what to do with a fighter

[Skrum]

I've just started playing DnD again, and the last time I played was years ago in 3.5 - which is to say, I'm not particularly familiar with 5th.

I'm playing an orc fighter, and just hit second level. I'm planning on going Battle Master, and I've taken the fighting style variant that gives me a maneuver at 1st (I took riposte). I'm using an axe and shield for now, but I'm not entirely wedded to it.

So, question - how do I do more damage? Looking forward in progression, I'm not seeing any particular way to get above 1d8+str, which I imagine is going to get insufficient fast. The only thing I saw was Great Weapon Fighting (which would pair nicely with the feint maneuver), but I'd have to give up my shield to use it.

I really like the orc racial Aggressive, so if there's way to leverage that ability, that would be cool too.

My stats are 16 12 14 8 8 16, if that matters.

[Eldariel]

I've just started playing DnD again, and the last time I played was years ago in 3.5 - which is to say, I'm not particularly familiar with 5th.

I'm playing an orc fighter, and just hit second level. I'm planning on going Battle Master, and I've taken the fighting style variant that gives me a maneuver at 1st (I took riposte). I'm using an axe and shield for now, but I'm not entirely wedded to it.

So, question - how do I do more damage? Looking forward in progression, I'm not seeing any particular way to get above 1d8+str, which I imagine is going to get insufficient fast. The only thing I saw was Great Weapon Fighting (which would pair nicely with the feint maneuver), but I'd have to give up my shield to use it.

I really like the orc racial Aggressive, so if there's way to leverage that ability, that would be cool too.

My stats are 16 12 14 8 8 16, if that matters.

Well, you generally want a damaging fighting style first - you can pick another one up with a feat later but for now, it's your primary source of damage. The standard issue melee DPR "Sword" & Board is Polearm Master with Spear (or Quarterstaff) taking the Dueling-style. Once you get maneuvers on top of that on 3, you'll have plenty of damage and of course, 5 and 11 will give you further boosts. For reference, this puts you at 1d6+5/1d4+5 with a reasonable chance at getting an offturn 1d6+5 on top of it with +1d6+5 on level 5, and maneuvers and Action Surge on top of it (Action Surge obviously gets a lot more value once you get the second attack).

Then it's just down to feats and maneuvers. Though bewarned, this is one of those builds that starts off really strong but kinda plateaus: you'll get +4 Strength but aside from that you won't be getting any massive boosts to your overall damage. Great Weapon Master is a fine option down the line - eventually you'll have so much HP that you might not need as much AC (especially since the value of AC grows lower as enemy attack bonus grows higher, unless you can inflict Disadvantage somewhat regularly). One option is also going Shield Master but that depends on DM ruling (if you can shove before you attack, it can be worthwhile but otherwise PAM is largely better - though it does somewhat help your Dex saves at least).

[Greywander]

The main fighter progression is getting more attacks. Other martial classes get a max of two attacks with one action, but you're gradually work your way up to four at max level. At 5th level you'll get your first big bump with Extra Attack, doubling your damage output, and you'll get a third attack at 11th level. Compare this with the paladin who gets a second attack at 5th level, then gets Improved Divine Smite at 11th level, adding 1d8 radiant damage to each of their two attacks. The damage output is roughly the same.

On top of that, you also have your fighting styles. Sword and board usually wants to get Dueling, which will add up as you get more attacks. As Eldariel mentioned, you can also grab Polearm Master at 4th level and use a spear or quarterstaff to get a bonus action attack. The damage die is only a d4, but unlike dual-wielding you get to add your STR mod to the damage, and the Dueling bonus. Plus this will give you a total of three attacks at 5th level, so you should see a big spike then. If spears/quarterstaves aren't your thing, look into Shield Master instead, especially if the DM lets you use the shove before making your attacks (my interpretation is that it locks you into attacking, but allows the shove to happen first). Even if you have to shove after attacking, your teammates can still benefit from it, especially if you have a rogue in the party.

Once you start getting Battle Master maneuvers, most of those also do full attack damage on top of causing an additional effect. This allows you to inflict various effects on your enemies without giving up damage, and these can increase your own damage as well. For example, using a tripping attack with your first attack will allow you to make you next few attacks with advantage, increasing your chances of hitting and/or critting.

Otherwise, you should look forward to finding magic weapons. A weapon +1 usually means 2 extra damage for other classes, but for you it can be 3 or 4 extra damage, and that only increases as you get +2 and +3 weapons, or something like a Flame Tongue that uses more damage dice. The key to maximizing fighter damage is to stack as many bonuses as you can that will apply to each attack you make, rather than to just a single attack. You'll get roughly twice the benefit that other martial classes will get out of those features, albeit not until higher levels.

You might also look at feats such as Slasher or Crusher to add a bit of control to your attacks. While these won't add damage directly, knocking an enemy into a hazard or slowing them down so they can't run away/chase your mages can still be tactically valuable. Piercer generally isn't worth it, IMO, but it will add a small amount of damage (to a single attack only, which is part of the issue).

You might also consider multiclassing, though that means giving up your fourth attack at 20th level (but that's a long ways away). A barbarian dip can get you a +2 bonus to damage while raging, on top of the other benefits of Rage like damage resistance.

[Eldariel]

You might also consider multiclassing, though that means giving up your fourth attack at 20th level (but that's a long ways away). A barbarian dip can get you a +2 bonus to damage while raging, on top of the other benefits of Rage like damage resistance.

It's worth noting though that Fighter is pretty busy up until level ~8-11. From now on, you have:
- Battlemaster on level 3
- Polearm Master on level 4
- Extra Attack on level 5
- +2 Strength on level 6
- Superiority Die #4
- +2 Strength on level 8
- 1d10 Superiority Dice on level 10
- Extra Attack on level 11

Trying to fit Barbarian there so that you get a net damage increase is hard. While the resistances are good, you really want 3 levels of Barbarian for them to truly take off (Totem Warrior Bear, which also works in Heavy Armor - though that would lose out on the +2 damage so you'd be forced to go medium armor, which is a chunk of AC equal to a shield at this point). After 11 Fighter doesn't really get anything of note for another 5 levels so it's easy to fit stuff there, but pre-11 you're probably best off just going Fighter.

And even then, the latter ASIs can add crucial abilities like Resilient: Wisdom, Lucky, Martial Adept, Fighting Initiate (e.g. Blind-Fighting or +1 AC), Heavy Armor Master (which is actually not a bad pick for your level 6 ASI if you're okay slowing down your damage progression a bit: this would let you get Crusher and Heavy Armor Master to add more control and anti-crowd capability to your repertoire, plus Crusher goes nicely with Polearm Master anyways, forcing enemies to close in to provoke again, though that combo locks you to Quarterstaves), Con-improvements/Tough, etc. so it's not that bad an idea to go for level 12 at that point. You could get up to 7 superiority dice by level 15 if you took both Martial Adept and Fighting Initiate: Superior Technique, which could be cool too (or 6 by level 8 if you push your Str boosts down the line) though Str does probably get you more damage per day (depends on fight duration, amount of advantage, enemy AC, frequency of short rests, etc.).

[ImproperJustice]

Typical Sword and Board combo is dueling, and then anything that grants advantage.

Shield Master is nice for Champions as a resource free shove/ prone maneuver. Allowing for attacks with advantage.

Advantage doubles your chances for a crit, a d combined with extra attack is welcome.

Most Battlemasters will lead with a trip attack, and then pile on with an action surge volley.

Samurai just unload their Fighting Spirit w/ a surge a couple times a day in between short rests.

Keep your ranged options open, the above listed features all work with ranged attacks.
Samurai and Battlemaster (especially with some of Tasha’s maneuvers) have some cool things they can do now outside of combat.

Champion athleticism can be useful in exploration.


Menacing attack is great for Battlemasters too as it targets Wisdom.

Crisher, Piercer, Slasher are all direct combat upgrades.
Poisoner could be really interesting in a fighter, but check with your GM. If they allow harvesting of enemy / trap poisons you could have some good stuff available. Also, it’s not great against undead and constructs but could be useful if the main campaign villain is the evil empire of humans and elves.

[Mastikator]

Great Weapon Master feat + Precision maneuver is an easy way to crank out a lot of damage. But you'll have to use a heavy two handed weapon (so no shield). You'd do 2d6 + str + 10. Precision maneuver is added after the roll but before you find out if you hit so you're less likely to waste it. Maneuvers like trip and menacing are really good. Menacing can be added after you hit and since it's a weapon dice it also gets doubled on crit. (similar to how paladins can choose to smite after they roll 20).

Polearm master is also really strong since it lets you weaponize your bonus action, and use your reaction to attack if someone enters reach. Works with spear so you can use your shield. (and yes, you can combine Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master and yes it is very strong)

[Ir0ns0ul]

I think the folks above hit the hail, but if I can complement with some perspective:

- Fighters often don’t have much use for their bonus action; that’s why PAM is great
- Fighters do have a lot of attacks, so any damage increase that adds in each attack is amazing, for example Hunters Mark/Hex, Divine Favor, Hexblade Curse, Rage and etc.

Of course depends on your WIS, but War Domain Cleric offers good versatility for Fighters and it’s a nice 1 dip level.

[sophontteks]

Swap to Dueling at level 4.
At level 1 Superior technique is better then dueling. I recommend you change your fighting style to dueling once you hit level 4 though. Dueling becomes better as you get more attacks.

The spear is your best weapon with polearm master.
You can throw it. You can use a shield with it. With Polearm master you get a bonus attack and a opportunity attack whenever someone walks up to you. This is a great weapon.

There are actually a few ways you can build a battlemaster from here.

You could take thrown weapon fighting style, goading strike, and thrown weapon master to make a "second line" build that throws spears just out of melee range, goading the enemy into attacking them where they take all opportunity attacks. Dueling works on melee weapons, even if you are making a ranged weapon attack with that melee weapon. +4 damage on each attack is pretty nice.

You can also build a front liner, I won't go into detail because people already have. Menacing attack is very good. Once you get to level 5 and you are making up to 6 attacks in a round, you'll be the top damage-dealer by a long shot. Make sure you push for resting between fights.

[Man_Over_Game]

It's worth noting that the Battlemaster generally does more damage than any other Fighter subclass.

A while back, I calculated what the most easily quantified Fighter subclasses would do in a fairly basic scenario of each being level 5, having either the Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter feats, and having an average of 3 combats a day, each lasting 3 rounds.

The results were (with the numbers reflecting the damage gain from the subclass):

Champion (+4.2), Samurai (+35), Arcane Archer (+69), Battlemaster (+54-96)

Battlemaster either lets you get extra attacks per round (Riposte) or it tacks on guaranteed damage with its attack riders. At 4 uses per Rest, 3 fights a day, each one adding a minimum of +4.5 damage to your attack, for ~+54 damage per day. At that point, you're doing about 11 damage per attack, 22 per round, so your base damage before maneuvers is about 200 damage per day.

You have to get used to the fact that damage isn't going to be scaling up very quickly. You have probably one of the best subclasses for a Fighter's damage output and it's only contributing about 25% more damage.

[Skrum]

By spear do you mean pike? Or the simple weapon "spear?"

[stoutstien]

It's worth noting that the Battlemaster generally does more damage than any other Fighter subclass.

A while back, I calculated what the most easily quantified Fighter subclasses would do in a fairly basic scenario of each being level 5, having either the Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter feats, and having an average of 3 combats a day, each lasting 3 rounds.

The results were (with the numbers reflecting the damage gain from the subclass):

Champion (+4.2), Samurai (+35), Arcane Archer (+69), Battlemaster (+54-96)

Battlemaster either lets you get extra attacks per round (Riposte) or it tacks on guaranteed damage with its attack riders. At 4 uses per Rest, 3 fights a day, each one adding a minimum of +4.5 damage to your attack, for ~+54 damage per day. At that point, you're doing about 11 damage per attack, 22 per round, so your base damage before maneuvers is about 200 damage per day.

You have to get used to the fact that damage isn't going to be scaling up very quickly. You have probably one of the best subclasses for a Fighter's damage output, and it's only contributing about 25% more damage.

You should play around with the psi Knight. Can't quite catch the BM but it can get close. It's less reliant on criticals with adding Int mod to the bonus damage which may not be effected by crits DM ruling pending. Only down fall is needing at least 3 Int to push the upper limit.

[Eldariel]

By spear do you mean pike? Or the simple weapon "spear?"

Simple weapon "Spear". Thanks to errata, it works with Polearm Master, which makes it lowkey a top tier weapon. Quarterstaff is the other option (if your table doesn't use errata, the only option). Spear can be thrown; meanwhile, Quarterstaff can benefit of Crusher, being a Bludgeoning weapon (and not relevant to you, but also works with Shillelagh and doubles as an arcane/druidic focus). Polearm Master + Duelist is one of the better damage comboes in the game (behind GWM/SS builds), getting a lot of hits with one-handed weapons proccing Duelist over and over. Either works just fine.

[Man_Over_Game]

You should play around with the psi Knight. Can't quite catch the BM but it can get close. It's less reliant on criticals with adding Int mod to the bonus damage which may not be effected by crits DM ruling pending. Only down fall is needing at least 3 Int to push the upper limit.

I took a look at it, but it seems like a simpler version of the Battle Master. I like playing around with stuff that forces other things to act differently. More game, not more numbers.

Psi Knight's starting powers are:
Add extra damage to an ally's attack.
Block damage dealt to an ally.
Spend an Action to move an ally 30 feet.


Plus, you get 4 uses, +1 per Short Rest, which results in a lot less versatility and decision-making than the Battle Master's 4 per Short Rest.

The Psi-Knight is this weird middle ground between the Battlemaster (who has maneuvers using Charisma, Wisdom and Intelligence now) and the Samurai (who uses some Wisdom). Which is kind of irrelevant, when the Samurai was made as a middle ground between the Battle Master (Resource management) and the Champion (hit things very hard).

Mechanically, it doesn't really seem to add all that much to the game, unfortunately. For the extremes between Simple and Consistent (Champion) vs. Resource-management and Strategy (Battle Master, Eldritch Knight), the boundaries of the Fighter class hasn't changed since the first book (since you can always make a simple Battlemaster for roughly the same gains as the Samurai, Arcane Archer, or Psi Knight).

The Psi Knight can move someone 30 feet as an Action, Battlemaster can add +4.5 damage to an attack and move an ally half their movement (~15ft) with their Reaction and do it about twice as often. What is a Fighter doing every turn? Attacking.

It's like we just keep getting different versions of Battlemaster builds. Maybe it's just because they made the Battlemaster to be extremely robust and versatile, but it's not like "Move an ally after you hit an enemy" is all that revolutionary of a concept. As weird as the Echo Knight was, and how little it fits into the default DnD world, it was exactly what the Fighter needed.


Sorry, got on my high horse again....

[stoutstien]

I took a look at it, but it seems like a simpler version of the Battle Master. I like playing around with stuff that forces other things to act differently. More game, not more numbers.

Psi Knight's starting powers are:
Add extra damage to an ally's attack.
Block damage dealt to an ally.
Spend an Action to move an ally 30 feet.


Plus, you get 4 uses, +1 per Short Rest, which results in a lot less versatility and decision-making than the Battle Master's 4 per Short Rest.

The Psi-Knight is this weird middle ground between the Battlemaster (who has maneuvers using Charisma, Wisdom and Intelligence now) and the Samurai (who uses some Wisdom). Which is kind of irrelevant, when the Samurai was made as a middle ground between the Battle Master (Resource management) and the Champion (hit things very hard).

Mechanically, it doesn't really seem to add all that much to the game, unfortunately. For the extremes between Simple and Consistent (Champion) vs. Resource-management and Strategy (Battle Master, Eldritch Knight), the boundaries of the Fighter class hasn't changed since the first 3 subclasses.

It's sort of the halfway between the EK and champion. It is a little redundant but purely on the most damaging subclass it might be the leader once proficiency jumps up to 3 for at least part of the level range. *Rests per day depending*

[firelistener]

I'll go against the grain here and just say you probably don't need to worry about boosting damage all that much. 5e is designed with lower monster AC, so you'll be hitting more often on average than you would in 3.5 even without boosts from items and such. With that in mind, Fighters get more Extra Attacks than everyone else and quickly begin to output more damage as they level than most other classes. Just improve your Strength score, and it actually should be plenty sufficient without defining your entire build around getting a single extra d4 from something like PAM.

My suggestion is just pick a 3rd level subclass that sounds cool to you. As others have suggested, Battle Master is a really popular choice if you want something with more crunch.

[sophontteks]

I'll go against the grain here and just say you probably don't need to worry about boosting damage all that much. 5e is designed with lower monster AC, so you'll be hitting more often on average than you would in 3.5 even without boosts from items and such. With that in mind, Fighters get more Extra Attacks than everyone else and quickly begin to output more damage as they level than most other classes. Just improve your Strength score, and it actually should be plenty sufficient without defining your entire build around getting a single extra d4 from something like PAM.

My suggestion is just pick a 3rd level subclass that sounds cool to you. As others have suggested, Battle Master is a really popular choice if you want something with more crunch.

OK to be fair we are not telling him he needs to do more damage.He is asking us how to do more damage. We are just answering his inquiry.

[Frogreaver]

I've just started playing DnD again, and the last time I played was years ago in 3.5 - which is to say, I'm not particularly familiar with 5th.

I'm playing an orc fighter, and just hit second level. I'm planning on going Battle Master, and I've taken the fighting style variant that gives me a maneuver at 1st (I took riposte). I'm using an axe and shield for now, but I'm not entirely wedded to it.

So, question - how do I do more damage? Looking forward in progression, I'm not seeing any particular way to get above 1d8+str, which I imagine is going to get insufficient fast. The only thing I saw was Great Weapon Fighting (which would pair nicely with the feint maneuver), but I'd have to give up my shield to use it.

I really like the orc racial Aggressive, so if there's way to leverage that ability, that would be cool too.

My stats are 16 12 14 8 8 16, if that matters.


If you don't have the Duelist Fighting Style then switch to a 2 handed weapon - unless you have trouble staying up in combat.
Once you become a Battlemaster make sure to take the trip attack and precision attack Manuevers.
Consider a single level dip into hexblade - I prefer to wait till level 6-7 to do so. (Hex and Hexblade's curse both add nice damage to each attack you make)
Some suggest GWM or PAM - but I think you'll enjoy the warlock multiclass dip more.


The bread and butter combo from level 5+ is going to be something like: Hexblade's Curse + Action Surge + Precision Attack when missing by not to much + Trip Attack when hitting. By the time you have max strength and the warlock dip at level 7 you can hit for about 70+ accuracy accounted for damage on your opening turn (once per short rest). In fights where you just want to do consistent damage you can hex to grant all your attacks an additional d6 damage.

[Skrum]

If you don't have the Duelist Fighting Style then switch to a 2 handed weapon - unless you have trouble staying up in combat.
Once you become a Battlemaster make sure to take the trip attack and precision attack Manuevers.
Consider a single level dip into hexblade - I prefer to wait till level 6-7 to do so. (Hex and Hexblade's curse both add nice damage to each attack you make)
Some suggest GWM or PAM - but I think you'll enjoy the warlock multiclass dip more.


The bread and butter combo from level 5+ is going to be something like: Hexblade's Curse + Action Surge + Precision Attack when missing by not to much + Trip Attack when hitting. By the time you have max strength and the warlock dip at level 7 you can hit for about 70+ accuracy accounted for damage on your opening turn (once per short rest). In fights where you just want to do consistent damage you can hex to grant all your attacks an additional d6 damage.

That does sound like a good combo, but for roleplaying purposes I probably won't. My character is an orc from a hunter/gatherer tribe with asperations to be a "suave swordsman" type - defeating his opponents with overwhelming martial skill and finesse.

Thank you for the suggestions everyone! I already talked to the DM about swapping for duelist, so I think I'm going to go the duelist/spear/polearm mastery route. I think that fits his flavor as well, being an orc. Probably switch to a pike with GWM later on (level 8?), assuming I live that long/progress that far.

[Man_Over_Game]

That does sound like a good combo, but for roleplaying purposes I probably won't. My character is an orc from a hunter/gatherer tribe with asperations to be a "suave swordsman" type - defeating his opponents with overwhelming martial skill and finesse.

Thank you for the suggestions everyone! I already talked to the DM about swapping for duelist, so I think I'm going to go the duelist/spear/polearm mastery route. I think that fits his flavor as well, being an orc. Probably switch to a pike with GWM later on (level 8?), assuming I live that long/progress that far.

If damage is your goal, nothing's going to ever outpace PAM+GWM for Fighters.

[LudicSavant]

If damage is your goal, nothing's going to ever outpace PAM+GWM for Fighters.

This is objectively wrong.

[sophontteks]

This is objectively wrong.
You gonna add anything to that? :smallconfused:

[Man_Over_Game]

You gonna add anything to that? :smallconfused:

Tbf, I bet you could make a baller thrown weapons build if you got both Duelist and the Thrown Weapon Fighting. That's +4 damage per throw, turning a 1d6 into the equivalent of a 1d14. Add in the fact that you can still hold a shield and you keep your Bonus Action, it might be a solid contender in the upper levels, like maybe an Eldritch Knight build or something.

Although it's hard to say, considering how variable GWM can be. I think I'd probably do it as a Horizon Walker Ranger instead, since the extra ranged works well with those teleport strikes.

I'd laugh if someone managed to pull off a Ranger build that outperformed the flood of PAM+GWM builds we've had over the years.

[Frogreaver]

You gonna add anything to that? :smallconfused:

{Scrubbed}

[Man_Over_Game]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}
Nah, it's cool. Me and Ludic go way back. We bickered then, too! And it's not like I offered any evidence of my statement.

[Frogreaver]

Nah, it's cool. Me and Ludic go way back. We bickered then, too! And it's not like I offered any evidence of my statement.

I have a problem with the notion that not offering evidence for a universally qualified statement being a thing that could be held against you. Nearly no amount of evidence is ever going to be adequate to back up such a statement. Whereas if it's obviously incorrect then it's trivially easy to provide a counterexample.

[LudicSavant]

You gonna add anything to that? :smallconfused:

Sure, I'd be happy to elaborate! :smallsmile:

So basically, in order for GWM to outperform even a strength bump, you need to have a sufficiently high hit chance due to some combination of accuracy buffs and/or sufficiently low enemy AC. Thus it is fairly commonplace for GWM to get outpaced in a wide variety of situations.
PAM likewise has some clear limitations -- it competes for action economy (so if your Fighter has access to other bonus actions or reactions, it's less valuable), and it lowers your weapon die size, which actually matters when we're talking about a class that can potentially get several attacks in a round.
Both lose access to certain highly efficient Fighting Styles (like Archery), and both require you to focus on Strength, which means a lower initiative than Dex-based alternatives (and winning initiative more often = more actions per adventuring day = better damage output), and both will not work with things like, say, Shadow Blade on an Eldritch Knight.

As an example of a case where PAM actually makes your damage lower, let's take the humble Champion -- after all they make for a particularly simple and straightforward calculation.
Level 20 Champion w/ GWM+PAM+20 Strength+GWF Style+Glaive vs AC 19 (DMG-stated "average AC for a CR20 monster"):
46.4 DPR
76.1 DPR with Advantage
84.7 DPR with Action Surge
138.2 DPR with Action Surge/Advantage

Meanwhile if that same character ignores their PAM feat and just swings a greatsword, they instead do:
47.4 DPR
81.5 DPR with Advantage
92.4 DPR with Action Surge
153.9 with Action Surge/Advantage

(All results rounded to nearest tenth. This calculation includes everything: accuracy, critical hits, GWF rerolls, and the chance of a GWM bonus action attack triggered by crits. You can easily replicate the results using AnyDice or the DPR calculator in my sig).

We're already beating out PAM's damage, and that's without even replacing it with a different feat, which could further improve our damage (like, say, using a maul with Crusher, or taking Fey-Touched for Hex, or the like).

So why does your Champion's damage actually go down with PAM? Well, it's because...
- Your damage die gets lower, which actually matters with a large number of attacks and high critrate.
- You scale less with the GWF style (which adds 1.33 repeating per greatsword hit and 2.66 repeating per greatsword crit, but only .8 per Glaive hit, 1.6 per Glaive crit, and .5 / 1 per PAM bonus action hit/crit).
- Your crit rate is high enough that there is a substantial chance of getting a bonus action attack, without PAM's help. (There's actually even more of a chance in a fight with multiple enemies, because of the "reduce a creature to zero" clause).

And again, that's all before we consider that we could have taken another feat in PAM's place.

This is but one of many examples. It's not uncommon for there to be scenarios where a Fighter will do better damage with choices other than PAM+GWM.

They're good feats, but there's plenty of strong competition.


Nah, it's cool. Me and Ludic go way back. We bickered then, too! And it's not like I offered any evidence of my statement.

https://forums.giantitp.com/images/sand/icons/icon_thumbsup.png

[Man_Over_Game]

Few things, though.

It's not expected for a player to go toe-to-toe with a creature of equal CR, the expectation was that a party of 4 is supposed to take on 1 creature of equal CR.

You are accounting for a level 20 scenario, not one that's a little more down-to-earth, like level 5. Most of us haven't seen a level 20 table before, so it's relevance is a bit spotty.

While it's a little odd of a nitpick, the Champion isn't exactly a great example of anything to use for a basis, as it basically contributes a bonus equal to 5% (10% at super high levels) of your weapon damage (which is like .6 damage per turn). Compare it to something like the Samurai or Battlemaster, who can modify their accuracy and are more common, and it's a no-brainer.

Lastly, AC kinda scales up faster for monsters the more magic items are expected, but I realize that can probablh be looped in with nitpick #2.

But I want to clarify, I don't think they are individually bad, but that they are much stronger together. GWM is stronger the weaker your attacks are, so you're risking less for that bonus damage, and PAM requires reach weapons (which sacrifices damage for versatility and consistency) while also giving you a weak attack and a Reaction Attack.

Which is a pretty perfect synergy. GWM wants rapid-fire attacks, PAM sacrifices damage for more attacks.

[LudicSavant]

You are accounting for a level 20 scenario, not one that's a little more down-to-earth, like level 5. Most of us haven't seen a level 20 table before, so it's relevance is a bit spotty.

You said "nothing's going to ever outpace PAM+GWM for Fighters." Level 20 is part of ever, and thus seems relevant to the claim being addressed.

That said, the level 20 Champion is an arbitrary example, chosen for its relative simplicity -- I could have used any of a hundred others, which is why I gave more generalized principles above the specific example. Those principles can apply at level 5, or level 20, or any other level.


Compare it to something like the Samurai or Battlemaster, who can modify their accuracy and are more common, and it's a no-brainer.

It shouldn't be a no-brainer for them either. A Samurai for example cannot benefit from bonus action attacks when using Fighting Spirit, and thus it should be clear that PAM+GWM isn't maximizing damage there. And (at higher levels) they will have even more attacks than a usual Fighter.

PAM+GWM is a good combo, but there are other combos that are at least as effective. More of them than ever now that Tasha's is out.

[Ir0ns0ul]

I didn’t crunch any numbers and my math skills are nothing compared with Ludic, but I always had the feeling that my basic GWF Fighter / Hexblade swinging a Greatsword with Hex on round 1, Hexblade Curse on round 2 and Action Surge on round 3 was consistently doing more damage than my fellow GWM and/or PAM friends.

[ImproperJustice]

Or the Eldritch Knight with the action surge double fireball that kills everything before the encounter starts.

[Man_Over_Game]

You said "nothing's going to ever outpace PAM+GWM for Fighters." Level 20 is part of ever, and thus seems relevant to the claim being addressed.

That's fair. A bit pedantic, but you make a point.

[Frogreaver]

I didn’t crunch any numbers and my math skills are nothing compared with Ludic, but I always had the feeling that my basic GWF Fighter / Hexblade swinging a Greatsword with Hex on round 1, Hexblade Curse on round 2 and Action Surge on round 3 was consistently doing more damage than my fellow GWM and/or PAM friends.

You probably were. GWM requires a few build specific choices to actually shine and also requires optimal in play decision making to actually be effective. A lot of players fail in one of those regards.

I’m not sure which actually wins out on damage. I imagine it depends on if you are looking at a single enemy or over the adventuring day and what level you are looking at.

[sophontteks]

Sure, I'd be happy to elaborate! :smallsmile:

Thank you. I just wanted to hear what alternative ideas you had to help the OP make a good choice. That'll do.

[Thunderous Mojo]

GWM is stronger the weaker your attacks are, so you're risking less for that bonus damage
I'm afraid the above quote is an example of fallacious reasoning: the effect of GMW is not "stronger" with a spear, then the same feat being used with a greatsword.

The percentage amount of change in expected damage between a successful attack with GWM and a successful attack without using the feat, increases- dependent on the size the damage die of the weapon used. A lower weapon damage die, results in GWM accounting for a larger percentage of the damage done when the feat is successfully used.

Attempting to 'optimize' for this particular relationship isn't ultimately fruitful. -5/+10 is still -5/+10, regardless of the weapon.


It's not expected for a player to go toe-to-toe with a creature of equal CR, the expectation was that a party of 4 is supposed to take on 1 creature of equal CR.
My copy of the 5e DMG seems to be lacking text explicitly enumerating this 'game expectation'...perhaps a difference in the print edition?🃏

[Frogreaver]

I'm afraid the above quote is an example of fallacious reasoning: the effect of GMW is not "stronger" with a spear, then the same feat being used with a greatsword.

It's not fallacious at all. It's trivially easy to show both by absolute and percentages. Take a greatsword attack without GWM. Now apply GWM. Take the new value and subtract the old value. Now do the same with a lower damage weapon. The lower damage weapon will increase in damage more than the higher damage weapon. Both in absolute terms and in percentage terms.

[Thunderous Mojo]

It's not fallacious at all. It's trivially easy to show both by absolute and percentages. Take a greatsword attack without GWM. Now apply GWM. Take the new value and subtract the old value. Now do the same with a lower damage weapon. The lower damage weapon will increase in damage more than the higher damage weapon. Both in absolute terms and in percentage terms.
I stated this above already. In aggregate terms you are not getting 'more' damage.
A 401K account with 15% annual return on an investment of $1,000 is not generating more income than a 401K with a 6% annual return on an investment of 100,000.

There is a difference.

If your design goal is to execute "more damage per round", then maximizing the "percentage of damage obtained from the GMW" may not actually yield the best result for your intended goal.

[Greywander]

What it does mean is that if you're already going to be using a weapon with a lower damage die then GWM becomes slightly more valuable to you. This doesn't mean that PAM + GWM with a polearm is better than GWM with a greatsword, only that GWM is getting you a bit more value if you're already using PAM with a polearm.

To use some numbers, let's say GWM adds +10 damage. If you're normally doing 100 damage, that's a +10% increase, but if you're normally doing 50 damage, that's a +20% increase. 20% is better than 10%, but 110 damage is better than 60 damage. All this really means is that the 50 damage build would be more likely to grab GWM, while the 100 damage build doesn't need it as much, but the 100 damage build is still dealing more damage.

[LudicSavant]

It's not fallacious at all. It's trivially easy to show both by absolute and percentages.

By absolute? Certainly not. I posted a mathematical example where greatsword + GWM outperforms glaive + GWM earlier in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24992405&postcount=26).


What it does mean is that if you're already going to be using a weapon with a lower damage die then GWM becomes slightly more valuable to you. This doesn't mean that PAM + GWM with a polearm is better than GWM with a greatsword, only that GWM is getting you a bit more value if you're already using PAM with a polearm.

To use some numbers, let's say GWM adds +10 damage. If you're normally doing 100 damage, that's a +10% increase, but if you're normally doing 50 damage, that's a +20% increase. 20% is better than 10%, but 110 damage is better than 60 damage. All this really means is that the 50 damage build would be more likely to grab GWM, while the 100 damage build doesn't need it as much, but the 100 damage build is still dealing more damage.

I believe this is a good summation.

[Frogreaver]

I stated this above already. In aggregate terms you are not getting 'more' damage.
A 401K account with 15% annual return on an investment of $1,000 is not generating more income than a 401K with a 6% annual return on an investment of 100,000.

There is a difference.

If your design goal is to execute "more damage per round", then maximizing the "percentage of damage obtained from the GMW" may not actually yield the best result for your intended goal.

I get that the absolute and the percentage don't have to line up for everything, but for GWM with respect to weapons of different sizes they actually do. This is because the -5 to hit lowers your DPR by more the higher your damage already is.

[Man_Over_Game]

This is being kinda irrelevant. The reason you're choosing to have lower damage is due to having more chances for dealing damage. It's not lower damage for lower damage, it's lower damage for reach.

Even if we are using a reach weapon without PAM, the extra reach having even a 10% chance to get an attack you otherwise couldn't hit (or just focusing a better target), it will probably outvalue the average 1.5 damage another weapon would give you with GWM.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Hello OP,

An alternative is to focus on defense and ask your fellow party members to give you the buffs you need to dish out the damage.

Sword and board fighters combine high AC and high HP. For extra tankiness invest in feats like Lucky, Resilient: Wisdom and don't forget the impressive defensive benefits of Shield Master. There are others as well to suit your party configuration and preferred playstyle.

"But wait, Mr. Wonderful," I hear you saying, "I don't want to do 1d8 +4 or 5! I want to crush!"

Well my friend, that's what your fellow party members are for, especially clerics. Holy weapon is especially nice, now you are doing 3d8 +5 and when you get your third attack that equates to 9d8 +15 plus any extra adds from Maneuvers and other specials. At lower levels Spirit Guardians is nice, though it incentivizes foes to stay away from you and that's not usually the plan.

Just an alternative to the good ideas tossed out so far.

[Eldariel]

Well my friend, that's what your fellow party members are for, especially clerics. Holy weapon is especially nice, now you are doing 3d8 +5 and when you get your third attack that equates to 9d8 +15 plus any extra adds from Maneuvers and other specials. At lower levels Spirit Guardians is nice, though it incentivizes foes to stay away from you and that's not usually the plan.

Do note though, this does take their Concentration which is a very massive cost since Clerics' Concentration spells are good. Spirit Guardians is great up to level 20 and Summon Celestial is another huge Concentration effect that Holy Weapon would shut down. So when you get Holy Weapon'd, you're essentially tasked with doing the contributions of two PCs, not one, since you're using the main resource from another PC while at it. It can still work but it's...not a trivial choice by any means.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Do note though, this does take their Concentration which is a very massive cost since Clerics' Concentration spells are good. Spirit Guardians is great up to level 20 and Summon Celestial is another huge Concentration effect that Holy Weapon would shut down. So when you get Holy Weapon'd, you're essentially tasked with doing the contributions of two PCs, not one, since you're using the main resource from another PC while at it. It can still work but it's...not a trivial choice by any means.

Understood, but if you are facing average to intelligent opponents then anyone casting Spirit Guardians pretty much guarantees they will receive all ranged attacks. After all, those guardians are very obvious visually.

Against dumb monsters that means the cleric is near or in the front line.

In the groups I play with the clerics (including myself) are willing to do a lot to keep the Fighter between the monsters and themselves.

[Eldariel]

Understood, but if you are facing average to intelligent opponents then anyone casting Spirit Guardians pretty much guarantees they will receive all ranged attacks. After all, those guardians are very obvious visually.

Against dumb monsters that means the cleric is near or in the front line.

In the groups I play with the clerics (including myself) are willing to do a lot to keep the Fighter between the monsters and themselves.

Generally if I cast Spirit Guardians, I want to have all them focus on me and I want to be in the middle of enemies - the more fire I draw the better. Cleric has a shield and medium/heavy armor, they can Sanctuary or heal themselves if they're at risk and every round after casting Spirit Guardians while engaged in melee they can just take the Dodge-action while Spirit Guardians do their thing. Cleric being able to tank'n'spank without needing to take actions is just wonderful and makes them probably better suited for the frontline than most Fighters (some Eldritch Knights potentially exempted) - the bonus action can then be used to Spiritual Weapon, (Mass) Healing Word or Sanctuary depending on what's on the menu. This means enemies are trying to attack the 19-20 AC Cleric at Disadvantage (and needing to roll Wisdom-saves to even attack if the Cleric is feeling the heat and Sanctuaries themself) while due to speed reduction unable to really leave their threatened area and taking constant damage from Spirit Guardians (upcast if need be) and with the Cleric able to take War Caster-level OAs if enemy does try to get out (Toll the Dead as the minimum option but it can of course be a leveled spell too). This makes life very easy for the rest of the party who can just pick the useless enemies off.

[sophontteks]

Generally if I cast Spirit Guardians, I want to have all them focus on me and I want to be in the middle of enemies - the more fire I draw the better. Cleric has a shield and medium/heavy armor, they can Sanctuary or heal themselves if they're at risk and every round after casting Spirit Guardians while engaged in melee they can just take the Dodge-action while Spirit Guardians do their thing. Cleric being able to tank'n'spank without needing to take actions is just wonderful and makes them probably better suited for the frontline than most Fighters (some Eldritch Knights potentially exempted) - the bonus action can then be used to Spiritual Weapon, (Mass) Healing Word or Sanctuary depending on what's on the menu. This means enemies are trying to attack the 19-20 AC Cleric at Disadvantage (and needing to roll Wisdom-saves to even attack if the Cleric is feeling the heat and Sanctuaries themself) while due to speed reduction unable to really leave their threatened area and taking constant damage from Spirit Guardians (upcast if need be) and with the Cleric able to take War Caster-level OAs if enemy does try to get out (Toll the Dead as the minimum option but it can of course be a leveled spell too). This makes life very easy for the rest of the party who can just pick the useless enemies off.

Reasons why Clerics are one of the best tanks in the game, especially life Clerics. Everything about them is an answer to "How can I get the enemy to attack me?" and they have all the tools they need to take the punishment coming their way.

[ImproperJustice]

Reasons why Clerics are one of the best tanks in the game, especially life Clerics. Everything about them is an answer to "How can I get the enemy to attack me?" and they have all the tools they need to take the punishment coming their way.

I love Clerics. My favorite 5e character so far was a Dwarven Cleric of the Forge.

Wasn’t boring at all. I made it clear up front that I wasn’t a healer. But that I would pick people up if they got downed. Instead I tanked ridiculous opposition, blasted when I felt like it, and did all kinds of fun utility stuff like Sending, Communion, Party Wide Teleportation, Summoning, and Divine Interventions.
Been itching to try another Cleric soon.

Apologies to the side discussion, but to add to what has already been said. It is easy and tempting to jam all the combat feats in the world onto your fighter, but it will get really boring.

Do yourself a favor at level four or six and grab something utility based or unique.
Like Ritual Caster, Magic Adept (Mold Earth, shape water and Find Familiar), Prodigy, Skill Expert, Poisoner, Keen Mind (that perfect memory can be surprisingly useful), random Warlock invocation, just something that lets you do something interesting out of combat to improve your overall play experience.

[Willowhelm]

Generally if I cast Spirit Guardians, I want to have all them focus on me and I want to be in the middle of enemies - the more fire I draw the better. Cleric has a shield and medium/heavy armor, they can Sanctuary or heal themselves if they're at risk and every round after casting Spirit Guardians while engaged in melee they can just take the Dodge-action while Spirit Guardians do their thing. Cleric being able to tank'n'spank without needing to take actions is just wonderful and makes them probably better suited for the frontline than most Fighters (some Eldritch Knights potentially exempted) - the bonus action can then be used to Spiritual Weapon, (Mass) Healing Word or Sanctuary depending on what's on the menu. This means enemies are trying to attack the 19-20 AC Cleric at Disadvantage (and needing to roll Wisdom-saves to even attack if the Cleric is feeling the heat and Sanctuaries themself) while due to speed reduction unable to really leave their threatened area and taking constant damage from Spirit Guardians (upcast if need be) and with the Cleric able to take War Caster-level OAs if enemy does try to get out (Toll the Dead as the minimum option but it can of course be a leveled spell too). This makes life very easy for the rest of the party who can just pick the useless enemies off.

This is fairly off topic at this point but just an FYI - sanctuary errata affects the spirit guardians combo.

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/58059/how-do-the-spirit-guardians-and-sanctuary-spells-interact

[KorvinStarmast]

So, question - how do I do more damage?

My stats are 16 12 14 8 8 16, if that matters.
What I did with my orc battle master was to take pole arm mastery (which applies to spears) and go spear and board, with dueling fighting style. Unless you have another need for a bonus action, the bonus action attack that you get adds a 1d4 +5 damage to your 1d6+5 damage. As level goes up and you get more attacks, you do only get that one bonus attack unless you now and again pull an action surge. This combo dovetails with some Battle Master maneuvers better than others ...

There are other ways to skin the cat, but that's what I did.

By level 10, when you get a second fighting style, you might want to take Great Weapon Fighting and go all in on two handed weapons...you may have gotten some magical plate or something to boost your AC.

Do note though, this does take their Concentration which is a very massive cost since Clerics' Concentration spells are good. Spirit Guardians is great up to level 20 and Summon Celestial is another huge Concentration effect that Holy Weapon would shut down. So when you get Holy Weapon'd, you're essentially tasked with doing the contributions of two PCs, ... and on the next round the cleric can cast, as a bonus action, spiritual weapon which does not require concentration. I think you are overstating the case a little bit, but I do agree that Holy Weapon as a buff has its costs and that need to be assessed by the party as they build their tactical scheme.

[DwarfFighter]

So, question - how do I do more damage?


I would like to make the point that as a fighter you have A LOT of options for versatility, which are often overlooked in the pursuit of optimal damage output. Sure, the more tools you invest in, the less spectacular your special moves will be, but you will have more of them to chose from.

Take some javelins: you do more damage if you can make a ranged attack at an enemy out of reach instead of flailing impotently at him from afar.

Carry more weapons so you are not limited to a single damage type.

Give the net a try.

You can expect to find exotic and magical weapons the rest of your party lack proficiency in using - you can expect some of those to be coming your way!

Don't underestimate what you can do with combat actions like Dodge - if the big bad guys spend their whole turn missing your solid AC with their attacks, it's like your whole team got a free turn! You can Grapple enemies you don't want to move, or to drag them into a position you want. Shove and Knockdowns can set the enemy up for devastating team combos.

Be a team player, and the rest of the party will want to find ways for you to get advantages.

-DF

[Rashagar]

It's not the most damaging, but the most fun I ever had on a melee fighter was taking Shield Master and Mobile on a Battlemaster.

The thing I don't really like about melee fighty types is the feeling of being stuck in place once I've engaged an enemy. Like, as soon as we engage it can feel like "and here's where we both live til one of us falls over". With the above Shield Master and Mobile feats it was a lot of fun knocking people prone to half their movement and disengaging from melee for free, in open battlefields it felt like I could almost cover and protect multiple flanks at once. Since Tasha's came out I'm kind of tempted to reprise the character and take the Bait and Switch maneuver to see what it adds to the feel of the character.

[Skrum]

Update - Ghak the Professional just hit level 3. Spear + Board and duelist have been doing the work so far, but I'm really looking forward to using maneuvers. I took Commanding Presence (gotta use that 16 Cha), Precision, and Riposte. I know trip was recommended and it does look nice, but I like to avoid offering saving throws whenever possible, and the strength save seems like it'll be particularly unreliable.

Re: buff spells: the game I'm in has rolling attendence, so I never know who's going to be at the table. There's also an awful lot of arcane spell casters, and not many clerics (just the way it worked out). While actual party cohesion/complimentary builds will always give the best results, it's just not possible in this game. Building self-sufficiently I think is the way to go.

[Eldariel]

... and on the next round the cleric can cast, as a bonus action, spiritual weapon which does not require concentration. I think you are overstating the case a little bit, but I do agree that Holy Weapon as a buff has its costs and that need to be assessed by the party as they build their tactical scheme.

What it costs you is one of:
- Spirit Guardians
- Summon Celestial
- Silence
- Banishment
- Aura of Life
- Holy Aura
- Etc.


There are lots of really powerful Concentration-spells on the Cleric list: their primary contribution in most fights is dropping a powerful Concentration effect like Spirit Guardians, and then adding Spiritual Weapon on top of it next round. Holy Weapon means they personally aren't really doing much: a Cleric just using Spiritual Weapon and Cantrip is barely comparable to a martial damage dealer. So the Holy Weapon user has to get more out of the spell over its duration than the party would get out of e.g. Spirit Guardians V (5d8 SG) or Summon Celestial or Banishment V (two targets).

Now, if the encounter difficulty is low, it can be worth it but as a rule, in tougher scenarios, I'd say Cleric generally helps the party more via casting one of the more impactful Concentration spells. E.g. Summon Celestial V is already pretty competitive with Holy Weapon for damage; Fighter with 3 attacks gets +2d8 * attack bonus (at best the same as the Cleric's except for Archer who gets +2) while Summon Celestial attacks at 2d6+7 x2, which assuming 18ish AC and +9 to hit amounts to 24 DPR for both, so a wash that comes down to intangibles: range of engagement, target resistances and vulnerabilities, amount of turns spent getting or not getting attacks in, access to environmental advantage, etc.

Summon Celestial thus does about the same damage as Holy Weapon but also gives you an extra body to take actions, soak damage, scout, fly around on (it's a Large flyer so it can carry PCs), healing touch someone, etc. for an hour. This means that the Fighter can also take actions other than full attacking without costing the party a lot of value in Holy Weapon. Thus I find it hard to argue for Holy Weapon, not because it's a bad spell, but because the competition is so fierce. On self-buffers like Crossbow Expert Swords Bard, Holy Weapon is great.

[thoroughlyS]

I posted a mathematical example where greatsword + GWM outperforms glaive + GWM earlier in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24992405&postcount=26).
I just started reading through this thread, and I'm a little confused. Can you show how you're calculating your totals in that post? I ran them myself, and I'm getting slightly different results with important implications. Taking your example of a 20th level champion fighter with 20 STR, Great Weapon Fighting, Great Weapon Master, and Polearm Master against a 19 AC creature, I'm getting:
4 attacks × (0.4 chance to hit × (6.3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.945 expected damage from crit) + 1 PAM bonus action attack × (0.4 chance to hit × (3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.45 expected damage from crit) ≈ 45.5 damage with a glaive
4 attacks × (0.4 chance to hit × (8.33 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 1.2495 expected damage from crit) ≈ 42.3 damage with a greatsword/maul
This means that the damage lost from using a glaive is more than made up for by the 5th attack. With advantage the gap widens:
4 attacks × (0.64 chance to hit × (6.3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 1.74825 expected damage from crit) + 1 PAM bonus action attack × (0.64 chance to hit × (3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.8325 expected damage from crit) ≈ 73.9 damage with a glaive
4 attacks × (0.64 chance to hit × (8.33 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 2.311575 expected damage from crit) ≈ 69 damage with a greatsword/maul
That said, Action Surge does swing things back in the greatsword/maul's favor:
8 attacks × (0.4 chance to hit × (6.3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.945 expected damage from crit) + 1 PAM bonus action attack × (0.4 chance to hit × (3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.45 expected damage from crit) ≈ 83.4 damage with a glaive
8 attacks × (0.4 chance to hit × (8.33 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 1.2495 expected damage from crit) ≈ 84.7 damage with a greatsword/maul
And for completeness, Action Surge with advantage:
8 attacks × (0.64 chance to hit × (6.3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 1.74825 expected damage from crit) + 1 PAM bonus action attack × (0.64 chance to hit × (3 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 0.8325 expected damage from crit) ≈ 135.4 damage with a glaive
8 attacks × (0.64 chance to hit × (8.33 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 2.311575 expected damage from crit) ≈ 138 damage with a greatsword/maul

It also bears mentioning that if they trigger the GWM bonus action attack, the greatsword/maul also pulls ahead (somewhat obviously, as an extra greatsword swing is a bigger boost than an extra glaive swing).

All this said, I guess this doesn't actually disprove your rebuttal. There is still a circumstance where the fighter would be better off dropping their glaive and using a greatsword/maul. But round by round, I think the glaive is still probably the better pick, especially at other levels of play or for other subclasses, where triggering the bonus action attack will come up less frequently.

[LudicSavant]

I just started reading through this thread, and I'm a little confused. Can you show how you're calculating your totals in that post? I ran it in the Comprehensive DPR calculator (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?582779-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator-(v2-0)), which has all of its formulas documented here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/11eTMZPPxWXHY0rQEhK1msO-40BcCGrzArSl4GX4CiJE/edit#heading=h.5qcgsqvtvf8v).


I ran them myself, and I'm getting slightly different results with important implications.

Your error appears to be that your math did not account for this bullet point in the GWM rules:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/445485023299108875/830704576746225664/unknown.png

This is an important variable, because the chance for a high level Champion to land at least one crit during their turn (and thus earn a better bonus action attack than PAM's 1d4) is high.

If you leave that variable out, you're gonna be way off on your DPR calculation.

As an example:


4 attacks × (0.4 chance to hit × (8.33 damage die + 5 STR + 10) + 1.2495 expected damage from crit) ≈ 42.3 damage with a greatsword/maul

Here's the correct answer laid out on the calculator (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FYCtIlVYqIzeBbQHyoNGVbAOmTxA-HHOEsI0lUMNMxY/edit?usp=sharing). Note how if you uncheck the "account for GWM crit chance?" box, it'll produce your answer (42.3). Checking the box, and therefore accounting for the GWM crit bonus, bumps it up to 47.4, which is the answer you should be getting.

So yeah. The difference in your math is that you only accounted for one of GWM's bullet points. In order to accurately calculate DPR, you must account for both, as surely as you must account for things like accuracy and crit chance.

[DwarfFighter]

It's not the most damaging, but the most fun I ever had on a melee fighter was taking Shield Master and Mobile on a Battlemaster.


That sounds like a lot of fun! :) Standing in one space only and churning out numbers sounds like poor way to spend an evening.

I get that people feel they need to bring their A game to win, and optimizing theory is a way to make sure you're not dead weight, but...

1. You can play for better results. Dynamic is more entertaining than static, even if it is harder to keep at an optimal level.

2. The encounters aren't balanced for optimizers, i.e. your fighter need not be the ultimate incarnation of a warrior for the party to win.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Generally if I cast Spirit Guardians, I want to have all them focus on me and I want to be in the middle of enemies - the more fire I draw the better. Cleric has a shield and medium/heavy armor, they can Sanctuary or heal themselves if they're at risk and every round after casting Spirit Guardians while engaged in melee they can just take the Dodge-action while Spirit Guardians do their thing. Cleric being able to tank'n'spank without needing to take actions is just wonderful and makes them probably better suited for the frontline than most Fighters (some Eldritch Knights potentially exempted) - the bonus action can then be used to Spiritual Weapon, (Mass) Healing Word or Sanctuary depending on what's on the menu. This means enemies are trying to attack the 19-20 AC Cleric at Disadvantage (and needing to roll Wisdom-saves to even attack if the Cleric is feeling the heat and Sanctuaries themself) while due to speed reduction unable to really leave their threatened area and taking constant damage from Spirit Guardians (upcast if need be) and with the Cleric able to take War Caster-level OAs if enemy does try to get out (Toll the Dead as the minimum option but it can of course be a leveled spell too). This makes life very easy for the rest of the party who can just pick the useless enemies off.

We are talking about the same thing really, you just prefer that the cleric be the focus of enemy attacks and I prefer the fighter. I like them because pouring extra feats into defense makes them very tanky indeed, and also because the cleric tends to be more vulnerable to grappling and restraining attacks. Also, if you have a DM who follows the guidelines of 6-8 medium and hard encounters per day with 2 short rests, your cleric will need to carefully conserve resources. But it can certainly be done - there are many clever builds on this forum that have virtually every class able to stand in front just fine.

And honestly, you can figure out how to have a cleric in any role they are just that flexible.

As a side note, Optimization threads tend to focus on a single character where most play groups look to build a tough and balanced party. That's why my response to OP was focused on party synergies rather than the best standalone character.

[sophontteks]

We are talking about the same thing really, you just prefer that the cleric be the focus of enemy attacks and I prefer the fighter. I like them because pouring extra feats into defense makes them very tanky indeed, and also because the cleric tends to be more vulnerable to grappling and restraining attacks. Also, if you have a DM who follows the guidelines of 6-8 medium and hard encounters per day with 2 short rests, your cleric will need to carefully conserve resources. But it can certainly be done - there are many clever builds on this forum that have virtually every class able to stand in front just fine.

And honestly, you can figure out how to have a cleric in any role they are just that flexible.

As a side note, Optimization threads tend to focus on a single character where most play groups look to build a tough and balanced party. That's why my response to OP was focused on party synergies rather than the best standalone character.
Fighters are better tanks on paper, but in play it's difficult for them to keep the enemy on them. I bring up the life cleric here. That divinity heal is the ultimate tank ability. The enemy either fights a very tanky cleric (athletics and a decent strength score is a good idea) or the cleric keeps reviving the whole party on a short rest mechanic.

[Greywander]

Life clerics might be one of the best tanks in the PHB. There's been a few subclasses released since that offer abilities that specifically help you tank, so it's not as clear-cut anymore, but just for PHB subclasses Life clerics are among the best tanks.

They get heavy armor and shields, so their AC is as good as the best of them.
Clerics are a support class, so they're already high priority targets as support abilities tend to act as force multipliers for the rest of the party.
Clerics are healers, too, and Life clerics are the best healers. If the Life cleric is still standing, it becomes very difficult to keep any other party member down.
Life clerics heal themselves when they heal others.
Life clerics eventually maximize healing. It almost doesn't matter who you attack, because the cleric will just heal it. Focusing down the cleric is the only way to remove this, but even then you better drop them in one round or they'll just heal themselves.

TL;DR, Life clerics are tough, give plenty of reason to attack them instead of another party member, and can easily heal any damage taken.

The only area where clerics are weak is saving throws (but no more so than most other classes). Pair them up with a paladin and the two can be almost unstoppable. Throw in an Artillerist artificer for temp HP every round and you have an extremely resilient team.

For fighters, Cavalier gets a really nice tanking feature in the late game giving them basically unlimited OAs. This pairs extremely well with PAM and Sentinel, making it almost impossible to get past them and allowing them to deal a lot of damage if they get rushed by a horde of enemies. They can render a 25 foot wide hallway nearly impassible to enemy forces, which is pretty amazing. If you can force the enemy to rush into melee, the Cavalier acts as a meat grinder and can slaughter hordes of weak enemies. But that's only late game.

Basically, several different classes and subclasses get their own abilities that help them tank, so you need to build around those abilities into a specific style of tanking.

[thoroughlyS]

Your error appears to be that your math did not account for this bullet point in the GWM rules:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/445485023299108875/830704576746225664/unknown.png
Ah, your results incorporated the chance to provoke a bonus action attack from a crit. Ok, well after re-running the numbers, my results concur with yours. However, I decided to expand this out over an entire progression, with my results here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vvRm0xe1pFVvff66cVtq1ifjWxV8OReVW7L7JMWwZgw/edit?usp=sharing). From 1st level through 19th level, the character has a higher damage output with the glaive, which makes sense considering they put a feat into it. It only flips over to the greatsword at 20th level exactly, when fighter gets their fourth attack. Advantage drags the tipping point down to 15th level, which was when the champion got their second expansion to their crit range. Action Surge causes an imperceptible bump at 5th, but the real tipping point is 11th level, when fighter gets their third attack. Action Surge with advantage does seem to paint the most damning picture, with the greatsword eclipsing the glaive at 5th level and their lead only growing. But it is worth mentioning that all of these tipping points seem to be tied to the fighter and champion exactly. Getting rid of the expanded critical, the glaive does more from 1st-20th normally and 1st-19th with advantage. The greatsword does still come out ahead after 1th level with Action Surge (with or without advantage).

Now, I admit that this doesn't disarm your initial argument. There are still cases where the greatsword outperforms the glaive, even on a build with Polearm Master. But I think that the simplest case might have also been the best case for the greatsword, if inadvertently. After all, only the champion fighter gets the third and fourth attack, and the expanded critical range.

[Bilbron]

I've just started playing DnD again, and the last time I played was years ago in 3.5 - which is to say, I'm not particularly familiar with 5th.

I'm playing an orc fighter, and just hit second level. I'm planning on going Battle Master, and I've taken the fighting style variant that gives me a maneuver at 1st (I took riposte). I'm using an axe and shield for now, but I'm not entirely wedded to it.

So, question - how do I do more damage? Looking forward in progression, I'm not seeing any particular way to get above 1d8+str, which I imagine is going to get insufficient fast. The only thing I saw was Great Weapon Fighting (which would pair nicely with the feint maneuver), but I'd have to give up my shield to use it.

I really like the orc racial Aggressive, so if there's way to leverage that ability, that would be cool too.

My stats are 16 12 14 8 8 16, if that matters.

I've done a whole series of videos on Fighters on my YouTube channel, including Deep Dives on how to optimize most of the archetypes (only missing Eldritch Knight, Arcane Archer, and Banneret) and builds for those archetypes. Link in sig.

[CapnWildefyr]

What to do with a fighter?

Walk him and pitch to the low dex cleric. :smallwink:

Sorry, kept skimming this thread, and could no longer resist.

My only piece of advice to the OP: I've seen friends who've run single-themed characters, PAM or GWM etc. All good, but just remember to bring other weapons and plans too. Oil, acid, some kind of missile weapon (or more than one spear), caltrops, ball bearings -- something. Make sure you're never standing there going 'Gee, I wish I could do something.' Probably you've already got that covered.

[LudicSavant]

Ah, your results incorporated the chance to provoke a bonus action attack from a crit. Ok, well after re-running the numbers, my results concur with yours

https://forums.giantitp.com/images/sand/icons/icon_thumbsup.png


Now, I admit that this doesn't disarm your initial argument. There are still cases where the greatsword outperforms the glaive, even on a build with Polearm Master But I think that the simplest case might have also been the best case for the greatsword, if inadvertently.

Note the section of your post I bolded and underlined. That's not the best case for the greatsword at all -- on the contrary, it's pulling punches by not replacing the PAM feat with something new.


But it is worth mentioning that all of these tipping points seem to be tied to the fighter and champion exactly.

There are plenty of tipping points on the other subclasses too, they just use different methods than the Champion. Every subclass is different, and should be built differently.

For example, on a Samurai, you don't want a bonus action attack on your Fighting Spirit turns at all. For another example, an Eldritch Knight can use stuff like Shadow Blade, Spirit Shroud, or Blind-Fighting + obscurement spells. An Arcane Archer should be using a ranged weapon. Rune Knight is one of the strongest fighters, and it's already got plenty of competition for its bonus action and reaction to reduce the value of PAM. And so forth.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Fighters are better tanks on paper, but in play it's difficult for them to keep the enemy on them. I bring up the life cleric here. That divinity heal is the ultimate tank ability. The enemy either fights a very tanky cleric (athletics and a decent strength score is a good idea) or the cleric keeps reviving the whole party on a short rest mechanic.

My experience is VERY different from yours and supported by hundreds of encounters over very long periods of time with a number of DMs.

This does not invalidate your point of view of course, and as I said earlier, party synthesis is the key to a successful adventuring group.

That said, you cannot say "do it my way or die." That's just lazy.

[KorvinStarmast]

What it costs you is one of:
- Spirit Guardians
- Summon Celestial
- Silence
- Banishment
- Aura of Life
- Holy Aura
- Etc.

Your fighter ally doesn't make a saving throw against you using that spell.
Aura of Life and Silence
Depending On The Situation
might be a better use some times.
I do not concur with your handwave on the other ones.

As usual, your spell centric tone and style are noted. You are consistent, I'll give you that. :smallcool:
I tend to be very bore sighted on team play; style preferences do vary, of course.

[sophontteks]

My experience is VERY different from yours and supported by hundreds of encounters over very long periods of time with a number of DMs.

This does not invalidate your point of view of course, and as I said earlier, party synthesis is the key to a successful adventuring group.

That said, you cannot say "do it my way or die." That's just lazy.

Oh I agree with you completely. You definitely would experience things differently. Clerics can't break their stereotype. Neither can tanks, a concept deeper rooted in MMOs that offered much more mechanical methods to draw agro.I'm bringing it up specifically because its not realized in most games.

People who build life clerics are trying to make the ultimate healer, but clerics, even life clerics, struggle to compete with a druids healing kit when it comes to raw healing.

While not often realized, everything in a life clerics kit is related to tanking. That said, the perfect companion to a tanky cleric is a tanky fighter. It's a very tasty combo IMO.

[KorvinStarmast]

While not often realized, everything in a life clerics kit is related to tanking. That said, the perfect companion to a tanky cleric is a tanky fighter. It's a very tasty combo IMO. Concur, though I can't speak to play after level 12 on that since the tanky cleric we had was tempest, a dwarf. My tanky fighter and he were a good 'front line' but unless I could shove (shield master) the enemy, we were in truth not very 'sticky' in the way that a cavalier or someone with a sentinel feat might be.

[LudicSavant]

I concur with those saying that Life Clerics have the potential to be bloody fantastic tanks.

But bringing it back to Fighters...


I'm playing an orc fighter, and just hit second level. I'm planning on going Battle Master, and I've taken the fighting style variant that gives me a maneuver at 1st (I took riposte). I'm using an axe and shield for now, but I'm not entirely wedded to it.

So, question - how do I do more damage? Looking forward in progression, I'm not seeing any particular way to get above 1d8+str, which I imagine is going to get insufficient fast. The only thing I saw was Great Weapon Fighting (which would pair nicely with the feint maneuver), but I'd have to give up my shield to use it.

Here are some effective ways to generate more damage on a Battle Master while keeping a shield:

- Raise your primary stat. +1/+1 makes a bigger difference in 5e than you might think (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24862465&postcount=151), especially over many attacks.

- Take the Dueling fighting style. This will add +2 damage per attack. This benefit scales, because your number of attacks will scale. I generally recommend not taking the maneuver-granting Fighting Style you chose, since it's just a single d6 per short rest, whereas those +2s are going to add up to a lot more than that fast. Quite possibly in a single Action Surge!

- Generating Advantage for yourself and/or your party (because causing your party to do more damage totally counts as you bringing more damage to the table). You can do this via things like knocking prone, using Blind-Fighting tactics, taking Crusher, or the like. Greater accuracy makes a big difference in your damage output in 5e!

- Per-hit damage buffs are particularly helpful to Fighters, because those benefits apply more times since they have more attacks. You might even be able to apply these yourself; for example you can grab Hex from Fey-Touched.

- Feats! Check out Polearm Master (shield+spear), Revenant Blade, Crusher, Elven Accuracy, Fey-Touched (Hex or Gift of Alacrity), Alert, Lucky, Shield Master (note: find out which ruling your DM is using for it, that's its own whole can of worms), Sentinel, and Piercer.

- Do not neglect the things that indirectly boost your damage output, such as...

- Having a higher initiative will increase your damage output too, because the difference between beating Team Monster's initiative and losing to it is an entire round of extra actions. Yes, that means winning initiative makes a bigger difference than an Action Surge. A party being collectively stealthy enough to get Surprise has a similar effect (and they stack).

- Increasing your mobility or range. Remember, even occasionally losing a turn to being stuck out of range or CCed is a huge damage loss that can be very hard to make up even over the course of a whole adventuring day.

[Yakk]

16 or 17 strength, spear+shield+polearm master, dueling style, level 4 5 and 6, vs 2 higher strength with an axe.



3 4 5 6
PAM - 16@+6 25@+6 28@+7
AXE 10@+6 11@+7 21@+7 23@+8



(rounded 0.5 up).

As you can see, the PAM spear gets a large bump at 4 from the bonus action attack tap. And does 17% and 20% more damage in exchange for 1 point of accuracy, a decent tradeoff at level 5 and 6.

And this doesn't account for the reaction attack when a foe approaches you! Which is another 1d6+str+2 attack. If we assume we get one of those 1 round in 2 it looks more like:



3 4 5 6
PAM - 20@+6 29@+6 32@+7
AXE 10@+6 11@+7 21@+7 23@+8


For BM maneuvers, you'll want one that lets you do +damage (the other effect is to taste) for when you really need to burn dice *now*.

The other maneuvers should include riposte (PAM also uses that resource; but doesn't burn dice) and precision. Once you know the AC of the foe, burning a precision die when you miss by 1 is near guaranteed damage, and even 2 or 3 is near guaranteed. And a miss turned into a hit with a 1d6 weapon is like 8+ damage after attribute and dueling bonuses, a max roll on a damage die for a on-hit rider, and it scales with better magic weapons.

Having the free PAM reaction now just makes your BM dice last longer.

Only use the other BM maneuvers when (a) there is a tactical use to disarm a foe (or knock them prone or whatever), (b) you have extra BM dice and need to drop them this turn and there probably won't be enough turns to burn the dice as precision or riposte, or on crits.

If you precision on a miss by 1 2 or 3, that happens on 15% of attacks. With 4 attacks/round (attack action, bonus attack, reaction) that is like 0.6 on average per round. In a 3 round fight you can expend to burn 1 - 3 dice on just precision, turning 88% of those chances from misses into hits, for about 7 damage per die burned this way. Better than the 4.5 you get from an on-hit boost, but not as good as the 9 you get from a crit boost.

A riposte on a foe you have a 60% chance of hitting does 5.3 damage on average. Also a touch more than the 4.5 from a hit. It also opens an opportunity to do another precision die (if you miss by 1 or 2) or drop a die on a crit (if you roll a 20), which are valuable.

If you burn riposte every 2 rounds, PAM reaction the other round, use precision on a 1-3 to convert misses to hits, you burn 1.1 dice/round and make 4 attacks. Those 4 attacks give you 0.2 crits/round, on which you burn a die for damage, so we are up to 1.3 dice/round. Over 3 rounds that is 3.9 dice, exhausting your pool.

You get 0.6 crits @ 9 damage boosted, 1.6 extra hits @ about 8 damage each, and 1.5 extra ripostes @ 5.3 damage each, converting your 4 BM dice to about 26 extra damage over the fight, almost 50% more than the naive "just do more damage" choice.

Now at level 5 and 50% accuracy, the baseline PAM was doing 18 damage per round (after accounting for misses), for a total of 54. That extra 26 is significant (bringing you up to 80), but naive use (just add damage dice whenever) would only cost you 10% damage output.

The above techniques scale better as your weapon and strength gets better, as it leverages turning misses into hits or getting extra chances to hit. And as the die gets bigger, you can precise attack on a longer range and have it reliably hit.

If we back up and we compare this to a axe+shield 18 strength duelist champion...

0.2 crits and 1.2 hits per round. +2d8 damage on crits, 1d8+6 damage (10.5) on a hit is 14.4 damage per round. Times 3 rounds is 43.2. So the PAM BM above is putting out about twice the damage of a duelist axe and shield orc. (I forgot to include orc crit damage boost in the above, so the gap is actually a big larger).

[Eldariel]

Your fighter ally doesn't make a saving throw against you using that spell.
Aura of Life and Silence
Depending On The Situation
might be a better use some times.
I do not concur with your handwave on the other ones.

As usual, your spell centric tone and style are noted. You are consistent, I'll give you that. :smallcool:
I tend to be very bore sighted on team play; style preferences do vary, of course.

My overall point was that there are lots of things you can do with your Concentration and locking it into a buff locks them all out. The buff isn't always wrong but I do believe for most parties the party can overall benefit more of some other Concentration effect. However, that of course depends a lot, as you said.

It's worth noting that Spirit Guardians specifically is an effect where you don't care if enemy makes the save. It locks enemies down and deals damage to them; whether they succeed or fail is really kinda immaterial since they're mostly ****ed as long as they're stuck inside the area of effect anyways, and they're taking damage regardless. Banishment though, granted, is an effect where the success or failure of the saves is huge - but it's also an effect you'll only cast if there's a very significant chance of the opponent failing (it's not cast on high Cha targets).

Do note, I'm all for teamplay; I love combining effects that add up to more than the sum of their parts (e.g. Shadow Blade + Haste is one such combination) and I like comboes like grapple + Spike Growth or CC + DoT or Oil + Create Bonfire or any such. I just want to get the best bang for my (and everyone's) buck resource-wise, which is why I always do my best to consider all the opportunity costs to every single choice made and Holy Weapon is one where sometimes it can be worth it but often there are better alternatives, which is why I'm not too keen on the spell (except maybe when we can ensure a sufficient number of attacks).

[Mr. Wonderful]

Oh I agree with you completely. You definitely would experience things differently. Clerics can't break their stereotype. Neither can tanks, a concept deeper rooted in MMOs that offered much more mechanical methods to draw agro.I'm bringing it up specifically because its not realized in most games.

People who build life clerics are trying to make the ultimate healer, but clerics, even life clerics, struggle to compete with a druids healing kit when it comes to raw healing.

While not often realized, everything in a life clerics kit is related to tanking. That said, the perfect companion to a tanky cleric is a tanky fighter. It's a very tasty combo IMO.


I enjoy reading the "eclectic list of fun and interesting builds" on this site and have tried out several. I've played most cleric variants, though of course not all to high levels (alas puir Tempest clark, we hairdly knew ye).

I've been trying for some time to convince my regular circle of friends to do an all-cleric party. I think that would seriously rock - incredible combat skills, plenty of social stuff and a built in roleplaying hook of arguing over who's deity is best. I don't know if Trickster has enough overlap to do the Rogue's traditional job but I'd think multiclassing is still on the table.

Last add - I asked earlier if your DMs follow the recommended 6-8 medium and hard encounters per day before a long rest. If not, would your opinion change if they did?

[LudicSavant]

I enjoy reading the "eclectic list of fun and interesting builds" on this site

<3


Last add - I asked earlier if your DMs follow the recommended 6-8 medium and hard encounters per day before a long rest. If not, would your opinion change if they did?

I can't speak for sophontteks, but I'm used to being able to deal with 6+ encounters a day, often with them being Deadly rather than Medium or Hard. And occasionally I'll have over 10 encounters a day (so indeed, the DMG recommended average is just that for me, an average... sometimes more, sometimes less). All of my builds that I post are tested for 6+ encounters.

And (at least with our veteran caster players who know how to play casters very efficiently -- it's very possible for a less experienced player to blow their resources inefficiently), Clerics and other casters still do amazing in these. You don't need to worry about the class failing you and running out of steam... instead, you have a more interesting problem: Figuring out how you, personally, can make the best in-the-moment decision to maximize your resources that day.

So yeah. A Life Cleric tank should be doing fantastic even in a very long adventuring day. I can make a longer post breaking down exactly why but maybe that would be better suited for its own thread?

In the meantime, you can find some discussion about how so-called 'resourceless' types fare against resource-burning types throughout the thread here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24481932&postcount=17). Though it's in the context of Champion vs Battle Master (and it's Pre-Tasha's -- Champions got some useful tools in that), a lot of the general concepts of resource efficiency apply to other classes.


hundreds of encounters over very long periods of time with a number of DMs.
As a random side note, "hundreds of encounters" is not a lot to me. Like, according to RPGBot, it takes about 200 encounters just to get a single character to level 20. (https://rpgbot.net/dnd5/dungeonmasters/campaign_planning/) (Note: I have not personally double-checked RPGBot's math). So you can get to hundreds of encounters in just one campaign, gaining the perspective of playing only a single character for only the first time.

I'm not saying that to say your experience is unimportant or anything, I'm just saying, you know, tip of the iceberg, my friend! So much more exciting things yet to see and do! :smallsmile:

[Mr. Wonderful]

Hi Ludic,

I do enjoy your thread, especially for the lateral thinking.

When I mentioned that I had tested my theories with hundreds of encounters it wasn't intended as a brag, just showing that I have enough experience to have a credible opinion. Nor does it mean that I intend to have the last word - again, I read threads like yours to grow and expand my horizons.

The main thrust of my argument is to point out that when optimizing a character the aim should be instead to optimize the party. Too often these discussions spin down into an analysis of DPR and that kind of misses the whole point, which is if the party wins, the players win, period, end of story. Over the years (many years) I've developed a preference for strongly defensive characters, ones that can weather bad guys, bad rolls, and bad decisions by both players and the DM. To be successful over time a party needs to survive when they screw up or the dice just hate them that evening.

And so my preference is to play fighters, paladins and clerics, and do everything I can to ward against bad luck. In most encounters I plug along, casting Bless, healing, or doing 1d8+4. In others, the rest of the party is happy to surrender some of their pop to give it to the tank, via Holy Weapon, Spiritual Guardians etc. That's team play and smart teams will do that when appropriate. The key is to be flexible enough to win EVERY TIME, because one loss is catastrophic.

But I get how optimization threads focus on the individual rather than the group. It's WAAAAAYYY easier, but ultimately its a fruitless exercise.

I look forward to your next thread that discusses how two or more characters bring synergy to the party!

[LudicSavant]

To be successful over time a party needs to survive when they screw up or the dice just hate them that evening.


key is to be flexible enough to win EVERY TIME, because one loss is catastrophic.

The thing you're touching on here is a very important optimization concept! There were some people on the old CharOp boards who referred to it as "IP Proofing" (which stands for "Iterative Probability Proofing")

The basic idea is that a 1% chance is not a small chance when you're talking about something that will make you actually lose (or otherwise have catastrophic consequences), because a 1% chance is actually probable to come up over the course of 100+ encounters (e.g. a full campaign. After all, as we've just established, 1-20 is like 200 encounters).

I think we can see the importance of this (as well as how many people lack understanding of it) distilled in the XCOM community. People who can't beat Legendary Ironman mode consistently will say things like "I just had bad luck" or "RNG was nonsense, I missed a 95% roll multiple times in a row! I was just unlucky!" Whereas the people who can beat Legendary Ironman mode consistently will say things like "it's statistically probable that you will miss 95% rolls multiple times in a row over the course of a full campaign. If such an event is enough to make you lose, your strategy needs rethinking."

So, in order to prevent this, you basically can't bank on winning a critical roll, you need to have some plan for what's gonna happen when the @#$% hits the fan. You basically want a plan that has to fail in layers. And you can see that XCOM-veteran philosophy reflected in the builds I make, emphasizing well-rounded defenses and the versatility to make contingency plans or adapt to enemy counterplay.