Balancing Question for Heavy Armor Master

[Shadean207]

I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai, and I am the only dedicated/exclusive frontline fighter.

For 4th level, I was thinking of taking the Heavy Armor Master feat, but I keep being told by other players that it's just "not worth it", and they advise me to go with Tough or Sentinel.

Now, I don't have that much experience with long-term campaigns and the associated scaling... is HAM actually that bad? Does it just fall off later? Can it be balanced by, for example, changing the flat 3 reduction to reduction=Proficiency Bonus?
I'd really like to have some insights from the more experienced players here. Thanks!


To add: I have no clue if the campaign is gonna be that long, but from the way I know our DM, level-wise it will go into the double digits, probably. Also, as a VHuman, I started with the Great Weapon Master feat, my Fighting Style is GWF. So, I am pretty much set on that front (I believe...)

[ecarden]

So it sort of depends what you're running up against.

HAM is great against hordes and against almost all purely physical attackers. There's a tendency to increase risk by increasing number of attacks rather than by making the attacks do more damage. it's weak against traps and magic.

I ran a HAM fighter up to about 10 and it was very good at letting me hold positions and keep folks away from the squishier party members. One other thing depends on your DM, as some might start playing around it as they get annoyed by their horde of goblins doing minimal or no damage and just have them rush past you. Not a problem I had, but some have run into it.

[stoutstien]

I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai, and I am the only dedicated/exclusive frontline fighter.

For 4th level, I was thinking of taking the Heavy Armor Master feat, but I keep being told by other players that it's just "not worth it", and they advise me to go with Tough or Sentinel.

Now, I don't have that much experience with long-term campaigns and the associated scaling... is HAM actually that bad? Does it just fall off later? Can it be balanced by, for example, changing the flat 3 reduction to reduction=Proficiency Bonus?
I'd really like to have some insights from the more experienced players here. Thanks!


To add: I have no clue if the campaign is gonna be that long, but from the way I know our DM, level-wise it will go into the double digits, probably. Also, as a VHuman, I started with the Great Weapon Master feat, my Fighting Style is GWF. So, I am pretty much set on that front (I believe...)

Those who are giving you that advice are just wrong. HaM is flat out more mitigation than tough and if you are already getting targeted by most attacks sentinel has little value. Even at lv 20 HaM can be the largest source of mitigation for a fighter. It increases your HP and THP value and it's passive. Being a half feat is icing.

Tough has its purpose but you need to have reliable resistance to the most common damage types you face and a party that can fill that bigger HP pool easily or the value isn't even as good as being able to cast shield or goodberries 1/LR.

[BoutsofInsanity]

Heavy Armor Master is exceptional against many enemies.

If three goblins hit you with spear attacks and a +2 damage you are looking at an average of 5 damage per hit. With HAM that becomes 2 damage per hit. That's incredible. Overtime that will add up in a dungeon and so forth.

HAM is good if you face many enemies that don't hit super hard or multi-attack enemies.

On the other hand, if you constantly are going up against 1 or 2 creatures that just drop bomb after bomb of attacks Sentinel is going to be a better choice.

Honestly - As a fighter with a 2 handed weapon you prolly want both Sentinel and HAM unless any of the above conditions are met.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Heavy Armor Master is exceptional against many enemies.

If three goblins hit you with spear attacks and a +2 damage you are looking at an average of 5 damage per hit. With HAM that becomes 2 damage per hit. That's incredible. Overtime that will add up in a dungeon and so forth.

HAM is good if you face many enemies that don't hit super hard or multi-attack enemies.

On the other hand, if you constantly are going up against 1 or 2 creatures that just drop bomb after bomb of attacks Sentinel is going to be a better choice.

Honestly - As a fighter with a 2 handed weapon you prolly want both Sentinel and HAM unless any of the above conditions are met.

And I thought the OP wanted to suggest that HAM should scale. I've wondered why WotC didn't write it as damage absorbed equals proficiency bonus. I bet some other feats would be better if they scaled. It is after all, mastery of something, and mastery is relative given a profic mod.

[Tanarii]

Tought is worth 2 hp per level, and doesn't apply to HD. But it's important to note it's the last 2 hp/level, not the top, so don't get to count it twice unless you drop below the value before healing. Since than can happen, it can increase the base value of it.

So at level 4, it's worth base value 8 HPs. You get that back from HAM after 3 hits. Even at level 10, you'll get back that base value 20 hp after 7 hits. At level 15 in 10 hits.

How often are you getting hit?

[micahaphone]

Let's take a look at an encounter my 3 level 9 players just took on, 1 Nalfeshnee and 2 Barlguras, 1 CR 13 and 2 CR 5 demons, a very tough and deadly fight. This is not a horde of mooks, these are 3 heavy hitters. The wizard insta-died to a crit bite, thank god the paladin just unlocked Revivify.

Let's say you take a full round of hits from the 3 demons, no special abilities or spellcasting being used.
Nalfeshnee has 1 bite, 2 claw attacks. All at +10 to hit, 5d10+5 and 3d6+5 x2.
each Barlgura does 1 bite, 2 fist. +7 to hit, 2d6+4 and 1d10+4 x2


If every hit lands, you're looking at (averaged) 32+15+15+2x(11+9+9) = 91 damage!

If you have heavy armor master that average would be 29+12+12+2x(9+7+7)= 76 damage

So even vs 3 hard hitting fiends, you could prevent 15 damage, or ~17% of the total. That's pretty good for a half feat.

[diplomancer]

Let's take a look at an encounter my 3 level 9 players just took on, 1 Nalfeshnee and 2 Barlguras, 1 CR 13 and 2 CR 5 demons, a very tough and deadly fight. This is not a horde of mooks, these are 3 heavy hitters. The wizard insta-died to a crit bite, thank god the paladin just unlocked Revivify.

Let's say you take a full round of hits from the 3 demons, no special abilities or spellcasting being used.
Nalfeshnee has 1 bite, 2 claw attacks. All at +10 to hit, 5d10+5 and 3d6+5 x2.
each Barlgura does 1 bite, 2 fist. +7 to hit, 2d6+4 and 1d10+4 x2


If every hit lands, you're looking at (averaged) 32+15+15+2x(11+9+9) = 91 damage!

If you have heavy armor master that average would be 29+12+12+2x(9+7+7)= 76 damage

So even vs 3 hard hitting fiends, you could prevent 15 damage, or ~17% of the total. That's pretty good for a half feat.

Your point is correct, but your math is off; it's actually 120 points of damage if everything hits, and 27 of them get absorbed by HAM for a total of 93 damage, so 22.5% of the total damage gets prevented.

[Guy Lombard-O]

I've never liked Tough much. I think it's pretty marginal (unless you already have a 20 Con).

Sentinel is a great feat, full stop.

But HAM can be really good, as well. One thing we don't know about your situation is whether you have an odd Str score? If you do, then I'd take HAM and I wouldn't look back.

[JonBeowulf]

My first 5e char was a Battlemaster with HAM and Parry... that guy could stand in the gap all day long. The dmg reduction may seem small once the hits get big but it adds up over the course of an adventure. Also, every round you stay up is another round nobody has to worry about getting you back up.

[strangebloke]

Take HAM because its cool, you don't need another reason.

Its one of those feats that isn't amazing in some circumstances, but when it works (IE, against a horde) it really works and feels great.

[Keravath]

I think a bigger issue is that HAM becomes less useful as levels go up and opponents have magical attacks.

"While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from non-magical weapons is reduced by 3."

HAM only works on bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical weapons. As opponents get tougher, NPCs may be armed with magical weapons or their attacks may be considered magical (like higher CR fiends - eg Marilith) and as a result, HAM won't do anything in those cases. On the other hand, in tier 1 and tier 2, it is a decent 1/2 feat.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I've never liked Tough much. I think it's pretty marginal (unless you already have a 20 Con).

Sentinel is a great feat, full stop.

But HAM can be really good, as well. One thing we don't know about your situation is whether you have an odd Str score? If you do, then I'd take HAM and I wouldn't look back.

Pretty much this. There are full feats and 1/2 feats; if you need a 1/2 then HAM is good and your fellow players are just plain wrong. If you have an even score take something else.

[Shadean207]

And I thought the OP wanted to suggest that HAM should scale. I've wondered why WotC didn't write it as damage absorbed equals proficiency bonus. I bet some other feats would be better if they scaled. It is after all, mastery of something, and mastery is relative given a profic mod.

Yes, that was part of my initial question, since I have never played beyond Tier 1, so have no idea how much HAM can actually make a noticeable difference. For this level, when bandit veterans are the most annoying thing you might encounter, 3 damage per attack sounds pretty cool. I'm just worried for the later levels.

Also, I agree with the scaling in several feats (and other things, to not make abilities obsolete purely on grounds of them being an early ability...)

As for the other options, Sentinel and Tough, I am currently the only dedicated Tank/Fighter in the party, the others being a Tempest Cleric, Shadow Monk and Fiend Warlock. So, I think we're pretty much set on the offensive part, I wanna worry about the defensive part now :smallsmile:

[Tanarii]

You probably want both HAM and Sentinel and Str and Con as a GWM fighter who is also trying to tank. :smallamused:

[strangebloke]

Yes, that was part of my initial question, since I have never played beyond Tier 1, so have no idea how much HAM can actually make a noticeable difference. For this level, when bandit veterans are the most annoying thing you might encounter, 3 damage per attack sounds pretty cool. I'm just worried for the later levels.

Also, I agree with the scaling in several feats (and other things, to not make abilities obsolete purely on grounds of them being an early ability...)

As for the other options, Sentinel and Tough, I am currently the only dedicated Tank/Fighter in the party, the others being a Tempest Cleric, Shadow Monk and Fiend Warlock. So, I think we're pretty much set on the offensive part, I wanna worry about the defensive part now :smallsmile:

Magical attacks aren't really commonplace until tier 3, which basically never happens. Sometimes a boss will have some, and at other times you'll have a big breath weapon or something to deal with but MOST enemies you'll fight will still be dealing B/S/P damage.

[Dark.Revenant]

tier 3[...] basically never happens

10% is not "basically never". That's as likely as rolling a 1 or a 20.

[strangebloke]

10% is not "basically never". That's as likely as rolling a 1 or a 20.

It's still not worth worrying about at level 4

[PhoenixPhyre]

Magical attacks aren't really commonplace until tier 3, which basically never happens. Sometimes a boss will have some, and at other times you'll have a big breath weapon or something to deal with but MOST enemies you'll fight will still be dealing B/S/P damage.

Yeah. There are a few monsters whose base attacks are magical. But only a few. And even those who have breaths and things do most of their damage physically.

[Kane0]

It's a perfectly fine feat unless you're fighting nothing but:
- Enemies that always use magical weapons or nonweapon attacks/effects
- Enemies that hit only once or twice for truckloads of damage
- Enemies that ignore you

Which is to say that's pretty rare, so it's a good feat.

[micahaphone]

Your point is correct, but your math is off; it's actually 120 points of damage if everything hits, and 27 of them get absorbed by HAM for a total of 93 damage, so 22.5% of the total damage gets prevented.

Well crap not sure how I screwed that up. Still, thank you for correcting me and proving that it's even better!


I think a bigger issue is that HAM becomes less useful as levels go up and opponents have magical attacks.

"While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from non-magical weapons is reduced by 3."

HAM only works on bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical weapons. As opponents get tougher, NPCs may be armed with magical weapons or their attacks may be considered magical (like higher CR fiends - eg Marilith) and as a result, HAM won't do anything in those cases. On the other hand, in tier 1 and tier 2, it is a decent 1/2 feat.


Even in higher tiers I'm not convinced there's that many monsters with magical attacks. I'm currently using a filtered list of all 5e official monsters that have magical attacks, it's only constructs/golems, some fiends, some celestials, and some BBEG level contenders like named demon lords or a balor. I can't imagine you'll run into these with much frequency, they're "special occasions" monsters.



Name, creature type, CR, book
Stone Giant Statue Construct 0 SKT
Damaged Flesh Golem Construct 1 EGW
Merrenoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 3 MTF
Couatl Celestial 4 MM
Nimblewright Construct 4 WDH
Stone Warrior Construct 4 PotA
Flesh Golem Construct 5 MM
Hellwasp Fiend 5 BGDIA
Hollyphant Celestial 5 BGDIA
Lightning Golem Construct 5 CM
Mezzoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 5 MM
Reduced-Threat Flesh Golem Construct 5 TftYP
Tomb Guardian Construct 5 ToA
Unicorn Celestial 5 MM
Zakya Rakshasa Fiend 5 ERLW
Spiked Tomb Guardian Construct 6 ToA
White Abishai Fiend (devil) 6 MTF
Air Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Armanite Fiend (demon) 7 MTF
Black Abishai Fiend (devil) 7 MTF
Dhergoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 7 MTF
Earth Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Fire Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Oni Giant 7 MM
Water Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Canoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 8 MTF
Fiendish Flesh Golem Construct 8 BGDIA
Clay Golem Construct 9 MM
Gray Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 9 MM
Hydroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MTF
Nycaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MM
Reduced-Threat Clay Golem Construct 9 TftYP
Amber Golem Construct 10 CoS
Crystal Golem Construct 10 WDMM
Death Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 10 MM
Four-Armed Statue Construct 10 OotA
Headless Iron Golem Construct 10 IDRotF
Huge Stone Golem Construct 10 SKT
Jade Giant Spider Construct 10 OotA
Reduced-Threat Stone Golem Construct 10 TftYP
Sapphire Sentinel Construct 10 CM
Statue of Vergadain Construct 10 WDMM
Stone Dragon Statue Construct 10 TftYP
Stone Golem Construct 10 MM
Stonecloak Construct 10 WDMM
Animated Statue of Lolth Construct 11 WDMM
Gynosphinx Monstrosity 11 MM
Sphinx of Judgment Monstrosity 11 GGR
Yagnoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 11 MTF
Arcanaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MM
Ki-rin Celestial 12 VGM
Mad Golem Construct 12 WDMM
Oinoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MTF
Ultroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 13 MM
Green Abishai Fiend (devil) 15 MTF
Nabassu Fiend (demon) 15 MTF
Iron Golem Construct 16 MM
Marilith Fiend (demon) 16 MM
Steel Predator Construct 16 MTF
Titivilus Fiend (devil) 16 MTF
Androsphinx Monstrosity 17 MM
Blue Abishai Fiend (devil) 17 MTF
Trostani Fey 18 GGR
Bael Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Balor Fiend (demon) 19 MM
Red Abishai Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Pit Fiend Fiend (devil) 20 MM
Astral Dreadnought Monstrosity (titan) 21 MTF
Hutijin Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Moloch Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Molydeus Fiend (demon) 21 MTF
Geryon Fiend (devil) 22 MTF
Zaratan Elemental 22 MTF
Baphomet Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Colossus of Akros Construct 23 MOT
Empyrean Celestial (titan) 23 MM
Fraz-Urb'luu Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Juiblex Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Zuggtmoy Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Graz'zt Fiend (demon, shapechanger) 24 MTF
Rakdos Fiend (demon) 24 GGR
Yeenoghu Fiend (demon) 24 MTF
Demogorgon Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Orcus Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Tromokratis Monstrosity (titan) 26 MOT
Zariel Fiend (devil) 26 MTF

[Dork_Forge]

I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai, and I am the only dedicated/exclusive frontline fighter.

For 4th level, I was thinking of taking the Heavy Armor Master feat, but I keep being told by other players that it's just "not worth it", and they advise me to go with Tough or Sentinel.

Now, I don't have that much experience with long-term campaigns and the associated scaling... is HAM actually that bad? Does it just fall off later? Can it be balanced by, for example, changing the flat 3 reduction to reduction=Proficiency Bonus?
I'd really like to have some insights from the more experienced players here. Thanks!


To add: I have no clue if the campaign is gonna be that long, but from the way I know our DM, level-wise it will go into the double digits, probably. Also, as a VHuman, I started with the Great Weapon Master feat, my Fighting Style is GWF. So, I am pretty much set on that front (I believe...)

It really depends on your campaign, if you're shooting to in general be a tanky fighter, then I suggest Tough. More hp are more hp, they're reliable no matter what encounter you walk into, and it raises your insta-death threshold nicely.

HAM isn't going to protect you from traps, AOEs, any form of magical of non BPS daamge (or which there is potentially a lot, and it won't really protect you from sudden massive damage.

If you find that your DM mostly prefers out numbering the party or using a lot of weaker attacks, then it will have a lot of value.

Do you have an odd numbered strength?


Those who are giving you that advice are just wrong. HaM is flat out more mitigation than tough and if you are already getting targeted by most attacks sentinel has little value. Even at lv 20 HaM can be the largest source of mitigation for a fighter. It increases your HP and THP value and it's passive. Being a half feat is icing.

That depends entirely on party composition and encounters, not the feats in question.


Tough has its purpose but you need to have reliable resistance to the most common damage types you face and a party that can fill that bigger HP pool easily or the value isn't even as good as being able to cast shield or goodberries 1/LR.

Why would you need resistance for Tough to be worth it?

How are you working out that a single casting of Shield or Goodberry per LR is better than no resistance Tough? Shield only really matters if you blocked a lot of hits or a very big hit.

For Goodberry I have no idea where you're coming from on that one, at 4th Tough is an 8hp bump, for Goodberry to be worth more than that you'd have to never heal those 8hp in a day. Since as a Fighter the OP would get Second Wind I don't see any way that Goodberry 1/LR is better now and it will just fall worse and worse as levels gain.


I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai, and I am the only dedicated/exclusive frontline fighter.

For 4th level, I was thinking of taking the Heavy Armor Master feat, but I keep being told by other players that it's just "not worth it", and they advise me to go with Tough or Sentinel.

Now, I don't have that much experience with long-term campaigns and the associated scaling... is HAM actually that bad? Does it just fall off later? Can it be balanced by, for example, changing the flat 3 reduction to reduction=Proficiency Bonus?
I'd really like to have some insights from the more experienced players here. Thanks!


To add: I have no clue if the campaign is gonna be that long, but from the way I know our DM, level-wise it will go into the double digits, probably. Also, as a VHuman, I started with the Great Weapon Master feat, my Fighting Style is GWF. So, I am pretty much set on that front (I believe...)


Well crap not sure how I screwed that up. Still, thank you for correcting me and proving that it's even better!




Even in higher tiers I'm not convinced there's that many monsters with magical attacks. I'm currently using a filtered list of all 5e official monsters that have magical attacks, it's only constructs/golems, some fiends, some celestials, and some BBEG level contenders like named demon lords or a balor. I can't imagine you'll run into these with much frequency, they're "special occasions" monsters.



Name, creature type, CR, book
Stone Giant Statue Construct 0 SKT
Damaged Flesh Golem Construct 1 EGW
Merrenoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 3 MTF
Couatl Celestial 4 MM
Nimblewright Construct 4 WDH
Stone Warrior Construct 4 PotA
Flesh Golem Construct 5 MM
Hellwasp Fiend 5 BGDIA
Hollyphant Celestial 5 BGDIA
Lightning Golem Construct 5 CM
Mezzoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 5 MM
Reduced-Threat Flesh Golem Construct 5 TftYP
Tomb Guardian Construct 5 ToA
Unicorn Celestial 5 MM
Zakya Rakshasa Fiend 5 ERLW
Spiked Tomb Guardian Construct 6 ToA
White Abishai Fiend (devil) 6 MTF
Air Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Armanite Fiend (demon) 7 MTF
Black Abishai Fiend (devil) 7 MTF
Dhergoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 7 MTF
Earth Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Fire Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Oni Giant 7 MM
Water Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Canoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 8 MTF
Fiendish Flesh Golem Construct 8 BGDIA
Clay Golem Construct 9 MM
Gray Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 9 MM
Hydroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MTF
Nycaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MM
Reduced-Threat Clay Golem Construct 9 TftYP
Amber Golem Construct 10 CoS
Crystal Golem Construct 10 WDMM
Death Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 10 MM
Four-Armed Statue Construct 10 OotA
Headless Iron Golem Construct 10 IDRotF
Huge Stone Golem Construct 10 SKT
Jade Giant Spider Construct 10 OotA
Reduced-Threat Stone Golem Construct 10 TftYP
Sapphire Sentinel Construct 10 CM
Statue of Vergadain Construct 10 WDMM
Stone Dragon Statue Construct 10 TftYP
Stone Golem Construct 10 MM
Stonecloak Construct 10 WDMM
Animated Statue of Lolth Construct 11 WDMM
Gynosphinx Monstrosity 11 MM
Sphinx of Judgment Monstrosity 11 GGR
Yagnoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 11 MTF
Arcanaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MM
Ki-rin Celestial 12 VGM
Mad Golem Construct 12 WDMM
Oinoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MTF
Ultroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 13 MM
Green Abishai Fiend (devil) 15 MTF
Nabassu Fiend (demon) 15 MTF
Iron Golem Construct 16 MM
Marilith Fiend (demon) 16 MM
Steel Predator Construct 16 MTF
Titivilus Fiend (devil) 16 MTF
Androsphinx Monstrosity 17 MM
Blue Abishai Fiend (devil) 17 MTF
Trostani Fey 18 GGR
Bael Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Balor Fiend (demon) 19 MM
Red Abishai Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Pit Fiend Fiend (devil) 20 MM
Astral Dreadnought Monstrosity (titan) 21 MTF
Hutijin Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Moloch Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Molydeus Fiend (demon) 21 MTF
Geryon Fiend (devil) 22 MTF
Zaratan Elemental 22 MTF
Baphomet Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Colossus of Akros Construct 23 MOT
Empyrean Celestial (titan) 23 MM
Fraz-Urb'luu Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Juiblex Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Zuggtmoy Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Graz'zt Fiend (demon, shapechanger) 24 MTF
Rakdos Fiend (demon) 24 GGR
Yeenoghu Fiend (demon) 24 MTF
Demogorgon Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Orcus Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Tromokratis Monstrosity (titan) 26 MOT
Zariel Fiend (devil) 26 MTF

Do people not give out magic items by having the bad guys use them anymore? >.>

Looking purely at monsters with built in magical BPS attacks is a limited comparison, you're not taking into consideration the amount of monsters that have non BPS attacks, traps or effects taht target max hp directly.

[stoutstien]

It really depends on your campaign, if you're shooting to in general be a tanky fighter, then I suggest Tough. More hp are more hp, they're reliable no matter what encounter you walk into, and it raises your insta-death threshold nicely.

HAM isn't going to protect you from traps, AOEs, any form of magical of non BPS daamge (or which there is potentially a lot, and it won't really protect you from sudden massive damage.

If you find that your DM mostly prefers out numbering the party or using a lot of weaker attacks, then it will have a lot of value.

Do you have an odd numbered strength?



That depends entirely on party composition and encounters, not the feats in question.



Why would you need resistance for Tough to be worth it?

How are you working out that a single casting of Shield or Goodberry per LR is better than no resistance Tough? Shield only really matters if you blocked a lot of hits or a very big hit.

For Goodberry I have no idea where you're coming from on that one, at 4th Tough is an 8hp bump, for Goodberry to be worth more than that you'd have to never heal those 8hp in a day. Since as a Fighter the OP would get Second Wind I don't see any way that Goodberry 1/LR is better now and it will just fall worse and worse as levels

It's pretty easy to find ways for shield to block more damage than hp that tough provides. Generally one hit turned into a miss is enough and shield tends to do more than that.

GB has flexibility on it's side. 20 extra health on the fighter doesn't do any good if the clerics needs a touch up and it provides food so it has utility going for it. Could just as well said the healer fest which is more healing but at a gold cost without the food benefit.

MI also comes with cantrips. Guidance is going to be a better tool for traps and environmental challenges than trying to eat problems with a bigger HP pool because that health still needs to be recovered which brings me the part that I actually am annoyed about tough. It's only useful when that extra HP is on the bottom. until you get to the point where the only reason that you're still up right is the extra HP provided by that feat it hasn't done anything. It doesn't soften damage coming and doesn't synergize with other forms of mitigation besides resistance which thankfully it works really well with.

I think we're looking at this for two different angles. in a white room comparison between the two they're pretty close but specifically for a samurai fighter using 2hd weapons (fighting style unknown) heavy armor Master is going to mesh better with that PC. He is a decent source of temporary hit points that works well with the feat and second wind. Tough would be an okay pick after that because now they have a way of stretching those extra hp out but in and of themselves they aren't going to feel impactful. Not to mention if they do happen to get to the later levels tough actually directly interferes with the samurai's capstone. Either that or that extra little bit of HP wouldn't have made a difference anyways.

[Tanarii]

Tough is a wasted feat if you don't already have a 20 Con. +2 Con already grants +2 HP, one to max HP and one to each HD. And it gives you a bonus in checks and saves to boot.

The only reason to take Tough over Con is if you're really struggling with the max HP in a single fight on a regular basis. If that's the case, fair enough, go to it,

[stoutstien]

Tough is a wasted feat if you don't already have a 20 Con. +2 Con already grants +2 HP, one to max HP and one to each HD. And it gives you a bonus in checks and saves to boot.

The only reason to take Tough over Con is if you're really struggling with the max HP in a single fight on a regular basis. If that's the case, fair enough, go to it,

Tough does have a few corner cases where it shines. For example a battle Smith that is leveraging consistent use of warding bond and mindsharping infusion means they can double the value of the feat and they have very action friendly healing. Toss on the hill dwarf bonus as well and you got a very self sustainable front line.

[Unoriginal]

I think a bigger issue is that HAM becomes less useful as levels go up and opponents have magical attacks.

"While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from non-magical weapons is reduced by 3."

HAM only works on bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical weapons. As opponents get tougher, NPCs may be armed with magical weapons or their attacks may be considered magical (like higher CR fiends - eg Marilith) and as a result, HAM won't do anything in those cases. On the other hand, in tier 1 and tier 2, it is a decent 1/2 feat.

Non-magic-attack-using enemies keep showing up in tier 3 and 4, though. Both as mooks and for many big enemies.

An Ancient Red Dragon's bite, claws, tail and wings are all affected by Heavy Armor Master, for example.

It's true it's less useful if you face mostly high CR Fiends or Celestials, but otherwise it's still pretty worthwhile.

[RSP]

I’m a fan of HAM: as others have said, if you need +1 Str, I’d grab it.

Certainly see if your DM will go for Prof Mod rather than a flat DR 3, though, to be fair, it seems you’ve escaped the majority of the campaign when that would weaken the feat (when your Prof Mod is 2).

I’d push more for “If I’m wearing magic armor, will that allow the DR3 to hold up against magic attacks?” I think this is a very sensible errata to the feat (though I’d also be fine with having the feat just DR magical attacks too - really it makes no sense that it doesn’t).

[Chaosmancer]

Tackling the other side of the question, I'm not sure I'd let HAM scale with prof per se. Doing so directly would weaken it when it is most useful (levels 1 through 5) while not strengthening it a lot when it is least useful.

However, I could see an argument made for increasing it to 4 damage at level 11 and 5 damage at level 17. I also let it work on magical weapons. If you want it to not, for the purposes of magical weapons sheering through armor, then let it only work if you are wearing magical heavy armor.

And, to be fair, I could see a point being made that this is a feat with a lot of restrictions with minimal value at mid to high level play. You have to be wearing heavy armor, which means you are disincentivized to wear magical medium armor, it doesn't work against anything except non-magical weapon damage, and it is less effective the fewer attacks you are receiving.

However, I also have some experience with a (slightly home-brewed) UA samurai using this feat. We were using the UA where it gave resistance, and we calculated resistance before taking the 3 damage out (I know that is technically wrong ordering) and it was very powerful as it was.

Even with the Samurai as written, you are able to gain 5 temp hp 3/day. HAM can make this, effectively 8. Which is 24 extra max HP per day, before taking any damage that needs to be healed. Then you can use Second Wind to heal yourself. HAM is subtle, but powerful at early levels, unless you aren't getting hit with weapons.

If you have 24 hp and you get hit for 20 damage, then sure, reducing it to 17 isn't going to feel like it helped a lot. Because hit number 2 knocks you out either way, the extra 6 hp isn't enough to overcome the overkill. But, if you get hit six times for 5, that turns 30 damage to 12, and that does save your life by a lot.

[Asmotherion]

I think it's a pretty good feat for a tank.

[micahaphone]

Do people not give out magic items by having the bad guys use them anymore? >.>

Looking purely at monsters with built in magical BPS attacks is a limited comparison, you're not taking into consideration the amount of monsters that have non BPS attacks, traps or effects taht target max hp directly.

If you're handing out magic weapons by having the bad guys use them, that's at most one guy in the entire dungeon? Once an arc? Not exactly super frequent. Besides, if your players are collecting the villain's magic items, they're in for a world of curses and trapped souls and thirsting blades.

You're right that HAM doesn't help against fire breaths, acid spits, poisons, or life drains, but those are frequently recharging abilities or riders atop regular b/p/s damage. I think the bread and butter of damage is b/p/s.

And as Tanarii pointed out earlier,


Tough is worth 2 hp per level, and doesn't apply to HD. But it's important to note it's the last 2 hp/level, not the top, so don't get to count it twice unless you drop below the value before healing. Since than can happen, it can increase the base value of it.

So at level 4, it's worth base value 8 HPs. You get that back from HAM after 3 hits. Even at level 10, you'll get back that base value 20 hp after 7 hits. At level 15 in 10 hits.

How often are you getting hit?

So long as you get hit more than ~5 times between short rests, HAM is better than Tough. Mitigation is also stronger than more max HP because it makes healing more potent.

[Nagog]

Tought is worth 2 hp per level, and doesn't apply to HD. But it's important to note it's the last 2 hp/level, not the top, so don't get to count it twice unless you drop below the value before healing. Since than can happen, it can increase the base value of it.


What do you mean by this? Hp is Hp, it doesn't matter where you place it, they all have the same kind of value.

[Tanarii]

What do you mean by this? Hp is Hp, it doesn't matter where you place it, they all have the same kind of value.
I'm a 3rd level Con 14 fighter, and have 28 hps. At level 4 I take either Tough or HAM. With HAM I have 36 hps. With Tough I have 44 hps.

In 5 fights each, I get hit 3 times for 6 damage, and healed each time of all damage with Cure Wounds spells of 9 damage / spell, to enter (each) battle fully healed. With tough, I have gained nothing. Those extra HPs weren't needed because I never dropped below 8 hps. With HAM, I have saved 1 Cure Wounds level 1 slot per battle.

Conversely if I get dropped down below 8 hps and healed to full, and again, each battle, those tough hit points are doing double (or more) duty towards saving me. They're being useful multiple times.

Same for Tough vs +2 Con, except the extra threshold/safety margin is lower, 1hp/level.

Hit points have two values: threshold values (max/min), and current value (constantly flowing in and out). Tough affects the first one directly and thus the other indirectly, HAM affects the latter directly and the other indirectly.

[diplomancer]

Seems to me that HAM is to a Heavy Armor user what Tough is to a Barbarian; the feat you take when you want to tank even more. I also think it is more fun than Tough, in that you see it working almost every round of combat.

More relevant, then, is the question "Do you want to tank more?" If yes, I'd go HAM over Tough every time (assuming, naturally, that HAM is an option)

[Waterdeep Merch]

Beyond what everyone else has said, HAM has another very serious leg up over Tough- it's probably improving your offense. The extra +1 Strength could put you at the next echelon for attack and damage improvements, and if it can't, it can allow for two improvements or another good half feat at a later ASI.

Unless you don't use Strength for your primary attack stat, of course.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Unless you don't use Strength for your primary attack stat, of course.

In which case it's weird you're wearing heavy armor. That's a lot of wasted stat points bumping STR (unless dwarf, of course).

[Waterdeep Merch]

In which case it's weird you're wearing heavy armor. That's a lot of wasted stat points bumping STR (unless dwarf, of course).

Yeah, it's not common, but there's a few cases. Certain clerics, a few rare warlock builds I've seen, or when a houserule or special circumstance is letting you do or get something that bypasses the Strength problem (in my own games, mithril is often a lot easier to get ahold of. A player took my 'free uncommon item' before a higher level game to nab Gauntlets of Ogre Strength to shore up bad stats once).

[Guy Lombard-O]

I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai

OP is definitely a Str user. He hasn't responded to the inquiries about whether his Str score is odd or even at the moment.

[micahaphone]

OP is definitely a Str user. He hasn't responded to the inquiries about whether his Str score is odd or even at the moment.

Now I'm curious about the new Tasha half feats like Slasher. Like if OP's str score is even, but then takes Slasher (or other str half feats, like some of the xanathar's racial feats) at level 6 then GWM at 8, you could still have an 18 str at level 8 but the bonus of 3 feats.

[MrStabby]

It's a perfectly fine feat unless you're fighting nothing but:
- Enemies that always use magical weapons or nonweapon attacks/effects
- Enemies that hit only once or twice for truckloads of damage
- Enemies that ignore you

Which is to say that's pretty rare, so it's a good feat.

I think that HAM is a good feat - well good enough anyway, but I think you are presenting this list as a set of niche occurences when in reality I think they are quite common.

Enemies that cast spells? Pretty common, I would say between 30% and 40% of enemies I am facing are casting spells, thoough to be fair some are sells like animate obejects and animate dead where it is very useful.

Enemies with magical weapon attacks - not that common, but as a fraction of enemies that are not casting spells and that are doing BPS damage it is considerably higher.

Enemies that do non magical BPS attacks but are not doing so with weapons - things like unarmed strike is the obvious one, but check if your DM is counting a bite or a claw a weapon - i.e have seen natural weapons ruled both ways.

Some circumstances won't show up in a monster stat block, like a monster doing a lot of its damage through its environment - throwing enemies onto lave or off ledges or flying and dropping from a height. If your DM runs more unorthodox encounters like this then HAM will be overvalued.

Enemies hitting just a couple of times but for loads of damage? Hmm, not common but maybe 15% of enemies that are non caster, non unarmed strike, non smashing people off the scenery type bad guys. In my experience - obviously everyone will have a different experience here.

And enemies that ignore you? Well this comes down to party composition I guess - if everyone is in heavy armour and there isn't much to chose between them then you should get your share of attacks. If your enemies are smart enough to target those who look like they have lower AC then you might find yourself attacked less than others.



So broadly speaking in T2/T3, hazarding a guess based on my experience...

Of all the damage you take, about 60% of it comes from BPS attacks
Of that, about 50% comes from weapons, about 75% if you count "natural weapons" as weapons for the purpose of this spell
Of that, about 95% of damage is from non magical weapons
And the big hitters - maybe 30% of those enemies where it will save you about 15% of damage...
And the other hordes 70% where it will save you about 30% of damage.

So 0.6*0.5*0.95*((0.3*0.15)+(0.7*0.3))=0.07 - i.e. I would roughly expect it to be about 7% damage reduction, 11% if a tenticle counts as a weapon. Very roughly... obviously DM dependant.

[Keravath]

Well crap not sure how I screwed that up. Still, thank you for correcting me and proving that it's even better!




Even in higher tiers I'm not convinced there's that many monsters with magical attacks. I'm currently using a filtered list of all 5e official monsters that have magical attacks, it's only constructs/golems, some fiends, some celestials, and some BBEG level contenders like named demon lords or a balor. I can't imagine you'll run into these with much frequency, they're "special occasions" monsters.



Name, creature type, CR, book
Stone Giant Statue Construct 0 SKT
Damaged Flesh Golem Construct 1 EGW
Merrenoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 3 MTF
Couatl Celestial 4 MM
Nimblewright Construct 4 WDH
Stone Warrior Construct 4 PotA
Flesh Golem Construct 5 MM
Hellwasp Fiend 5 BGDIA
Hollyphant Celestial 5 BGDIA
Lightning Golem Construct 5 CM
Mezzoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 5 MM
Reduced-Threat Flesh Golem Construct 5 TftYP
Tomb Guardian Construct 5 ToA
Unicorn Celestial 5 MM
Zakya Rakshasa Fiend 5 ERLW
Spiked Tomb Guardian Construct 6 ToA
White Abishai Fiend (devil) 6 MTF
Air Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Armanite Fiend (demon) 7 MTF
Black Abishai Fiend (devil) 7 MTF
Dhergoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 7 MTF
Earth Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Fire Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Oni Giant 7 MM
Water Elemental Myrmidon Elemental 7 MTF
Canoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 8 MTF
Fiendish Flesh Golem Construct 8 BGDIA
Clay Golem Construct 9 MM
Gray Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 9 MM
Hydroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MTF
Nycaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 9 MM
Reduced-Threat Clay Golem Construct 9 TftYP
Amber Golem Construct 10 CoS
Crystal Golem Construct 10 WDMM
Death Slaad Aberration (shapechanger) 10 MM
Four-Armed Statue Construct 10 OotA
Headless Iron Golem Construct 10 IDRotF
Huge Stone Golem Construct 10 SKT
Jade Giant Spider Construct 10 OotA
Reduced-Threat Stone Golem Construct 10 TftYP
Sapphire Sentinel Construct 10 CM
Statue of Vergadain Construct 10 WDMM
Stone Dragon Statue Construct 10 TftYP
Stone Golem Construct 10 MM
Stonecloak Construct 10 WDMM
Animated Statue of Lolth Construct 11 WDMM
Gynosphinx Monstrosity 11 MM
Sphinx of Judgment Monstrosity 11 GGR
Yagnoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 11 MTF
Arcanaloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MM
Ki-rin Celestial 12 VGM
Mad Golem Construct 12 WDMM
Oinoloth Fiend (yugoloth) 12 MTF
Ultroloth Fiend (yugoloth) 13 MM
Green Abishai Fiend (devil) 15 MTF
Nabassu Fiend (demon) 15 MTF
Iron Golem Construct 16 MM
Marilith Fiend (demon) 16 MM
Steel Predator Construct 16 MTF
Titivilus Fiend (devil) 16 MTF
Androsphinx Monstrosity 17 MM
Blue Abishai Fiend (devil) 17 MTF
Trostani Fey 18 GGR
Bael Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Balor Fiend (demon) 19 MM
Red Abishai Fiend (devil) 19 MTF
Pit Fiend Fiend (devil) 20 MM
Astral Dreadnought Monstrosity (titan) 21 MTF
Hutijin Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Moloch Fiend (devil) 21 MTF
Molydeus Fiend (demon) 21 MTF
Geryon Fiend (devil) 22 MTF
Zaratan Elemental 22 MTF
Baphomet Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Colossus of Akros Construct 23 MOT
Empyrean Celestial (titan) 23 MM
Fraz-Urb'luu Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Juiblex Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Zuggtmoy Fiend (demon) 23 MTF
Graz'zt Fiend (demon, shapechanger) 24 MTF
Rakdos Fiend (demon) 24 GGR
Yeenoghu Fiend (demon) 24 MTF
Demogorgon Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Orcus Fiend (demon) 26 MTF
Tromokratis Monstrosity (titan) 26 MOT
Zariel Fiend (devil) 26 MTF


I think a lot may depend on your DM and the encounters he runs. In my games, and many games I have played, a lot of the opponents are humanoids either built as NPCs or occasionally using a PC character template. Humanoid NPCs by late tier 2 and tier 3+ are very likely to be equipped with magical weapons of some sort either because it makes sense in context or as loot for the party if they succeed at the encounter.

If your DM restricts opponents to those in the PHB then I'd agree, the number with magical attacks is somewhat limited and tends to be somewhat higher CR with the exception of constructs. If you include those that could be found to be wielding magical weapons, the list is much longer.

For example, even in Sunless Citadel, one of the NPCs at the end is wielding Shatterspike, a +1 longsword, that would bypass the DR from HAM - and it isn't the only example. +1 weapons are fairly common throughout modules and get more common at higher levels.

[strangebloke]

So 0.6*0.5*0.95*((0.3*0.15)+(0.7*0.3))=0.07 - i.e. I would roughly expect it to be about 7% damage reduction, 11% if a tenticle counts as a weapon. Very roughly... obviously DM dependant.

My main quibble here will be that although many enemies do cast spells, spellcasters do a lot more than just deal damage. Oftentimes they're setting you up to take even more damage from physical enemies via spells like hold person or telekenesis.

But what I try to fixate on is that 30% damage reduction against normal hordes. Having a relatively common sort of creature that you're really good against feels very nice. It's why so many people take mageslayer for example. Its great for a character to be able to say, "hah, a hundred goblins? Not even a worry!"

[Keravath]

...

Enemies that do non magical BPS attacks but are not doing so with weapons - things like unarmed strike is the obvious one, but check if your DM is counting a bite or a claw a weapon - i.e have seen natural weapons ruled both ways.

...


Although it may be DM dependent - the MM makes it quite clear that all monster attacks are considered either spell or weapon attacks (though a DM could decide otherwise of course).

MM p10

"ACTIONS
When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player's Handbook.
MELEE AND RANGED ATTACKS
The most common actions that a monster will take in combat are melee and ranged attacks. These can be spell attacks or weapon attacks, where the "weapon" might be a manufactured item or a natural weapon, such as a claw or tail spike. For more information on different kinds of attacks, see the Player's Handbook."

This makes pretty clear that all monster attacks are either spell or weapon attacks and the stat block specifies which one they are. In addition, it also makes clear that even if the creature is not wielding a manufactured weapon, the attack is still considered a weapon attack.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Now I'm curious about the new Tasha half feats like Slasher. Like if OP's str score is even, but then takes Slasher (or other str half feats, like some of the xanathar's racial feats) at level 6 then GWM at 8, you could still have an 18 str at level 8 but the bonus of 3 feats.

Making Slasher slot in easier would be an excellent reason to grab HAM. From the OP's friends' recommendation of Sentinel, I'd hazard a guess that they are a tank of some sort. HAM helps them survive hits, while Slasher would help them control enemy movement better. Adding GWM at 8 would definitely add the kind of threat that makes enemies more likely to pay attention to them.

Depending on your DM, that might be more ideal than focusing on improved defenses later. It would be for my players, since I have smart opponents try to get around players with too much apparent AC (if it's due to something less noticeable like Bracers of Defense or a monk, I only have enemies react to their true AC if they're aware of them) to attack weaker members. Conversely, I have animals in particular avoid armored opponents and fear large weapons regardless of how meta-strong their wielder actually is (waving a large stick around works, too), and are cautious about approaching anyone that has both.

If your DM just attacks the tank because there is a tank and that's that, Slasher (and Sentinel for that matter) are kind of a waste of time. Some people prefer the simplicity of that style, especially in Theater of the Mind, I find.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

This thread is reminding me that our group has found it a little weird how many monsters do not have attacks that are considered magical. At the top of the list are dragons; The game is called Dungeons & Dragons for crying out loud. Anyway, at the moment we've given adult and older dragons magical attacks, but haven't made too many other changes, though I certainly will as I deem appropriate. I suppose this would be a Nerf to HAM, and I'm not sure how many applications this would have as a monster fighting a party. Not many I think.

[MrStabby]

Although it may be DM dependent - the MM makes it quite clear that all monster attacks are considered either spell or weapon attacks (though a DM could decide otherwise of course).

MM p10

"ACTIONS
When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action, as described in the Player's Handbook.
MELEE AND RANGED ATTACKS
The most common actions that a monster will take in combat are melee and ranged attacks. These can be spell attacks or weapon attacks, where the "weapon" might be a manufactured item or a natural weapon, such as a claw or tail spike. For more information on different kinds of attacks, see the Player's Handbook."

This makes pretty clear that all monster attacks are either spell or weapon attacks and the stat block specifies which one they are. In addition, it also makes clear that even if the creature is not wielding a manufactured weapon, the attack is still considered a weapon attack.

Oh, I agree. That's why I included those figures, though having had DMs rule the other way as well I thought it worth including them in a more comprehensive answer.

[Waterdeep Merch]

This thread is reminding me that our group has found it a little weird how many monsters do not have attacks that are considered magical. At the top of the list are dragons; The game is called Dungeons & Dragons for crying out loud. Anyway, at the moment we've given adult and older dragons magical attacks, but haven't made too many other changes, though I certainly will as I deem appropriate. I suppose this would be a Nerf to HAM, and I'm not sure how many applications this would have as a monster fighting a party. Not many I think.

You can always buff HAM later to compensate if you find it to be a problem. Maybe it starts working against magical attacks at level 11? Or maybe it always works, but to a lesser extent, like -1 damage for magical attacks?

[Unoriginal]

This thread is reminding me that our group has found it a little weird how many monsters do not have attacks that are considered magical. At the top of the list are dragons; The game is called Dungeons & Dragons for crying out loud. Anyway, at the moment we've given adult and older dragons magical attacks, but haven't made too many other changes, though I certainly will as I deem appropriate. I suppose this would be a Nerf to HAM, and I'm not sure how many applications this would have as a monster fighting a party. Not many I think.

I don't see any reason why the number of monsters who do not have attacks considered magical would be weird.

You do NOT need active magic to be incredible in Dungeons & Dragons. Many people and creatures are fantastical/backgroundly magic.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I don't see any reason why the number of monsters who do not have attacks considered magical would be weird.

You do NOT need active magic to be incredible in Dungeons & Dragons. Many people and creatures are fantastical/backgroundly magic.

Agreed.

Although the one edge case where I think they needed to do something slightly differently is were creatures--two werewolves fighting can't damage each other (immune to B/P/S from nonmagical/non-silvered weapons...and they don't deal magical damage and their claws aren't silvered)

[micahaphone]

Other than HAM and monsters fighting monsters, when does it matter for monsters to have magical attacks? Barbarian rage doesn't care about magic/nonmagic. I guess the spell Stoneskin is resistance only for nonmagic b/p/s but it's also a thoroughly meh spell because of its concentration. Magic attacks seems to matter much more for players than monsters.

[sithlordnergal]

As someone who has used HAM and gotten up to Tier 4, HAM became pretty much pointless around mid-Tier 3. At that point I was consistently facing things that had magical attacks, did so much damage that 3 points literally made no difference, or they just didn't use B/P/S at all. That said, until then it served me really, really well. To the point where I could easily tank tons of basic mooks with a combination of HAM and a high AC. It always feels really good when your DM crits you, rolls minimum damage, and you only take 2 or 3 damage from said crit.

As for Sentinel and Toughness, I far prefer Sentinel. Its a good way to make yourself sticky.

[strangebloke]

As someone who has used HAM and gotten up to Tier 4, HAM became pretty much pointless around mid-Tier 3. At that point I was consistently facing things that had magical attacks, did so much damage that 3 points literally made no difference, or they just didn't use B/P/S at all. That said, until then it served me really, really well. To the point where I could easily tank tons of basic mooks with a combination of HAM and a high AC. It always feels really good when your DM crits you, rolls minimum damage, and you only take 2 or 3 damage from said crit.

As for Sentinel and Toughness, I far prefer Sentinel. Its a good way to make yourself sticky.

as an addendum to what you're saying, I would add that feats become far less of an investment as you go up in levels. I've gotten to tier 4 in a few games and its pretty rare for one of my players to actively regret taking a half-feat as long as it served them decently well.

[MrStabby]

As someone who has used HAM and gotten up to Tier 4, HAM became pretty much pointless around mid-Tier 3. At that point I was consistently facing things that had magical attacks, did so much damage that 3 points literally made no difference, or they just didn't use B/P/S at all. That said, until then it served me really, really well. To the point where I could easily tank tons of basic mooks with a combination of HAM and a high AC. It always feels really good when your DM crits you, rolls minimum damage, and you only take 2 or 3 damage from said crit.

As for Sentinel and Toughness, I far prefer Sentinel. Its a good way to make yourself sticky.

Worth noting that HAM is less good with high AC. At high AC a higher proportion of hits against you will be critical hits where HAM will do proportionately less.

[strangebloke]

Worth noting that HAM is less good with high AC. At high AC a higher proportion of hits against you will be critical hits where HAM will do proportionately less.

Anyone optimizing for AC knows that its easier to persuade the DM to give you adamantine plate than it is to persuade him into giving you +1 plate.:smallwink:

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I don't see any reason why the number of monsters who do not have attacks considered magical would be weird.

You do NOT need active magic to be incredible in Dungeons & Dragons. Many people and creatures are fantastical/backgroundly magic.

The context for us is many years of 2e where monsters automatically counted as magical at certain levels. I believe 4+1 HD could hit +1 and 6+2 could hit +2, etc. So maybe that's where I'm coming from. Other than HAM it might only impact some summoning builds, so I guess it's not that big a deal in terms of mechanics. More an issue of flavor for me.

[stoutstien]

Worth noting that HAM is less good with high AC. At high AC a higher proportion of hits against you will be critical hits where HAM will do proportionately less.

Its a flat damage reduction per hit so it doesn't matter if it's a critical or not. If anything the mitigation of HaM is more valuable the higher your avoidance is just due to the way they play off each other. It's not about how many times you apply the reduction as much is how much it effects your EHP.

[Shadean207]

So, this is OP again.

Thanks to everyone for the advice on the surrounding mechanics, the numbers and everything else that has been mentioned. Now, there have been several people asking about the stats and group composition, so I figured I'd chime in and give a list of all of that, as comprehensive as possible:

I am a 3rd level VHuman Samurai Fighter, equipped with Splint armor (AC 17) and a Greatsword (flavored as a Nodachi), including GWF and GWM.
My current stats are
16 STR
14 DEX
14 CON (26 total HP)
11 INT
14 WIS
12 CHA
So, unfortunately, INT is the only dumpable and thus odd stat value I have.

The rest of the group are
- A VHuman Tempest Cleric with War Caster, Hammer, Shield, 18 AC, 27 HP, who is a hybrid frontline and backline
- A VHuman Fiend Warlock, Pact of the Tome, at 15 AC, 29 HP, who does some utility, some blasting, and is the only one with a negative ability modifier at 8 STR (We rolled REALLY well for our stats)
- A Wood Elf Shadow Monk 1/ Moon Druid 2, 17 AC, 28 HP, who has the highest single ability score in the party at 19 DEX, currently does some tanking with Wild Shapes, but that will gradually shift out of his focus as he plans for 18 levels in Monk.


So, to summarize, I am the least flexible in combat, because outside of javelins or throwing axes I am entirely reduced to CQC, and thus, tanking. My character also has sworn to be a protector to the Cleric (we share a backstory), which adds another need for the defensive aspect. The Great Weapon styles don't allow for a shield, and the Splint was already a goodie from our DM.


Sentinel hasn't really crossed my mind, because we've had several fights in this campaign and earlier runs with the same DM, and in all of that time, I don't know if there has ever been ONE opportunity attack on any side. Just never happened. So Sentinel loses much of its appeal for me. Slasher might be an additional option, but so far our DM has only allowed content from the PHB and Xanathars, as those are the only source books he owns in our native language (languages in general are not his strong suit at all).


At this point, I am set on HAM, and this thread has helped me tremendously with that, this is just additional information to further discussion among everyone else :smallwink:

[Frogreaver]

I am currently playing a 3rd Level Greatsword Samurai, and I am the only dedicated/exclusive frontline fighter.

For 4th level, I was thinking of taking the Heavy Armor Master feat, but I keep being told by other players that it's just "not worth it", and they advise me to go with Tough or Sentinel.

Now, I don't have that much experience with long-term campaigns and the associated scaling... is HAM actually that bad? Does it just fall off later? Can it be balanced by, for example, changing the flat 3 reduction to reduction=Proficiency Bonus?
I'd really like to have some insights from the more experienced players here. Thanks!


To add: I have no clue if the campaign is gonna be that long, but from the way I know our DM, level-wise it will go into the double digits, probably. Also, as a VHuman, I started with the Great Weapon Master feat, my Fighting Style is GWF. So, I am pretty much set on that front (I believe...)

HAM is generally better than tough if you already are a fighter/paladin and have a decent con score. A few points:
1. HAM helps temp hp and as a Samauri you generate temp hp
2. HAM helps healing as any regenerated hp becomes that much harder to chew through
3. Many enemies scale damage via number of attacks. HAM still provides great value against those enemies
4. Very few enemies deal only magical damage - as even enemies that deal some elemental damage with their attack typically also do some physical damage with it as well

IMO the only reason people say HAM is "bad" later is because it's borderline OP in tier 1 and it stops being borderline OP in tier 2+.


Worth noting that HAM is less good with high AC. At high AC a higher proportion of hits against you will be critical hits where HAM will do proportionately less.

The crit effect is only something to really worry about as your chance to be hit drops closer and closer to 5%. A 25% chance to be hit isn't significantly different than a 40% chance to be hit in terms of the effect that crits have on that. I'm not worried about the OP hitting those extremely low chances of being hit with a Samauri.

[MrStabby]

The crit effect is only something to really worry about as your chance to be hit drops closer and closer to 5%. A 25% chance to be hit isn't significantly different than a 40% chance to be hit in terms of the effect that crits have on that. I'm not worried about the OP hitting those extremely low chances of being hit with a Samauri.

Yeah, I am not saying it is a big deal, but there is a proportional difference. And you are right - it is a bit different on something like a forge cleric with AC22+ than it is on a Samurai with AC18, but for general evaluation of the feat it is worth a mention for completeness.

[Waterdeep Merch]

*snip*

If op attacks aren't happening, you're smart to avoid Sentinel. Slasher would also be a lot less appealing, for similar reasons. Given your stats, I might go: HAM at 4th, +2 Strength at 6th, +1 Strength and +1 Wisdom at 8th, Resilient: Wisdom at 12th, if you make it that far. Once Tier 3 starts, Wisdom saves start becoming a lot more common and hard to beat without proficiency, so manipulating odd statistics to make Resilient: Wisdom more lucrative is a sound way to stay ahead of the curve.

If your game continues past this, I'd opt for more Constitution before Tough. Tough means more HP, but improving your saves is going to be more important by then. You might also sweet talk your DM into allowing Resilient: Dexterity, though that is against the rules normally (can't take Resilient twice).

[Composer99]

Okay, so, I know you have a 14 Dex, but don't stick solely to javelins and throwing axes. Get a longbow or heavy crossbow or something that lets you shoot at range. Half a shot at hitting something at 300 feet is better than twiddling your thumbs.

On topic, Sentinel is the best for tanking, in the sense of making opponents fight you and not your squishy friends. It lets you keep enemies stuck to you with your OAs and lets you use your reaction to punish enemies who attack your allies in melee. But based on your party composition and your DM not giving out much in the way of OAs, it might not be the best choice.

HAM can set you up for, say, +1 Str/+1 something else down the road:
(1) Possibly Dexterity for a later Resilient (Dexterity) pick? You don't really need Dex, but you're going to get proficiency in Wisdom saving throws because samurai, and better Dexterity saving throws, initiative rolls, and ranged attacks are all good. Going down this route also makes you better at toughing out much of the damage that HAM doesn't protect you against.
(2) If you want to pump Wisdom, never a bad choice, HAM sets up a +1 Str/+1 Wis ASI, followed up by, say, Observant - the passive Perception and passive Investigation bonuses are pretty good if the DM is good about using them. Really DM dependent on that, but better Wisdom is good because failed Wisdom saves are baaad.

On the other hand, you can't really go wrong with a straight up +2 Strength.

I'd say your choice isn't between HAM and either Sentinel or Tough, but between HAM and +2 Strength. They both kind of do the same thing: make it easier to fight mooks (because you're more likely to one-shot them with +2 Strength, or stand up to their attacks with HAM) and let your spellcasters conserve spell slots that might have been spent on healing (because you kill things faster with +2 Strength and mitigate damage with HAM), and the earlier you take either of them, the better.

Bottom line: if you want to feel tough because you can whup monsters, get +2 Strength, and if you want to feel tough because you can tough out their hits, get HAM.


If op attacks aren't happening, you're smart to avoid Sentinel. Slasher would also be a lot less appealing, for similar reasons. Given your stats, I might go: HAM at 4th, +2 Strength at 6th, +1 Strength and +1 Wisdom at 8th, Resilient: Wisdom at 12th, if you make it that far. Once Tier 3 starts, Wisdom saves start becoming a lot more common and hard to beat without proficiency, so manipulating odd statistics to make Resilient: Wisdom more lucrative is a sound way to stay ahead of the curve.

Samurai get proficiency with Wisdom saving throws as part of their subclass at 7th level, so won't need Resilient: Wisdom.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Samurai get proficiency with Wisdom saving throws as part of their subclass at 7th level, so won't need Resilient: Wisdom.
[/FONT]

Ahh, right. Then Resilient: Dex is easily available to cover all three major saves, which is a really great place to be in as a tank. OP would have everything but Int and Cha covered.

[Dork_Forge]

It's pretty easy to find ways for shield to block more damage than hp that tough provides. Generally one hit turned into a miss is enough and shield tends to do more than that.

And applies for one round a day, besides any enemies with a modicum of intelligence switching targets for a turn, the additional hp from Tough can be healed and burned through multiple times a day.


GB has flexibility on it's side. 20 extra health on the fighter doesn't do any good if the clerics needs a touch up and it provides food so it has utility going for it. Could just as well said the healer fest which is more healing but at a gold cost without the food benefit.

The food benefit is nice, but irrelevant to the point of comparison though. As a top up source of healing, GB becomes redundant pretty quickly.


MI also comes with cantrips. Guidance is going to be a better tool for traps and environmental challenges than trying to eat problems with a bigger HP pool because that health still needs to be recovered which brings me the part that I actually am annoyed about tough. It's only useful when that extra HP is on the bottom. until you get to the point where the only reason that you're still up right is the extra HP provided by that feat it hasn't done anything. It doesn't soften damage coming and doesn't synergize with other forms of mitigation besides resistance which thankfully it works really well with.

This, I feel is moving away from your initial claim. Whilst yes you would get those spells from MI, your initial claim was something to the effect that you'd be better off with a 1/LR casting of SHield/GB than Tough (in the context of durability/survivabiltiy). Of course a feat that provides other benefits will have different overall value, but the comparison is strictly durability (whihc I find Guidance a little dubious to include, but obviously table differences).

I don't really agree with the 'at the bottom' part either, hp is hp and generally the more you have the better off you are, regardless of what the circumstances are. The moment you face something that doesn't trigger HAM, the reduction is entirely useless, that isn't possible with Tough.


I think we're looking at this for two different angles. in a white room comparison between the two they're pretty close but specifically for a samurai fighter using 2hd weapons (fighting style unknown) heavy armor Master is going to mesh better with that PC. He is a decent source of temporary hit points that works well with the feat and second wind. Tough would be an okay pick after that because now they have a way of stretching those extra hp out but in and of themselves they aren't going to feel impactful. Not to mention if they do happen to get to the later levels tough actually directly interferes with the samurai's capstone. Either that or that extra little bit of HP wouldn't have made a difference anyways.

For getting the most out of Samurai temp hp, reduction is better by far.

Though I'd have to argue it reduces the value of Second Wind in some ways, if the encounters do skew towards more mundane BPS attacks, then it just increases the likelihood of Second Wind falling into over healing.

Whilst the capstone of the Samurai is great, I don't really think 'I'm less likely to drop to 0hp' is really a bad thing.


Tough is a wasted feat if you don't already have a 20 Con. +2 Con already grants +2 HP, one to max HP and one to each HD. And it gives you a bonus in checks and saves to boot.

The only reason to take Tough over Con is if you're really struggling with the max HP in a single fight on a regular basis. If that's the case, fair enough, go to it,

Unless I can't think of an example for some reason, there are no Constitution ability checks?

The argument for +1 Con being better (if you're not concentrating) I don't think is that strong. It gives you one max hp and one guaranteed hp on your hit die. You can still roll more on your hit die than you originally gained, you might have a Bard or Chef in the party, that +1 to HD is not guaranteed benefit. Higher max HP is something that is nice to have if you need it and something you could just end up dead/TPK with if not.

If you're aiming to increase you HP over the day (assuming two short rests), you'd need to hit a lot of Con saves for +1 Con to be a strictly better option.


If you're handing out magic weapons by having the bad guys use them, that's at most one guy in the entire dungeon? Once an arc? Not exactly super frequent. Besides, if your players are collecting the villain's magic items, they're in for a world of curses and trapped souls and thirsting blades.

It's a pretty common way to hand out loot in a dungeon crawl style environment, once per arc really seems low as well. At a certain level +1 weapons are pretty unappealing to the party (not a wepaon anyone uses, everyone already has one etc.) so throwing them in doesn't really upset things, but something to consider:

A weapon just needs any enchantment (moon touched, non rusting), something that could just be a neat roleplay thing if you look at it like loot. It's still magical damage.


You're right that HAM doesn't help against fire breaths, acid spits, poisons, or life drains, but those are frequently recharging abilities or riders atop regular b/p/s damage. I think the bread and butter of damage is b/p/s.

The problem with Life Drain is that it doesn't care about your current HP. It will pull your current down as your maximum lowers, something I've used to great effect against the Barbarian in one of my games (it wasn't even a player specific challenge, just an undead heavy game).


And as Tanarii pointed out earlier,


So long as you get hit more than ~5 times between short rests, HAM is better than Tough. Mitigation is also stronger than more max HP because it makes healing more potent.

As long as you are facing vast majority mundane BPS damage and not accounting for healing, HAM is better. Over the course of a day you can dip into the Tough hp multiple times, it also raises your instadeath threshold, which is pretty relevant at 4th/5th level to make sure that you actually get to higher levels.

Since this thread has gotten in the weeds about what monsters do magical damage primarily, here's something else to consider:

A Remorhaz, it does damage whenever you hit it. It isn't mundane BPS, HAM is useless and it's a good way for a Fighter (especially like OPs) to be taken out of consideration as a serious damage dealer unless they want to kill themselves. It comes in regular and young varieties so it can be found in a range of levels.

This kind of damage on a hit ability isn't exclusive to the Remorhaz, but I don't think it's been factored into the %chances to run into something HAM can't help against.


Okay, so, I know you have a 14 Dex, but don't stick solely to javelins and throwing axes. Get a longbow or heavy crossbow or something that lets you shoot at range. Half a shot at hitting
Thoroughly agree, you lose nothing by carrying a longbow in case you need the range.

Also a good point, HAM becomes far more appealing if there's another half feat you actually want, otherwise the +1 Str is a dead benefit.

[stoutstien]

AFB atm but doesn't the remorhaz damage on hit/touch have a 5-ft limitation? Tough is good as insurance for bad tactics and not like fighters don't have plenty of ASIs to work with. More so for samurai with the free wisdom save proficiency.

[Tanarii]

Unless I can't think of an example for some reason, there are no Constitution ability checks?All ability scores have ability checks. Con checks would be for anything that requires health, stamina, or vital force. A simple example would be running/climbing/swimming for an extended time, or holding something heavy for an extended time.

(Edit: they come up more often in my game because I've changed the rule for Dash greater than 3 times means a DC 10+cumulative5 check to avoid exhaustion being a Con check instead of a Con save. That's a good example of when they mixed up what should be a check vs a save. But either way it's something +2 Con helps.)


The argument for +1 Con being better (if you're not concentrating) I don't think is that strong. It gives you one max hp and one guaranteed hp on your hit die. You can still roll more on your hit die than you originally gained, you might have a Bard or Chef in the party, that +1 to HD is not guaranteed benefit. Higher max HP is something that is nice to have if you need it and something you could just end up dead/TPK with if not.

If you're aiming to increase you HP over the day (assuming two short rests), you'd need to hit a lot of Con saves for +1 Con to be a strictly better option.Con is a strictly better option as soon as you use hit die in a day to heal and don't fall below 1hp/level in the day. That's before you roll a single Con save or Con check.

[x3n0n]

Con is a strictly better option as soon as you use hit die in a day to heal and don't fall below 1hp/level in the day. That's before you roll a single Con save or Con check.

I think what's being missed here (and I missed it as well until you said it) is that Tough does *not* increase HP regained by spending HD during a short rest, so the HP increase from Tough is entirely a long-rest resource.

4th level character with Con +0 creature with Tough has +8 max HP, and rolls straight HDs to recover.
4th level char with Con +1 has +4 max HP, rolls HD+1 to recover, and has +1 for Con checks, saves, and things like breath holding.

Thanks for pointing that out. I really had never noticed the HD recovery nuance.

(If your party tends to magically heal, that helps with the gap, but it's a real difference that I hadn't noticed before.)

[MrStabby]

I think what's being missed here (and I missed it as well until you said it) is that Tough does *not* increase HP regained by spending HD during a short rest, so the HP increase from Tough is entirely a long-rest resource.

4th level character with Con +0 creature with Tough has +8 max HP, and rolls straight HDs to recover.
4th level char with Con +1 has +4 max HP, rolls HD+1 to recover, and has +1 for Con checks, saves, and things like breath holding.

Thanks for pointing that out. I really had never noticed the HD recovery nuance.

(If your party tends to magically heal, that helps with the gap, but it's a real difference that I hadn't noticed before.)

I once was in a party with a dwarf draconic sorcerer who contemplated the tough feat. They backed out as they were already suffering from such a small proportion of their HP recovering on a rest

[x3n0n]

I once was in a party with a dwarf draconic sorcerer who contemplated the tough feat. They backed out as they were already suffering from such a small proportion of their HP recovering on a rest

Right. In principle, a Tough-less character entering a short rest at 1 HP would expect to recover almost all of their HP by spending all of their HD, assuming fixed-progression HP. (There will be a small gap for first level, and a 0.5 HP gap per level because of rounding.) With Tough, you should *expect* a gap of 2.5 HP per HD.

If you've already got a large Con and Durable, that will help by eliminating bad rolls...but who is going to invest two ASIs on Durable and Tough if they've already got (say) the +3 Con to make Durable matter?

[Guy Lombard-O]

I once was in a party with a dwarf draconic sorcerer who contemplated the tough feat. They backed out as they were already suffering from such a small proportion of their HP recovering on a rest

No full caster should, IMHO, ever even contemplate taking Tough. Not unless they've already got Con maxed out & Con proficiency (obviously Sorcerers get this automatically). Concentration's a pretty important aspect, and puts +2 Con well ahead of Tough for any caster.

[diplomancer]

No full caster should, IMHO, ever even contemplate taking Tough. Not unless they've already got Con maxed out & Con proficiency (obviously Sorcerers get this automatically). Concentration's a pretty important aspect, and puts +2 Con well ahead of Tough for any caster.

Or a 1st level V. Human Sorcerer that gets Tough as a feat; but even if there's no Con downside in that case, there are still probably better feats.

[Tanarii]

Ahh, right. Then Resilient: Dex is easily available to cover all three major saves, which is a really great place to be in as a tank. OP would have everything but Int and Cha covered.
I'm more curious why this character has Dex 14 at all, let alone why they'd waste ASIs increasing it to 16. Dex is the dump stat for Heavy Armor wearers.

[diplomancer]

I'm more curious why this character has Dex 14 at all, let alone why they'd waste ASIs increasing it to 16. Dex is the dump stat for Heavy Armor wearers.

Because he rolled well, I guess; still, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a dump stat; probably still better than Int and Cha, in most cases.
And it helps if he has to hit things from far away.

[Tanarii]

I'm more curious why this character has Dex 14 at all, let alone why they'd waste ASIs increasing it to 16. Dex is the dump stat for Heavy Armor wearers.


Because he rolled well, I guess; still, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a dump stat; probably still better than Int and Cha, in most cases.
And it helps if he has to hit things from far away.Good call.

Personally if I would have gone Dex 12 Cha 14 on a samurai (for the stacking Wis/Cha persuasion bonus). But that's subjective.

And personally if if I were going to consider wasting an ASI on Resilient (Dex), I'd have started Dex 11, Int 12, Cha 14. There's certainly no point in putting a half-feat for it into an already high Dex on a HA character though. Initiative and Dex saves just aren't that important. More Con would be a better payoff, as long as it's not maxed. And even with Con 20, Tough would be a better investment.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Good call.

Personally if I would have gone Dex 12 Cha 14 on a samurai (for the stacking Wis/Cha persuasion bonus). But that's subjective.

And personally if if I were going to consider wasting an ASI on Resilient (Dex), I'd have started Dex 11, Int 12, Cha 14. There's certainly no point in putting a half-feat for it into an already high Dex on a HA character though. Initiative and Dex saves just aren't that important. More Con would be a better payoff, as long as it's not maxed. And even with Con 20, Tough would be a better investment.

I'm not so sure, regarding Tough vs. Resilient: Dex. At higher levels (12, in this case), you'd have 24 extra HP. It's good, but Dex saves around that level can get near 24 HP in a single moment. For comparison, chain lightning deals 22.5 more damage on average if you fail your save, disintegrate can be outright avoided, and the CR 13 brass dragon's breath weapon deals 22.75 more damage on average if you fail it. While a fighter has Indomitable, it's not very useful if you don't have a decent save in the first place. Against that brass dragon's DC 18 for example, OP's +2 has a base 25% chance, 43.7% with Indomitable. A +7, meanwhile (assuming OP makes room to even out that score, as I'd planned), has a 50% base chance, 75.1% with Indomitable.

At 20, meanwhile, consider a stereotypical final boss- an ancient red dragon. Their breath weapon is their most serious HP threat. If OP never gets Resilient: Dexterity, they only succeed against that breath weapon on a crit, meaning 5% base, 9.8% with Indomitable. If they do, they're now at a +9 for a 30% base chance, 51% with Indomitable. This is one of the more extreme examples, definitely, but it's not an uncommon one. Your extra 40 HP from Tough is easily blasted off by the extra 45.5 for failing this one save. If the dragon gets to make two, Tough looks even worse.

EDIT: Ordinarily, Resilient: Dexterity has a single serious weakness- it competes unfavorably with Resilient: Constitution and Resilient: Wisdom. Samurai is one of the few unique circumstances where this just isn't an issue.

[Tanarii]

I remain not totally convinced, but that's a solid counter argument. :smallamused:

[Waterdeep Merch]

I remain not totally convinced, but that's a solid counter argument. :smallamused:

Tough's still good, and I wouldn't bug someone for grabbing it instead. As a counter argument to my own, increasing your maximum HP can help make healing more efficient on you, since you'll have the upper limits to wait a little longer and then a higher number to reach before you cap out.

Of course, both are possible in the OP's scenario.

[Guy Lombard-O]

Or a 1st level V. Human Sorcerer that gets Tough as a feat; but even if there's no Con downside in that case, there are still probably better feats.

Agreed. Even in that circumstance, I'd probably go with Inspiring Leader over Tough.

[MrStabby]

No full caster should, IMHO, ever even contemplate taking Tough. Not unless they've already got Con maxed out & Con proficiency (obviously Sorcerers get this automatically). Concentration's a pretty important aspect, and puts +2 Con well ahead of Tough for any caster.

Oh god yes; I am not saying it was optimal at all. It was kind of OK as their thing was twinned booming blade, but still - not really that great.

[Dork_Forge]

AFB atm but doesn't the remorhaz damage on hit/touch have a 5-ft limitation? Tough is good as insurance for bad tactics and not like fighters don't have plenty of ASIs to work with. More so for samurai with the free wisdom save proficiency.

Yeah, I think all 'damage on hit' effects do, ime the reach aspect of a weapon usually stops mattering pretty quickly once combat starts unless: you're playing a skirmisher, you're trying to hit as many creatures as possible (Cavalier, Ancestral Guardian), you're fighting a skirmisher.

Most monsters that attack with melee usually close and are then happy to stay there since they want to hit you. Especially if them getting hit usually ends up in their meal dying faster.


All ability scores have ability checks. Con checks would be for anything that requires health, stamina, or vital force. A simple example would be running/climbing/swimming for an extended time, or holding something heavy for an extended time.

(Edit: they come up more often in my game because I've changed the rule for Dash greater than 3 times means a DC 10+cumulative5 check to avoid exhaustion being a Con check instead of a Con save. That's a good example of when they mixed up what should be a check vs a save. But either way it's something +2 Con helps.)

Ahh, I should have said instead no skills and no common checks, I can see it being useful at some tables like your own, though the PHB even says they're uncommon, so I'm not sure it's worth being a listed benefit. The weird thing is, looking at the examples in the PHB I could have sworn that there was actual rules for a few of them, like starvation, but I must be confusing it or thinking of something they put in an adventure.


Con is a strictly better option as soon as you use hit die in a day to heal and don't fall below 1hp/level in the day. That's before you roll a single Con save or Con check.

So, just so I'm full understanding, you're saying it's better if you:

-Use a hit die
-Your current hp never dips below 1hp/level

That second one should be pretty common, especially on a frontline tank...


I think what's being missed here (and I missed it as well until you said it) is that Tough does *not* increase HP regained by spending HD during a short rest, so the HP increase from Tough is entirely a long-rest resource.

Personally not missing it, it's something I make a point to say to people when I recommend it in my games. The Paladin in my game currently has +3 Con and Tough, the extra hp has allowed him to face tank many times over the campaign and is the only reason he didn't go down in their last encounter (he ended up at 3hp, at 13th level 26hp of his max is from Tough. A +1 Con wouldn't have come close to cutting it, Star Spawn are nasty).


I once was in a party with a dwarf draconic sorcerer who contemplated the tough feat. They backed out as they were already suffering from such a small proportion of their HP recovering on a rest

That seems like possibly the worst possible time to take Tough, that's either all or close to all, of the player selectable hp increases I think?

[Chugger]

Heavy Armor feat gets weaker and weaker each time you level. If going to double digits, pick something else.

I would definitely up Strength. You must have a 20 Str to make GWM work. That -5 to hit is a beast, even if you have advantage. You need to get every plus to hit you can to offset the -5 (get someone to cast bless on you, too).

Sentinel is good, but it has little synergy w/ GWM - a Va Hu w/ PAM and Sentinel, that's synergy, that's solid. GWM is not really a tank's feat. It's a striker's feat (a meleer that does damage more than tanks). Since you're stuck w/ GWM, make it work, consider upping STR.

But if you find you're a very weak tank, if monsters always get past you and attack squishies - then Sentinel might be a good choice, even if it doesn't work all that well w/ GWM.

[stoutstien]

Heavy Armor feat gets weaker and weaker each time you level. If going to double digits, pick something else.

I would definitely up Strength. You must have a 20 Str to make GWM work. That -5 to hit is a beast, even if you have advantage. You need to get every plus to hit you can to offset the -5 (get someone to cast bless on you, too).

Sentinel is good, but it has little synergy w/ GWM - a Va Hu w/ PAM and Sentinel, that's synergy, that's solid. GWM is not really a tank's feat. It's a striker's feat (a meleer that does damage more than tanks). Since you're stuck w/ GWM, make it work, consider upping STR.

But if you find you're a very weak tank, if monsters always get past you and attack squishies - then Sentinel might be a good choice, even if it doesn't work all that well w/ GWM.

By that logic GWM/SS should never be taken because they deal increasing less damage relative to higher CR HP pools and takes out a smaller percentage of higher npc count encounters.

GWM is also pretty common for sammy fighters due to high attack count and on demand advantage. It's actually one of the few PC options that the feat makes sense for.

[diplomancer]

Heavy Armor feat gets weaker and weaker each time you level. If going to double digits, pick something else.

I would definitely up Strength. You must have a 20 Str to make GWM work. That -5 to hit is a beast, even if you have advantage. You need to get every plus to hit you can to offset the -5 (get someone to cast bless on you, too).

Sentinel is good, but it has little synergy w/ GWM - a Va Hu w/ PAM and Sentinel, that's synergy, that's solid. GWM is not really a tank's feat. It's a striker's feat (a meleer that does damage more than tanks). Since you're stuck w/ GWM, make it work, consider upping STR.

But if you find you're a very weak tank, if monsters always get past you and attack squishies - then Sentinel might be a good choice, even if it doesn't work all that well w/ GWM.

A V. Human GWM Fighter (and a Samurai to boot) can definitely afford two half-feats on his way to 20 Str.

The problem, here, is that apart from HAM, the other 2 good half-feat choices are Slasher and Crusher. And there are two problems with those feats:
1- They are Tasha's, so he'd have to clear them up with his DM first;
2- more relevant- they "lock" you into a weapon type, and this IS a problem in some groups where magic items are randomly assigned (or a DM who does the "by the book" items of published adventures).

If those 2 problems are solved, I believe the 2 Half-Feats route is quite reasonable, and might even be optimal. Otherwise, upping STR at 4 and 6 and choosing another full-feat at 8 might be best.

[stoutstien]

A V. Human GWM Fighter (and a Samurai to boot) can definitely afford two half-feats on his way to 20 Str.

The problem, here, is that apart from HAM, the other 2 good half-feat choices are Slasher and Crusher. And there are two problems with those feats:
1- They are Tasha's, so he'd have to clear them up with his DM first;
2- more relevant- they "lock" you into a weapon type, and this IS a problem in some groups where magic items are randomly assigned (or a DM who does the "by the book" items of published adventures).

If those 2 problems are solved, I believe the 2 Half-Feats route is quite reasonable, and might even be optimal. Otherwise, upping STR at 4 and 6 and choosing another full-feat at 8 might be best.

Skill expert is another good pick for +1 str and athlete gets over looked a lot buts it's a pretty solid feat for the extra mobility and movement options it opens up. Canceling prone cheaply and avoiding DT with jump/climbing are both extremely powerful tools for a fighter who's positioning is paramount.

[diplomancer]

Skill expert is another good pick for +1 str and athlete gets over looked a lot buts it's a pretty solid feat for the extra mobility and movement options it opens up. Canceling prone cheaply and avoiding DT with jump/climbing are both extremely powerful tools for a fighter who's positioning is paramount.

I mostly agree with you on skill expert, but I'm not sure whether getting it and HAM are better than some possible full feats (not Tough, though); it's a possibility, for sure, plenty of Athletic checks out there.

As to Athlete, I will have to disagree; specially when you are strong and have proficiency in STR saves, there will not be many times you will be knocked prone, and the other benefits are way too situational, I believe. You'd get more mileage out of Mobile in most combats if you want to improve your mobility, and it's not a feat I'd recommend for this character.

[stoutstien]

I mostly agree with you on skill expert, but I'm not sure whether getting it and HAM are better than some possible full feats (not Tough, though); it's a possibility, for sure, plenty of Athletic checks out there.

As to Athlete, I will have to disagree; specially when you are strong and have proficiency in STR saves, there will not be many times you will be knocked prone, and the other benefits are way too situational, I believe. You'd get more mileage out of Mobile in most combats if you want to improve your mobility, and it's not a feat I'd recommend for this character.

YMMV. As a DM I prone players constantly(soft control is better against players IMO) and design environments in 3D spaces so climbing and jumping are always in play.

Prone is also a very powerful defensive move if you are fighting anything with reach. Drop prone and move away means AOO are made at disadvantage and you can still stand up and move away or as a fast way to avoid a bunch of ranged attacks without sacking half your speed.

[x3n0n]

Personally not missing it, it's something I make a point to say to people when I recommend it in my games. The Paladin in my game currently has +3 Con and Tough, the extra hp has allowed him to face tank many times over the campaign and is the only reason he didn't go down in their last encounter (he ended up at 3hp, at 13th level 26hp of his max is from Tough. A +1 Con wouldn't have come close to cutting it, Star Spawn are nasty).

My apologies for implying that you missed it. I was out of line. (Someone else in the thread seemed to be having the same confusion I was, and I mixed you together; my bad.)

Once the additional +Con effects stop mattering to a character, Tough looks pretty good. Having +3 and Aura of Protection (for checks and saves) and Lay on Hands (to bridge the gap between HD and max HP) help, and being upright is really important for a Paladin.

And Tanarii's original quote actually says "The only reason to take Tough over Con is if you're really struggling with the max HP in a single fight on a regular basis. If that's the case, fair enough", which may apply here.


Prone is also a very powerful defensive move if you are fighting anything with reach. Drop prone and move away means AOO are made at disadvantage and you can still stand up and move away

Man, this is the thread that keeps on giving for me. I am used to thinking about using prone against ranged attacks, but not against reach OAs. Thanks for the tip!

[Vogie]

And honestly, it also really depends on the DM. If you are going into a BBEG Lair, and your DM is hitting your (even double digit level) party with waves of mooks to deplete resources prior to the harder fight, then something like HAM really shines, as it protects other resources - hit dice, magic item charges, and healer spell slots. Dragons have their Kobolds and/or Cultists, of course.

If you're in a Dark Souls / Shadow of the Colossus style game once you hit the double digits, then it's potentially going to fall off much faster.

[Mikal]

Without having read previous posts...
It depends
What are your current stats?
What are your preferred final stats/feats minus this ASI?
What level do you expect the game to go to? How fast should it get there?
How often are you facing non magical B/P/S damage vs other damage? How large is the damage when you get it? Is it large single hits? Multiple smaller hits?

Depending on all of the above, HAM could be
a) A waste of time
b) marginal
c) marginally decent
d) decent