How broken would it be to give all martial classes 1 extra attack at level 15?

[CTurbo]

I've just been thinking about ways to give high level martials a boost to better compete with high level spellcasters who are casting epic spells on a daily basis. This offers several benefits other than the obvious.

1. It gives a bit more incentive to stay full class longer.
2. It provides a boost to spells like Divine Favor, Holy Weapon, Hunter's Mark, etc...
3. It further separates attacking in general from other classes. (20 level Barbarian only gets 1 more attack than a 20 level Sorcerer)
4. It leaves a niche for things like Bladesinger and Bladelock which probably shouldn't get as many attacks as a martial.
5. It provides a boost to the typically weak Beastmaster which gives up it's extra attack at level 5, it could still get one at level 15.


Are there any drawbacks that I may be missing? Extra attacks still wouldn't stack with multiclass combos.

Should the Rogue get a 2nd attack at level 15 if the big 4 martial classes(excluding Fighter) gain an 3rd attack at 15? I'm think so, but not sure.

I was thinking this might be stepping on the Fighters' toes, but Fighters would still get the 3rd attack 4 levels faster, and stay ahead eventually having 2 extra attacks still. (5 vs 3)

On a small side note, If I made this homebrew, I would probably grant the War Cleric some kind if extra attack similar to the Bladesinger, Bladelock, and Valor/Swords Bards.

[Eldariel]

It'd be just fine. Almost needed, in fact: currently martial teens are just disappointing. Utterly so, in fact. Which is a pity since they start off so promisingly. Though I do think more different things should be given to them. And yeah, you can give Rogue the 2nd attack. It doesn't really matter; Rogue's primary damage is from Sneak Attack, which is 1/turn anyways. Mostly makes SA more reliable, which is nice.

[Spacehamster]

I've just been thinking about ways to give high level martials a boost to better compete with high level spellcasters who are casting epic spells on a daily basis. This offers several benefits other than the obvious.

1. It gives a bit more incentive to stay full class longer.
2. It provides a boost to spells like Divine Favor, Holy Weapon, Hunter's Mark, etc...
3. It further separates attacking in general from other classes. (20 level Barbarian only gets 1 more attack than a 20 level Sorcerer)
4. It leaves a niche for things like Bladesinger and Bladelock which probably shouldn't get as many attacks as a martial.
5. It provides a boost to the typically weak Beastmaster which gives up it's extra attack at level 5, it could still get one at level 15.


Are there any drawbacks that I may be missing? Extra attacks still wouldn't stack with multiclass combos.

Should the Rogue get a 2nd attack at level 15 if the big 4 martial classes(excluding Fighter) gain an 3rd attack at 15? I'm think so, but not sure.

I was thinking this might be stepping on the Fighters' toes, but Fighters would still get the 3rd attack 4 levels faster, and stay ahead eventually having 2 extra attacks still. (5 vs 3)

On a small side note, If I made this homebrew, I would probably grant the War Cleric some kind if extra attack similar to the Bladesinger, Bladelock, and Valor/Swords Bards.

Why would you deny the fighter this? Only thing that would do is to poo on what makes the fighter the fighter in 5e, more attacks than the other martials(which he needs since he has very few ways to add extra dice to his damage rolls compared to the ranger or Paladin), so if going with this it’s pretty much mandatory that the fighter would get an extra attack at 15 too, :)

[CTurbo]

Why would you deny the fighter this? Only thing that would do is to poo on what makes the fighter the fighter in 5e, more attacks than the other martials(which he needs since he has very few ways to add extra dice to his damage rolls compared to the ranger or Paladin), so if going with this it’s pretty much mandatory that the fighter would get an extra attack at 15 too, :)


Of course the Fighter gets the extra attack at 15, but it still gets it's 3rd attack at 11. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Barbarian, Monk, Paladin, and most Rangers all get 3rd attack at 15.
Fighter gets 4th attack at 15 and 5th attack at 20.
Rogue and Beastmaster Rangers gets 2nd attack at 15.
War Cleric probably gets 2nd attack at 6.

[OldTrees1]

It would be worth double checking the math. Some classes are based around 3-4 attacks while others are based around 2 double strength attacks.

However I don't recall much of the higher level concerns being about DPS. Most of the higher level concerns were about falling behind qualitatively rather than quantitatively.

[Dienekes]

It'd be just fine. Almost needed, in fact: currently martial teens are just disappointing. Utterly so, in fact. Which is a pity since they start off so promisingly. Though I do think more different things should be given to them. And yeah, you can give Rogue the 2nd attack. It doesn't really matter; Rogue's primary damage is from Sneak Attack, which is 1/turn anyways. Mostly makes SA more reliable, which is nice.

If I can minorly hijack the thread for a moment, what would you consider “good damage” per Action at these high levels?

For my own part, I don’t think it will break anything. And will give a reason for players to stay with one class for awhile. But I kinda agree with OldTrees. It’s not the damage that’s the problem. It’s more at level 15, I expect a Barbarian to be able to headbutt through a Forcecage. A Fighter to parry a spell and send it right back to the caster. A Rogue to be able to convince a minion to switch sides mid-fight.

More damage doesn’t really equate to the effects I expect a high level character to do. Though more damage never hurts of course.

[Hael]

It definitely would be a problem to balance. For instance a paladin would instantly vault over the fighters dpr, even if the fighter has four attacks.

In practice it wouldn’t really make much of a difference, bc in tier4 play dpr is rarely the problem. Who cares about a few d6s of damage when the thing you are fighting is ethereal or flying and you don’t have a way to hit them.

T4 play is much more about skill checks to know what you’re going up against, and careful preparation, magic items and one time tricks to kill things that are overwhelmingly more powerful. It’s very rare to have a standard encounter that doesn’t have some built in trick or trigger that you need to find in order to progress.

It’s one of the reasons I don’t really like this lvl of play, as the wargame side of it takes a backseat and it’s more about creative problem solving

[heavyfuel]

For my own part, I don’t think it will break anything. And will give a reason for players to stay with one class for awhile. But I kinda agree with OldTrees. It’s not the damage that’s the problem. It’s more at level 15, I expect a Barbarian to be able to headbutt through a Forcecage. A Fighter to parry a spell and send it right back to the caster. A Rogue to be able to convince a minion to switch sides mid-fight.

More damage doesn’t really equate to the effects I expect a high level character to do. Though more damage never hurts of course.

I third the notion that damage at high levels isn't THE problem. It's still A problem, since it scales much slower than monsters' HP, but not the big one.

Of course, every time you allow martials to do cool things without magic being involved, someone is bound to cry about lack of realism.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Just from looking at it, it would lead to a lot more one level dips, not an incentive to stay same class longer. It would also disable most martial multiclasses. Not sure how that helps. Probably I'm not thinking through this properly.

EDIT: Also, That would give Barbarian a massive boost due to rage

[Dork_Forge]

It would scale with some classes more than others, Paladin seeming to be the most obvious one as it would allow another stacking of:

-Dueling
-Improved Divine Smite
-Hunter's Mark/Divine Favor

Honestly I think the Fighter gains the least from this, but it shouldn't be much of a problem to allow. I don't think I've seen you addess Monks though and Rogues would need something.

[WaroftheCrans]

I'd watch out for Paladins the most. Being able smite three times a turn, and have improved divine smite regardless would boost it to a probably better dpr than the fighter. Add in that it's a spellcaster (not full), and it's sort of insult to injury situation.

In this scenario, it might be good to add 2 attacks to the fighter, to maintain the ratio.

[LtPowers]

Agree; it's too much of a boost to Paladins and a drop in the bucket for Fighters. And as someone who's played a fighter to level 20, I don't really want to be making six or seven attacks per round. Double that with Action Surge.


Powers &8^]

[Tvtyrant]

What about just doubling weapon size die? It benefits Fighter most and Smite least.

[LtPowers]

What about just doubling weapon size die? It benefits Fighter most and Smite least.

Interesting. Only a minor benefit to Rogues, though. Maybe their damage is high enough already?


Powers &8^]

[CTurbo]

I agree it seems strong for Paladins, but Paladins are already strong and probably stronger than Fighters anyway.

Let's compare some basic numbers without feats. Let's take a level 20 Fighter with 20 Str and Dueling vs a level 20 Paladin with 20 Str and Dueling.

Standard Fighter with 4 attacks - 4d8+28 = 46 dpr on average.
Standard Paladin with 2 attacks - 4d8+14 = 32 dpr on average.

Lets compare them now with my proposed change.

New Fighter with 5 attacks - 5d8+35 = 57.5 dpr on average.
New Paladin with 3 attacks - 6d8+21 = 48 dpr on average.

Of course there is Smiting with the Paladin, and well for one, it's not an infinite resource, and for two, the standard Paladin is already outdamaging the Fighter when you include smites. Also, the Fighter's subclasses offer dpr boosts that are also not factored in.

Let's see how the Barb stacks up. Level 20 raging Barb with 24 Str and Greataxe. No feats.
Standard Barb with 2 attacks - 2d12+22 = 35 dpr on average.
New Barb with 3 attacks - 3d12+33 = 52.5 dpr on average.

Of course that's not factoring crits and the Barb's brutal crits, but I'm not smart enough to factor that in.

I'm also not smart enough to factor in things like Battlemaster maneuvers, the Champion's extended crit range, etc...

It SEEMS like feats like PAM and especially GWM would benefit the Fighter the most, then Barb, and then Paladin. I can do the quick maths, but can't factor in how often the bonus action attack from GWM would trigger, or how much more often a Reckless Attacking Barb would hit.

Standard 20/20 GWM Fighter with Greataxe with 4 attacks - 4d12+60 = 86 dpr
Standard 20/24 GWM Barb with Greataxe with 2 attacks - 2d12+42 = 55 dpr

New 20/20 GWM Fighter with Greataxe with 5 attacks - 5d12+75 = 107.5 dpr
New 20/24 GWM Barb with Greataxe with 3 attacks - 3d12+63 = 82.5 dpr

Again, this is not factoring in the conditional bonus action attack which a Barb swinging with advantage is bound to trigger often, but you could make a similar argument that a Fighter with 5 attack per turn is also going to have some crits, esp the Champion.


Either way, it seems like the Fighter hangs in there with this proposed change. The Fighter can somewhat counter the Paladin's nova damage with Action Surge too. A properly optimized Barb MAY edge it out in dpr throughout the day, but the Fighter is still more stable and consistent.


As far as Rangers go, it's a decent boost, but for the most part isn't going to have the Ranger keeping up with the big 3 above nor should it. The Ranger has so much other stuff going on. It DOES make Hunter's Mark better though.

It probabaly helps Monks the least of the martials, but a dpr boost is still a boost, and people complain about the Monk's dpr. It does offer another opportunity to stun though which is not nothing.

The really late 2nd attack for the Rogue is more for making sure you got your sneak attack off rather than just adding as additional 1d8+5 damage each round. Nothing sucks worse than missing with your one big attack on your turn.

[Dork_Forge]

I agree it seems strong for Paladins, but Paladins are already strong and probably stronger than Fighters anyway.

Let's compare some basic numbers without feats. Let's take a level 20 Fighter with 20 Str and Dueling vs a level 20 Paladin with 20 Str and Dueling.

Standard Fighter with 4 attacks - 4d8+28 = 46 dpr on average.
Standard Paladin with 2 attacks - 4d8+14 = 32 dpr on average.

Lets compare them now with my proposed change.

New Fighter with 5 attacks - 5d8+35 = 57.5 dpr on average.
New Paladin with 3 attacks - 6d8+21 = 48 dpr on average.

Of course there is Smiting with the Paladin, and well for one, it's not an infinite resource, and for two, the standard Paladin is already outdamaging the Fighter when you include smites. Also, the Fighter's subclasses offer dpr boosts that are also not factored in.


Ignoring subclass, the Paladin DPR is a little on the conservative side:

-1st level Divine Favor is fairly cheap at 15th level and adds 7.5 dmg per turn

-3rd level Elemental weapon adds 10.5 dmg per turn

-5th level Holy Weapon (which is a better investment than a 5th level Divine Smite) adds 27 dmg per turn

When you mix in Oaths it shifts a bit further (Oathbreaker gets Cha damage bonus, Vengeance can sub Divine Favor for Hunter's Mark, gaining in both duration and damage for just a 1st level slot).

[Spiritchaser]

For my own part, I don’t think it will break anything. And will give a reason for players to stay with one class for awhile. But I kinda agree with OldTrees. It’s not the damage that’s the problem. It’s more at level 15, I expect a Barbarian to be able to headbutt through a Forcecage. A Fighter to parry a spell and send it right back to the caster. A Rogue to be able to convince a minion to switch sides mid-fight.


I think this just about perfectly captures my feelings as well.

Now: I’ve never played above level 16, but even there, I feel that melee needs more crazy epic actions... just exactly like headbutting through a force cage.

[Yakk]

Melee don't need a pure damage boost at T3/4. It remains a utility gap.

You can build non-cheese impressive melee damage. You cannot approach the utility of simulacrum, contact other plane, scry, wish, true polymorph, shapechange, mass heal, force cage, blah blah blah.

Adding more damage to melee is a red queen's race to a large extent. Unless you make melee sustained dDPS hit caster burst DPS?

The nerf on the fighter is real. Barbarian always advantage is huge; fighter 11/barbarian 9 was based on this. Now a pure barbarian gets it.

A 25% sustained boost for fighters and a 50% sustained boost for barbs, rangers and paladins, and a crap-all boost for rogues.

If you want something more uniform:

Combat Superiority
At level 15, Barbarians and Fighters double their weapon's damage dice.

Disruptive Strike
At level 11, a Rogue can expend a reaction when a creature within the range of a weapon they are wielding hits an ally of the Rogue. The Rogue makes an attack on the creature; if this attack hits, the allyngainsna bonus to their AC equal to the Rogue's proficiency bonus, which can cause the triggering attack to miss.

Hand of God
At 15th level, a Paladin who uses divine smite scores a critical hit on a 19 as well as a 20, and gains advantage on all attacks until the start of her next turn.

Deadly Precision
Starting at 15th level, as a bonus action, a Ranger may expend a spell slot to aim. Until the end of her next turn, she gains a bonus to damage rolls equal to twice the spell slot level.

Unending Kata
Starting at 15th level, when a monk uses Ki to fuel an ability as a bonus action, you gain its benefits on your next turn if you spend ki as a bonus action.

I think those all are fun.

[MoiMagnus]

I've not played high level enough to have a strong opinion, but I'd say that's a quite sad buff. While that's definitely easy to add, additional damages is not exactly was feels missing from high level martial.
(See the threads about martial being screwed or not. Damage is not what peoples are complaining about.)

If you still want something easy to implement, I'd more go in the direction of an ASI or an additional attunement slot for magical objects. Though both are strong buffs, so I'd definitely not give that to the most polyvalent martials (like paladin, which IMO does not need any buff).

[bid]

TWF?
That's about the only thing that could use some love with your rebalancing.

If you also double up the BA attack at level 15, that comes up to 3+2=5 attacks, a better gain than level 1. I'm not sure there's an easy way to balance it up.

[Nagog]

I don't know the full specifics of it, but if there is any class it could potentially overpower, I would guess it to be Monk. Rangers and Paladins can supercharge their attacks, yes, but at the cost of other resources. Monks keep themselves relevant by having a plethora of attacks all doing halfway decent damage, and have boosts to those attacks at times. Imagine a Monk being able to unleash 5 Stunning Strikes in a single round. Not much more than they would be normally (4), but that's the blanket argument. Other subclasses have other abilities that may scale with how many attacks can be made, and would therefore receive a larger buff than intended. To be frank I don't have as much experience with higher levels as I'd like so I'm not 100% sure what else would change.

That said, my Warlock/Varient Ranger MC stacking Hunter's Mark and Hex on a target could really bust some of that up, gaining 3d6+mod extra damage per round (assuming a 1d6 weapon).

[DevilMcam]

I don't think it's needed at all.

2 fighters with buffs can alreay kill the tarrasque in 1 round without magic item.
Martials amready have adamage aplenty, they don't need more

[Doug Lampert]

My simple utility buff for martials.

1) Martial's extra attack is replaced by "Extra Action". This makes martials faster and better at skills without needing any fancy rules. This does not apply to subclass features that grant extra attack.

2) Action surge doubles the number of actions in a turn.

3) An extra action may be used as an additional bonus action or a reaction during your own turn if desired. If an effect allows saves to end, then an action may be spent to roll a save.

4) Spells are globally limited to no more than one leveled spell a turn and no more than two total spells. So you can cast two cantrips or a leveled spell and a cantrip. Note that this is per turn, so it doesn't apply to reactions during other player's turns.

5) (Not a rule, just a clarification.) You can only ready one action, but if you have multiple actions you can act and ready.

[OldTrees1]

My simple utility buff for martials.

1) Martial's extra attack is replaced by "Extra Action". This makes martials faster and better at skills without needing any fancy rules. This does not apply to subclass features that grant extra attack.

2) Action surge doubles the number of actions in a turn.

3) An extra action may be used as an additional bonus action or a reaction during your own turn if desired. If an effect allows saves to end, then an action may be spent to roll a save.

4) Spells are globally limited to no more than one leveled spell a turn and no more than two total spells. So you can cast two cantrips or a leveled spell and a cantrip. Note that this is per turn, so it doesn't apply to reactions during other player's turns.

5) (Not a rule, just a clarification.) You can only ready one action, but if you have multiple actions you can act and ready.

Interesting. You might want check if Rogue should be updated based on these changes.
1) Extra Action is more flexible than Cunning Action. Buff Rogue?
2) Extra Action would allow a multiclass Rogue to double sneak attack. Double check single vs multiclass Rogue balance?

#1 might allow a multiclassed Martial to have Extra Action & Extra Attack. Double check if reasonable?

[Sindeloke]

2) Extra Action would allow a multiclass Rogue to double sneak attack. Double check single vs multiclass Rogue balance?

The extra action is still taken on the same turn, same as the bonus action from TWF for example, so sneak attack only applies to one of them. It is a third chance to land it, but fighter 5/rogue X got that already.

[Doug Lampert]

The extra action is still taken on the same turn, same as the bonus action from TWF for example, so sneak attack only applies to one of them. It is a third chance to land it, but fighter 5/rogue X got that already.

Yep, if you just use the extra actions to attack, then this pretty much gives the current situation, same number of attacks, but you can do more other stuff.

Extra attack still existing in some subclasses and druids having access to forms with multiattack would need an errata if I were making up a rule for publication.

6) multiattack and extra attack are limited to once per turn, done.

A rogue multiclass does get some extra damage, he can use an extra action to ready an off-turn attack. He couldn't do that with an extra attack, I'm not worried that this would be overpowered.

[Kane0]

It wont break the system but arguably isn’t strictly necessary.

[OldTrees1]

The extra action is still taken on the same turn, same as the bonus action from TWF for example, so sneak attack only applies to one of them. It is a third chance to land it, but fighter 5/rogue X got that already.

Normal Action: Ready an attack (becomes a sneak attack since it is on a different turn)
Extra Action: Sneak Attack

[Dork_Forge]

Normal Action: Ready an attack (becomes a sneak attack since it is on a different turn)
Extra Action: Sneak Attack

If you're referring to Extra Attack, that wouldn't work as you need to ready the attack action, so you wouldn't get your Extra Attack.

[OldTrees1]

If you're referring to Extra Attack, that wouldn't work as you need to ready the attack action, so you wouldn't get your Extra Attack.

My understanding of Doug Lampert's Extra Action utility buff in post #24 (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24583996&postcount=24) is it would allow an Attack and a Readied Attack.

[Dork_Forge]

My understanding of Doug Lampert's Extra Action utility buff in post #24 (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24583996&postcount=24) is it would allow an Attack and a Readied Attack.

Ah I thought this was relating to OP's suggestion, apologies. Extra Action has a lot of potential interactions, particularly with spell casting (EK attacks with action 1, casts with action 2 gets BA attack from War Magic, actually if they Action Surge they could attack three times and cast a SCAGtrip twice for 5 attacks with added damage and riders...). It has nice side effects like making a Dragonborn's breath more flexible, but unless you provide martials with actual utility abilities it mostly just seems like a combat exploit waiting to happen.

[Yakmala]

My Level 20 Half Elf Fighter with a Vorpal Scimitar would appreciate it.

That's 5 attacks per round. Assume I get advantage somehow so my Elven accuracy kicks in and of course let's not forget action surge...

That's 30 chances in a single round to roll a 20 and lop their head off.