm neglecting the dragon's legendary action to roll Perception because, well, it complicates the analysis). He has +11 at advantage to hit AC 22, so he hits 75% of the time, of which 5% are crits. A hit with a light crossbow does d8+10d6+5 damage, twice that on a crit. His expected damage per round is 37.23 points of damage, so a party of four identical 20th level rogues will take just under four rounds to kill the CR 24 dragon. Not bad, huh? Against an equal-level challenge like an ancient white dragon (AC 20, 333 HP) they will each do 41.23 damage per round and will kill it in almost exactly two rounds.

In fact, I was going to make it a Thief because that's the simplest kind of Rogue, but their 17th level ability means they would actually kill the white dragon in one round (since they get double turns on the first round of combat). I accidentally optimized it too much. :) So instead I made it a Rogue without a subclass, to keep things simple and illustrate a completely unoptimized PC.

Contrast this with a wizard using his best cantrip (Fire Bolt) for 14.30 damage per round against the white dragon (zero against the red), or a cleric using Sacred Flame for a pathetic 7.2 damage per round against same, and you will see why I say that weapon-users are doing just fine. A wizard pretty much HAS to break out his high-level spells in order to be what you call "time-effective" against high-CR threats, but a simple weapon-user is effective all the time--no optimization required, really.

One more data point: a mildly-optimized (GWM feat, Recklessly attacking, Str 24) Barbarian 20 would do 45.56 points of damage to the white dragon per round with a nonmagical greataxe, (two attacks for 21.72 average each counting Brutal Criticals, plus a third attack 19% of the time when he crits on one of the first two attacks). So Rogues aren't really an outlier here, and an unoptimized Rogue is doing about as well as a mildly optimized Barbarian.

[Sigreid]

To add to what MaxWilson said, a 20 fighter with the archery fighting style and sharp shooter has the potential to do 8x15 or 120 damage in 1 before he rolls the first damage die. This assumes he is using a non-magic weapon, action surging, and hits with every attack. Bump that up to 135 if he's a crossbow expert using a hand crossbow. If he doesn't pull out all the stops and action surge, it drops down to 60/75 before rolling the damage dice. I'm not a stats guy so odds of hitting are left out.

Edit: This means it's not impossible for said fighter to kill that ancient white dragon by himself in 2-3 rounds if he sticks every attack.

[Tehnar]

The odds for which ste fantastically small due to having + 8 to his attacks vs AC 20.

[djreynolds]

What a great discussion? Great thread.

I think the 5E designers wanted more hits. Players get really sad missing attacks and not feeling that they are contributing. And every class can at least have something that is "reliable" and produces some damage in combat. I find saves are tougher, but negative conditions are limited in duration, so bigbys hand doesn't ruin your day round 1.

They did not want to have unhittable pcs and villains. They didn't want a wizard with 5 spells prebuffed up and running. Nor a weapon master hybrid capable clearing people without with possibly a single hit.

The game is much more dice rolling to be sure.

[MaxWilson]

The odds for which ste fantastically small due to having + 8 to his attacks vs AC 20.

To be fair, he could be a Lucky Battlemaster under the effects of a Bless spell (either cast by a companion or, in the absurd solo case, by himself using Magic Initiate: Cleric) using a +3 magic heavy crossbow (Crossbow Expert). That would give him +11+d4+d12-if-necessary with a Lucky reroll on a miss.

Here's a one-sample Monte Carlo sim of that scenario. He attacks at +11+d4 for d10+18 points of damage per hit.

Round 0:
Bless self

Round 1:
1. 19 miss, add d12 (4), 23 -> hit for 27 damage
2. 16 miss, add d12 (10), 26 -> hit for 19 damage
3. 17 miss, add d12 (12), 29 -> hit for for 25 damage
4. 30 -> hit for 24 damage
Action Surge:
5. 25 -> hit for 25 damage
6. 16 miss, add d12 (6), 22 -> hit for 26 damage
7. 22 -> hit for 26 damage
8. 16 miss, save my last superiority die

172 points of damage inflicted on round #1

Round 2:
1. 15 miss
2. 27 -> hit for 27 damage
3. 18 miss, add d12 (12), 30 -> hit for 24 damage
4. 17 miss, Lucky reroll, 16, still miss
Action Surge
5. 16 miss, Lucky reroll, 28 -> hit for 20 damage
6. 34 hit -> hit for 21 damage
7. 34 crit -> critical hit for 26 damage
8. 14 miss, Lucky reroll, 34 -> hit for 28 damage

146 damage inflicted on round #2, 318 damage so far

Round 3:
1. 31 -> hit for 23 damage
2. 20 -> hit for 26 damage
3. 25 -> hit for 27 damage
4. 18 miss

76 damage inflicted on round #3, 394 damage total.

Ancient white dragon has only 333 HP, so it's dead.

In this simulation, I didn't manage to hit it every time, but I did still manage to kill it in three rounds. Very nearly got it in two.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

The odd thing, to me, is that you're a former 3.5 player and you expect a Cleric to stay competitive with weapon attacks as you level. They won't past the very lowest levels. That doesn't work in 5th but it never worked in 3.5 either.

The strength of a Cleric remains focused in their spells. Although, they'd not primarily direct damage dealers there, either, so you really probably should have picked another class if raw damage output is your main concern. If you mean to transition into a full-caster, taking a level of Fighter is probably just going to slow you down, since it will delay your access to higher level spells.

If you're just worried about fighting slowing down in general, it does a little but not by much, since the people playing classes that are designed to do damage will see themselves doing a lot more damage and high level spells can drastically alter the flow of combat. For example, Fighter damage scales better, if anything, than it usually did in 3.5.

[Sigreid]

The odds for which ste fantastically small due to having + 8 to his attacks vs AC 20.

To me, not impossible means it isn't likely, but it can happen.

[ClintACK]

In this simulation, I didn't manage to hit it every time, but I did still manage to kill it in three rounds. Very nearly got it in two.

And you didn't even assume a technique or party buff to give him advantage. :) Toss a Greater Invisibility on him, for example. Or make a melee build instead of ranged and use his first attack to shove or trip the target (obviously that one doesn't work against the dragon...).



The odd thing, to me, is that you're a former 3.5 player and you expect a Cleric to stay competitive with weapon attacks as you level. They won't past the very lowest levels. That doesn't work in 5th but it never worked in 3.5 either.

I didn't usually play Clerics, or beyond about 12th level, but I remember all kinds of DMM-persist-self-buffing Cleric builds that did really, really well. They were supposed to be profoundly better than fighters at wading into melee combat.

[Haldir]

The odd thing, to me, is that you're a former 3.5 player and you expect a Cleric to stay competitive with weapon attacks as you level. They won't past the very lowest levels. That doesn't work in 5th but it never worked in 3.5 either.

The strength of a Cleric remains focused in their spells. Although, they'd not primarily direct damage dealers there, either, so you really probably should have picked another class if raw damage output is your main concern. If you mean to transition into a full-caster, taking a level of Fighter is probably just going to slow you down, since it will delay your access to higher level spells.

If you're just worried about fighting slowing down in general, it does a little but not by much, since the people playing classes that are designed to do damage will see themselves doing a lot more damage and high level spells can drastically alter the flow of combat. For example, Fighter damage scales better, if anything, than it usually did in 3.5.

I was not expecting my cleric to be good at weapon attacks all the way through, i was questioning it for later play with other characters/ general theorycrafting.

3.5 clerics had spells that made them better fighters than just about any other class, so i have to respectfully disagree with your position.

[Sigreid]

I didn't usually play Clerics, or beyond about 12th level, but I remember all kinds of DMM-persist-self-buffing Cleric builds that did really, really well. They were supposed to be profoundly better than fighters at wading into melee combat.

Well, to be fair the fighter was the base model beetle in the Lamborghini lot.

[MaxWilson]

I was not expecting my cleric to be good at weapon attacks all the way through, i was questioning it for later play with other characters/ general theorycrafting.

Do you still have concerns, or are we done with this thread?

[Zalabim]

Point taken, but if the progression is so static for lv=CR, it would remain so for lv=CR-x. The only way you get a meaningful attack bump is it the GM increases the gap between you and the monsters.

The relationship between CR:XP and level:XP for building encounters and adventures would take some studying, but there's two factors that are likely to show up here. For enemy groups, it's likely to be lv = CR/x instead of CR-x, and the rate of expected AC growth drops off at the higher CR, since it matches with both proficiency gains and possible ASI, which cap out at 20.

[Haldir]

Do you still have concerns, or are we done with this thread?

I have noticed a severe lack of actual anecdotal evidence and a great deal of opinions of optimization at max level. I would love some ideas on the subject from people who progressed with real characters through the meat of the game.

Granted, i knew coming here i would get the theorycrafting, but in the interest of actually understanding gameplay experience, i would appreciate a more down-and-dirty response, if you will

[borg286]

Here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1826558867) is some hard number crunching. This guy has taken each class and made various iconic builds for each class and calculated the KPR (kills per round) for these builds.
Kills per round is the metric you're after, because it measures how much of a slugfest each combat turns into. It is expected damage per round / average monster HP at that level. In other words, what percent of a monster's HP you can chew through each round.
You'll notice that from 13-16 even the most brutal of damage dealers can't keep up with monster HP. Even when you take reactions, class features, proning with a fighter's trip attack, advantage from oath of emnity, bonus action attacks... encounters end up with the cheese grater effect, where you just whittle the monster down. This is where the casters shine as they have access to save or die spells like banishment, where you can separate the encounter into 2 parts: grunt slaughter, and BBEG smackdown. For without the ability to focus the team's damage they will end up getting overwhelmed with grunts that should have gone down with the fireball but instead power through it and disable the caster and formation.

Your bow cleric, while good now, will find his spells far outweigh his sharpshooter feat later on.

[Kryx]

I added an average to KPR. It's all around 20% until you get to 17+. 17-18 = ~17%. 19-20 = ~13-14%.

So pretty consistent except above 17.

[Mandragola]

My highest level character is a lvl 11 vengeance paladin with great weapon mastery and a +1 greatsword.

The damage I do is pretty swingy, but it's substantial. I have +10 to hit normally, doing 2d6+d8+6. So on a normal round I probably do fairly unspectacular damage. Something in the 20s maybe.

However, switching on smites, channel divinity for advantage and gwm pumps that up very fast, easily into 50+ dpr.

To be fair, this in no way compares to my 3.5 half Orc barbarian 1 cleric 10 with righteous might and everything else stacked on, wielding his +3 bastard sword two-handed. His strength went off any normal chart, meaning it was very difficult to miss and damage got pumped by +150%. But I can totally see why wizards changed that!

I enjoy the paladin more. Monsters still die, just not in a single hit to be cleaved through. Fights are interesting and more tactical than before. I love having stuff like misty step to let me hop around the place. That said I am considering a multiclass switch to battlemaster - possibly. Paladin seems to slightly cap out at 11. I'll probably stick with it though.

[Tehnar]

My experience is in the low teens. Combat is more boring then at the lower levels since dropping due to hp damage is a minor inconvinience at the most. Monsters are just bags of hp with autoattacks, and casters rule every encounter since they have more then enough slots to deal even with the rediculous 6 to 8 encounters paradigm.

I imagine it gets even worse later.

[LordVonDerp]

The original query was about HP, not AC. Lvl 10 fighter can reliably have 80 hitpoints, but only expect to deal 20 or so with a bonus attack, thats maxing the attack stat but not maxing Con for the target. Meaning in a slanted scenario it still takes four hits to kill an equally leveled target.

Tl;dr - it seems like hitpoints scale beyond damage output, making high level play more tedious.

Also, i don't like Sacred Flame as a cantrip. Dex saves are too common.

"an equally levelled target"
Here's the problem, most targets won't be equally levelled.

Also, AC is even more common than Dex saves.

[Mandragola]

I'm not finding encounters to be slug-fests. Actually in the party I play in you'd think that would be the case, as we're pretty low on dpr. We are my vengeance paladin (high dpr), a druid, cleric/fighter and valour bard, all with low dpr. And yes, we're all healers. There's another guy who has a wizard, but he usually DMs.

We've been finding that the party needs to have a lot thrown at it to stop us - considerably beyond what would constitute deadly encounters according to the dmg. The nearest we came to a tpk recently was actually an army of about 50 hobgoblins coming at us from all directions, including leaders who buffed them all and a flying, invisible mind flayer who hit us with a couple of cones of cold. We dimension doored out of that one but nobody went unconscious.

Anyway, we don't find ourselves slugging away at monsters for multiple rounds. Even things like dragons tend to go down in just a few turns. Anything I can't reach in melee can be a bit of a problem, though now that the druid can turn into an air elemental it's very hard for people to escape us.

[Easy_Lee]

To OP's point, damage scales less than hit points. At level 5, a frenzy barbarian can have 18 strength and make three attacks in a round. By level 20, a frenzy barbarian can still do the same, but crits harder and adds more rage damage and attribute damage. He does not do four times as much damage at level 20 as level 5, but he does have close to four times as many hit points. As do monsters. The barbarian's ability to kill appropriate targets in a given number of rounds decreases with level, because he takes longer to do it.

This means that control spells and instant kills are the best abilities at high levels. The most useful martial character at level 20 is an Open Hand Monk, because he can straight up kill multiple targets per day via Quivering Palm, and can land up to four Stunning Strike attempts per round. AoE spells are also vastly superior for dealing with minions when compared with attacks.

As a result of all of this, the overall best party consists of an Open Hand Monk partied with multiple casters. For added fun, give him a bag of holding, place the casters inside, and have each of them buff him.

[MaxWilson]

I have noticed a severe lack of actual anecdotal evidence and a great deal of opinions of optimization at max level. I would love some ideas on the subject from people who progressed with real characters through the meat of the game.

Granted, i knew coming here i would get the theorycrafting, but in the interest of actually understanding gameplay experience, i would appreciate a more down-and-dirty response, if you will

I've DMed PCs who went from 1st level up through level 13-14, and I've DM'ed once-shots at 20th level.

The points I've made in this thread are consistent with my actual play experience. No, it's not a slog at high levels. But it will be a slog for your sharpshooter cleric.