I have a hard time making melee characters

[jaappleton]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy melee. Melee is nice.

But only when I'm playing a class which forces me to be in melee.

Barbarian, Paladin, these are largely melee exclusively classes. And they're great! I love 'em!

But I think about a 2H Fighter, or non-archer Ranger... and I can't build it. I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it. Plus the better initiative, and all the things that come with Dex to boot.

I just can't even build non-melee centric characters for classes which aren't exclusively melee.

[Zalabim]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy melee. Melee is nice.

But only when I'm playing a class which forces me to be in melee.

Barbarian, Paladin, these are largely melee exclusively classes. And they're great! I love 'em!

But I think about a 2H Fighter, or non-archer Ranger... and I can't build it. I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it. Plus the better initiative, and all the things that come with Dex to boot.

I just can't even build non-melee centric characters for classes which aren't exclusively melee.

The trick is making a character who is best at melee but isn't exclusively melee. If the enemy can't hurt you as long as you stay out of melee range, then it doesn't matter how good you actually are at ranged combat. It's when the enemy can fight back that it matters how well you fight. In that case, you strategically send in the melee to disrupt the enemy's ranged attacks. So that's the kind of melee to build. One that is good to get in melee when it's good to have someone in melee, but that is also smart enough to know when to not. That suits rangers and fighters and rogues just fine.

[Waazraath]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy melee. Melee is nice.

But only when I'm playing a class which forces me to be in melee.

Barbarian, Paladin, these are largely melee exclusively classes. And they're great! I love 'em!

But I think about a 2H Fighter, or non-archer Ranger... and I can't build it. I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it. Plus the better initiative, and all the things that come with Dex to boot.

I just can't even build non-melee centric characters for classes which aren't exclusively melee.


What surprises me is the idea that "staying out of enemy melee range" is presented as a good thing. It isn't, imo. Staying into enemy melee range, blocking their path to the squishies, taking the hits (or better: dodging and blocking the hits), it's often more tactical, and imo, also more rewarding because your not only useful when attacking, but also when attacked.

[Civis Mundi]

I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it.

Don't think of it as staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping your health up. Think of it as staying in enemy melee range, and thus keeping your party's health up. Any damage you soak is damage some squishy backliner doesn't have to take. Sure, they could still target your buddy, but you're a much more attractive target when you're all up in their grill. Many enemies are most fearsome at melee range. Against those enemies, forcing them to take punishment in order to attack softer targets can make a world of difference. For best results, mix in features or spells that discourage them from attacking your allies.

[da newt]

I too have difficulty with the idea that if you can do damage well from far away where it is more difficult to be damaged, why would anyone with a shred of common sense and self preservation ever decide to stroll right up into the monster's face where it can tear you a new one - but it's hard to tank effectively at range. It requires deciding to emphasize team over self and choosing to make a target of yourself. Conversely, if you are actively trying to avoid being targeted - you are in effect making the other PCs more likely to be targeted.

BTW - just to be pedantic, tanking isn't really about absorbing damage, it's more accurately about absorbing attacks for the good of the party. One of the best ways to tank is to be attacked a bunch but not get hit much, but I'm splitting hairs.

[MrStabby]

Can I suggest that there are two features that you aim to take advantage of for a satisfying character:

1) Opportunity attacks. Why be in melee? To get this sweet extra attack per round.

2) Force ranged attack rolls to be made at disadvantage.


So for the first one, you want a means/reason to make enemies want to run away or otherwise suffer an attack. Sentinel, pole arm master or somespell support such as command or dissonent whispers (though you are swapping some attacks for control at that point). You might also be keen to have something that makes your opportunity attacks hurt more - some rogue levels or warcaster feat and a nice cantrip (read booming blade) fit the bill.

For the second... you want some nice mobility. You want the ability to pick your targets and get right up in their face.


With this... I would certainly be thinking that a rogue dip in some class would be apt for you. Cunning action and sneak attack are good. I would suggest that the new Echo knight might also be of interest. It works well with sentinel which is a feat that will not only give you more opportunity attacks but also make them even more effective. Aiming to hit rogue 2 echo knight 6 by mid levels might make for a character you enjoy. High elf can give you booming blade and you can use your second ASI for warcaster if you want. I also believe that you get advantage onyour attacks if you are hidden from your enemy - echo knight's echo never makes an attack - you do but the attack originates from the echo's space. I guess you could therefore also use your cunningaction to hide so that an "echo" attack would have advantage.

[Honk]

Depends on what tickles your palate most...
If you’re trying some off character melee, I hade mad fun with an Open Hand Monk, fast and furious, dashing through the fray and knocking down people.
Now I’m rocking a smiting wreckingball pala, but my DM is forewarned, if shiny boy hits the dust, Bartender of Doom will hit the stage. The details are still not fleshed out, but I want him/her to walk through the fight almost like a fancy specter, weaving death in a fancy way. Maybe WH40k Harlequin Style.
Swashbuckle Rouge for damage and deny of opportunity attacks, added Bard of Valor with defensive flourish (max AC) and then min level fighter for action surge.

That thing will be totally rad, walking through the fights, backstabbing and just ignoring people who try to tie him down.

[djreynolds]

I really like a strength based two weapon fighting ranger.... a beastmaster with a wolf.

It isn't optimized mind you. But it is fun just making it work.

Really give into making the wolf's attack count. PAM works also with sentinel and every DM needing to attack your beast.

Beastmaster can be loads of fun, especially in a larger party.

I only got to 12th. But I had seriously enjoyed it. The party had damage covered... and it really was the icing on the cake.

I used PAM and sentinel and and wolf and it was a blast. This pre-revised ranger. Just a beastmaster with a wolf.

[Barny]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy melee. Melee is nice.

But only when I'm playing a class which forces me to be in melee.

Barbarian, Paladin, these are largely melee exclusively classes. And they're great! I love 'em!

But I think about a 2H Fighter, or non-archer Ranger... and I can't build it. I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it. Plus the better initiative, and all the things that come with Dex to boot.

I just can't even build non-melee centric characters for classes which aren't exclusively melee.



Lol, I don't think you are making a character at all.
Instead, you are just trying to make some all-around powerful builds, and can't stay with underpower builds.

[Kyutaru]

Melee is usually the place to be. For a long time D&D has not had much in the way of threats in melee range unless you're low level. You might think dragons or demons or giants are threatening in melee but they all have long range attacks too that are just as devastating. Being in melee range grants opportunity attacks, causes spell failure and ranged problems, and for dumber beasts encourages that they target the correct things. It limits where enemies can go and it puts you in range for grappling. I guess folks haven't played with those rules much but making a grappler was huge in 3.5 and easily disabled some of the most ferocious enemies in D&D that had lower strength scores than your fighter. If you specialize in it you can wrestle down even the bigger threats. Melee is also one of the only ways to get physical AOE with cleaving and whirlwind attacks.

[Man_Over_Game]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy melee. Melee is nice.

But only when I'm playing a class which forces me to be in melee.

Barbarian, Paladin, these are largely melee exclusively classes. And they're great! I love 'em!

But I think about a 2H Fighter, or non-archer Ranger... and I can't build it. I see Archery style and the prospect of staying out of enemy melee range, and thus keeping my health up, and I love it. Plus the better initiative, and all the things that come with Dex to boot.

I just can't even build non-melee centric characters for classes which aren't exclusively melee.

Ancestral Guardian with Mobile.


I think the thing I'm reading from you is that you're emphasizing the value of dealing consistent damage, which is pretty standard as far as "most valuable things I can do" go. The goal is to kill things, you want to play the best you can, so you play the best way to kill things.

But the value of a melee character isn't so much the damage, but the distraction. You have higher AC, you generally don't cast Concentration Spells, you have more HP, more survival powers, etc. When an enemy attacks you with a 50% chance to miss, vs. your Wizard with a 25%, you effectively cut the value of that enemy's attack in half. Combined with the fact that he deals 15% of your HP on a hit vs. 25% of the Wizard's, and you've cut his value down from attacking the wizard by another 40%. So while you're taking chump change in damage compared to the Wizard, the Wizard gets to cast Fire Donut around the enemy team and boil them into stew without losing Concentration.

But you can't do that as effectively as a ranged character. If the enemy has the option of hitting someone easier than you, they're going to, and now you're sitting back with 16 AC and a 1d10 Hit Die dealing moderate damage while your Wizard just lost half his HP and has to spend the next turn casting Misty Step and a Cantrip, because you wanted to go shooty-shooty at range.

So the solution isn't to develop a build that deals damage, but leverages the unique benefits of a melee combatant. Anyone can deal a bunch of damage, but who can protect others? I suggest the Ancestral Guardian, as it has a lot of benefits as a ranged character, while still improving the melee-protector style while doing so. It's a unique challenge that I think would segue well with your optimizing mentality.

[jaappleton]

Snip.

.....huh. You bring up some very fine points.

I need to do some thinking.

[Spiritchaser]

Ancestral Guardian with Mobile.
.

I see your mobile and raise you 3 levels of echo knight

Edit: Obviously not AL legal, but they should make a specific allowance for that mix... or reprint them both together in a future book.

[Honk]

I need to do some thinking.

While you’re thinking, to support the Ancestral Guardian Theme:
My lvl 11 Conquest Pala (Lvl8) now hit his „full“ potential, with 3 levels of Sorcerer, hastened „hold person“ with double auto crit smites will deal average 115dmg... (once)

the „Wall of fear“ built guide is very interesting, the whole crowd control - area denial thing makes combat very funny and very rewarding for a tank.
He blocked a doorway with AC23 and possible shield reaction, 30ft frightening zone for a whole bunch of mobs, who were stuck in his speed 0 aura, dishing out normal damage and if somebody made his save an incoming smite (Wrathful or thunderous) made them regret their success...

[jaappleton]

Ancestral Guardian with Mobile.


I think the thing I'm reading from you is that you're emphasizing the value of dealing consistent damage, which is pretty standard as far as "most valuable things I can do" go. The goal is to kill things, you want to play the best you can, so you play the best way to kill things.

But the value of a melee character isn't so much the damage, but the distraction. You have higher AC, you generally don't cast Concentration Spells, you have more HP, more survival powers, etc. When an enemy attacks you with a 50% chance to miss, vs. your Wizard with a 25%, you effectively cut the value of that enemy's attack in half. Combined with the fact that he deals 15% of your HP on a hit vs. 25% of the Wizard's, and you've cut his value down from attacking the wizard by another 40%. So while you're taking chump change in damage compared to the Wizard, the Wizard gets to cast Fire Donut around the enemy team and boil them into stew without losing Concentration.

But you can't do that as effectively as a ranged character. If the enemy has the option of hitting someone easier than you, they're going to, and now you're sitting back with 16 AC and a 1d10 Hit Die dealing moderate damage while your Wizard just lost half his HP and has to spend the next turn casting Misty Step and a Cantrip, because you wanted to go shooty-shooty at range.

So the solution isn't to develop a build that deals damage, but leverages the unique benefits of a melee combatant. Anyone can deal a bunch of damage, but who can protect others? I suggest the Ancestral Guardian, as it has a lot of benefits as a ranged character, while still improving the melee-protector style while doing so. It's a unique challenge that I think would segue well with your optimizing mentality.

I need to say something.

This singular post has been in my head since I read it days ago.

It’s no secret around these forums that I’m a bit of an optimizer. If I’m playing a hero, I want to be pretty effective. When something is outright broken, I’ll retire it and find something else. I mean, I once played a Tempest Theurge, but only for a few sessions before I moved on to something a bit less overwhelming.

And that’s how I’ve been. High DPR, because dead enemies can’t hurt. That’s typically been what I’ve played.

But my favorite PC ever was Grom, my first 5E character. Dumb Half Orc Bear Totem Barb. Hit pretty hard and could take a beating.

Part of my love for him was the personality. The rest was how he could take a complete and absolute BEATING, and still stand up and give it right back.

And I’ve always focused since in being able to give enemies a beating, so to speak. Don’t get me wrong, not every PC was all about high DPR. Played a Bard that was all about enemy action denial, that was great. But really rendering enemies ineffective, whether by killing them super quickly or making them useless, I love doing that.

But the aspect of being a tank.... I don’t know, it never really clicked into my head. After reading it, it makes sense to explain in part why I adored playing Grom so much. Playing a character that could take such a brutal beating repeatedly and shrug it off was such an excellent feeling for me. Just something that never clicked together in my brain, I suppose.

So Man_Over_Game, I want to thank you. Sincerely. Thank you.

[MThurston]

I play a warlock Hexblade as our primary tank. He is holding his own.

[Yakk]

If it is charop you are worried about...

PAM does more damage than XBE. 1d6 1d6 1d6 < 1d10 1d10 1d4. And the reaction attack on PAM is going to go off reasonably often.

GWF and SS are about equal (after PAM/XBE).

Strength based shoving is a ridiculously easy way to get advantage, and give it to your team if you are well placed in initiative. Shove, Polearm, Shaft is a decent attack routine. And if you are 1:1, you can then move back (take an attack at disadvantage) and trigger PAM reaction again, or if you are mean be a battlemaster and riposte the OA then move right back.

Right now I'm considering making a Rune Knight 3/Celestial 1/Abjurer X that goes into melee range and tanks like crazy. Pre-soak damage with ward, then Armor of Aggy with Hill Giant resistance to make it last longer. Recast when it goes down.

This build doesn't work unless the enemy is attacking it, so it wants to be in melee.

And yes, monsters will almost always manage to attack a player; being an optimal player to attack for your party has high value. Sadly, Rangers don't get much in the way of "I'm a good thing to be attacked for the party". Fighters do, as do Barbarians and Paladins. Mostly Barbarians.

[N810]

How about something a bit unorthodox, like a bugbear with a pike for 15' of melee range.

[Man_Over_Game]

So Man_Over_Game, I want to thank you. Sincerely. Thank you.

Thanks for saying that, man. Warms a tin man's heart.