How to optimize martials for sustained damage without GWM, PAM, SS, CBE?

[Ir0ns0ul]

Based on current hot discussion because the new UA and not attended promises from WotC that martials would be able to cause good damage without feats, what are effective methods today to optimize for that without using the aforementioned feats?

[Amechra]

Based on current hot discussion because the new UA and not attended promises from WotC that martials would be able to cause good damage without feats, what are effective methods today to optimize for that without using the aforementioned feats?

Honestly? The Graze Weapon Mastery does a great job at boosting sustained damage. So grab a greatsword or a glaive on your Fighter and be happy.

[stoutstien]

Based on current hot discussion because the new UA and not attended promises from WotC that martials would be able to cause good damage without feats, what are effective methods today to optimize for that without using the aforementioned feats?

Are you referring to 5e or the playtest? The UA is definitely moving where feats are integral compared to 5e with more sticker slapped on angle feel.

[Mongobear]

Access to Bonus Action attacks - Frenzy, Two Weapon Fighting, Martial Arts, etc

Ways to increase accuracy - Reckless Attacks, Archery fighting style, Darkness/Devil's Sight, Elven Accuracy, etc

Bonus damage on each hit - Hex, Hunter's Mark, Rage, Brutal Critical/Half-Orc, Colossus Slayer, Sneak Attack, Superiority Dice, Divine Smite, Smite spells, etc

Increased critical threat range - Hexblade's Curse or Champion Fighter (i believe these are the only methods in official materials)


If you can make a build without the listed Feats, and check three or more of these criteria, your sustained damage will be quite high, considering the limitations.

[Dr.Samurai]

Gather magic item creation recipes and use your downtime to craft magic weapons (per Tasha's rules) that deal extra damage. Cover several damage types, or create a weapon for each creature type (giant slayer, dragon slayer, mace of disruption, etc.).

Then just use the weapon that will deal the most damage on each attack. Enjoy the extra damage until WotC sends the Pinkertons to your place to forcibly take your weapons because they don't want martials dealing so much damage.

[Gignere]

Increased critical threat range - Hexblade's Curse or Champion Fighter (i believe these are the only methods in official materials)

There is also a butcher’s bib.

[J-H]

Mongobear pretty well covered it.
In keeping with bounded accuracy, there's also kind of an upper bound on damage. Without magic items:
Rogue sneak attack + TWF BA at level 20 with dual short swords is 11d6+5(dex). Average 43.5.
Barb TWF with longswords and rage at level 20 is 3d8+21(str 24x3)+12(rage x3). Average 46.5.
Fighter with greatsword at level 20 is 8d6+20(str). Average 48.
Monk with FOB at level 20 is 4d10+20(dex x4). Average 42.
Ranger with dual-wield fighting style, shortswords, and Hunter's Mark is 6d6+15(dex). Average 36. Make it a longbow with the swift quiver spell and it's 4d8+20(str), average 38.
Paladin with longsword and Dueling is 4d8+10(str)+4(dueling), with the 2 extra d8s from smite being radiant. Average 32 except we all know there's a smite spell or smite added on.

You can do slightly different feat/weapon combos than I did, but results will generally be in the same range unless you start adding +10 damage feats into the mix. Nobody's reliably throwing 70 damage per round without the big damage feats, spell slots, scoring crits, or adding magical items.

As long as a weapon-using character is dealing over 40 damage before magic items if everything hits, you're within the bounds. The casting subclasses have slightly lower baselines. Magic items are the single biggest addition to martials in terms of damage, defenses (resistances/AC), and utility (mobility). As has been pointed out many times before, high magic item availability disproportionately benefits non-casters.

[da newt]

Shadow Blade w/ Elvin Accuracy and 3 or 4 attacks/action is pretty good (especially w/ action surge).

Invisibility/Unseen (GS or greater or hide or ...)

At level 8-10 the weapon cantrip + attack from a Eldritch Knight is handy.

Belts of Giant ST are a great easy button.

Flame Tongue is a nice little damage rider.

Smite.

Sentinel and BM moves - extra ways to trigger an extra attack / reaction.

But (IMO) the most impactful things are the riders that take away action economy or create vulnerabilities / control. Strait DPR is nice, but stunned, frightened, prone, etc ... are often more beneficial especially in team combat (a party of PCs).

[Unoriginal]

Access to Bonus Action attacks - Frenzy, Two Weapon Fighting, Martial Arts, etc


Worth noting that D&Done's Frenzy is no longer a bonus action attack, now it's an improvement on the Rage damage (a big improvement, mind).

[Hurrashane]

Worth noting that D&Done's Frenzy is no longer a bonus action attack, now it's an improvement on the Rage damage (a big improvement, mind).

Two weapon fighting frenzy barbs are going to go so hard.

[Gignere]

Worth noting that D&Done's Frenzy is no longer a bonus action attack, now it's an improvement on the Rage damage (a big improvement, mind).

Finally berserkers can play with PAM and GWM bonus action attacks.

[Mastikator]

Let's make a character from the UA. Make it pretty vanilla too, human barbarian. With the two feats you get at level 1 you take Fighting Style: Great Weapon Fighting and Tough. Using point buy your stat array turns out as 17/14/16/8/10/8. You got a greatsword, you take weapon mastery in greatsword. Your AC is 15, your HP 17.
Using your bonus action to rage your attack has a +5 to hit and deals 2d6+5 (reroll 1s and 2s), so each hit is 13.5 damage on average. Against AC 13 your DPR is 8.1 for when you hit, plus 3 when you miss, so 1.2. So all in all level 1 DPR 9.3

Level 2 you now have reckless attack, so against AC 13 your hit rate is 84%, your DPR is 11.34 when you hit and 3 when you miss, 0.48. For a total DPR of 11.82

Level 3 you pick Berserker, you now add +2d6 when you hit, 84% x 7 = 5.88, so your DPR has risen to 17.7

Level 4 you pick up Polearm Master and change your weapon mastery to Glaive, this also raises your STR to 18, but oh no the AC of enemies has risen to 14 so it's still a 60% hit rate without advantage and 84% with. You still reroll 1 and 2 on your glaive so the 1d10 has an average 6.3, and the bonus action d4 has an average of 3
Now you are doing two attacks with advantage, first 1d10+6 (12.3) then 1d4+6 (9), if either hits you add +2d6 (7), for each that miss you instead do 4.
The math is 12.3 x 0.84 + 9 x 0.84 + 2x (0.16 x 4) + (1-0.16^2) x 7 = 26 DPR at level 4

Level 5 you now have extra attack. So we have a new math, but it's fine (12.3 x 0.84) x 2 + 9 x 0.84 + 3x (0.16 x 4) + (1-0.16^3) x 7 = 37.11 DPR at level 5

And your HP at level 5 is 65, effectively 130 if you're raging and always taking even amounts of BPS

Honestly the new barb is looking pretty good.

Edit- forgot to factor in crits. I guess just add +0.4 at level 1, and about 1 on level 2, then maybe 1.5 on level 3 and 4, then 2 on level 5. Crits don't add a lot actually.

[Dr.Samurai]

Current V Human Berserker with Great Weapon Master and +2 Strength will do 52.57 DPR at level 5.

In a turn, UA Berserker+GWM does the following on a hit:

Attack 1: 4d6+9
Attack 2: 2d6+6
Attack 3: 1d4+6

The current Berserker does:

Attack 1: 2d6+16
Attack 2: 2d6+16
Attack 3: 2d6+16


The UA does +1d4 damage, and -27 damage. Great trade-off.

Oh well. Martials are definitely too strong right now. Good thing they nerfed the damage output.

[Unoriginal]

In a turn, UA Berserker+GWM does the following on a hit:

Attack 1: 4d6+9
Attack 2: 2d6+6
Attack 3: 1d4+6

The current Berserker does:

Attack 1: 2d6+16
Attack 2: 2d6+16
Attack 3: 2d6+16


Would you mind explaining how you got those numbers more in detail, please? I think I'm reading something wrong either in your post or in the UA.

[Dr.Samurai]

Would you mind explaining how you got those numbers more in detail, please? I think I'm reading something wrong either in your post or in the UA.
I’m going off memory so I might definitely be forgetting something.

First attack is 2d6 weapon plus 2d6 Frenzy plus 4 strength and 2 rage and 3 GWM (I think it’s once per turn Prof bonus damage).

Second attack is 2d6 weapon plus 4 strength and 2 rage.

And third attack is 1d4 PAM weapon plus 4 strength and 2 rage.

Apologies if I remembered incorrectly.

[Mongobear]

Worth noting that D&Done's Frenzy is no longer a bonus action attack, now it's an improvement on the Rage damage (a big improvement, mind).

They also will be able to start with Fighting Style Feats, being in the Warrior sub-Category. TWFing Barbarians can potentially be a thing, and if they use the right weapons/mastery traits, they can TWF all as part of their Attack action.

EDIT - Also, worth noting, this change was un-needed, imo. Berserker was perfectly fine if all they did was drop the Exhaustion. Just let them be the kings with their full power BA Attack at normal damage dice, instead of limited to 1d4 or whatever baby TWFing weapon theyre holding.

[greenstone]

…what are effective methods today to optimize for that without using the aforementioned feats?
Make sure the party is supporting you properly.

Bless, aid, improved invisibility, haste, bardic inspiration, paladin aura, and so on.

[Unoriginal]

EDIT - Also, worth noting, this change was un-needed, imo. Berserker was perfectly fine if all they did was drop the Exhaustion. Just let them be the kings with their full power BA Attack at normal damage dice, instead of limited to 1d4 or whatever baby TWFing weapon theyre holding.

They said it was because it got in the way of the Barbarian's new "use your BA to keep your Rage up" option, but honestly they could have just said if the Berserk uses Frenzy to attack the Rage stays up.

[ZRN]

They said it was because it got in the way of the Barbarian's new "use your BA to keep your Rage up" option, but honestly they could have just said if the Berserk uses Frenzy to attack the Rage stays up.

If you're attacking at all your rage stays up anyway.

[Gignere]

Current V Human Berserker with Great Weapon Master and +2 Strength will do 52.57 DPR at level 5.

In a turn, UA Berserker+GWM does the following on a hit:

Attack 1: 4d6+9
Attack 2: 2d6+6
Attack 3: 1d4+6

The current Berserker does:

Attack 1: 2d6+16
Attack 2: 2d6+16
Attack 3: 2d6+16


The UA does +1d4 damage, and -27 damage. Great trade-off.

Oh well. Martials are definitely too strong right now. Good thing they nerfed the damage output.

For one fight, because of exhaustion. Damage will be closer when you can’t frenzy. Thought GWM is + prof damage once a turn, but so many versions of the UA flying around it’s hard to keep track. Maybe you were referring to +1d4 from PAM.

Anyway the new version also scales better whereas the current GWM barbarian gets a massive spike at 5th level and never gain anything else. For anything but a current GWM barbarian, the new barbarian would outdamage 5e frenzy barbarian.

[Dr.Samurai]

My comment doesn’t take Exhaustion into account, just the massive drop in damage potential. They could have removed exhaustion and kept the bonus action attack, but decided to change that to bonus damage instead.

Even still, it’s not until level 3 exhaustion that you lose Advantage on attacks, and GWM is still an increase in dpr without advantage.

The UA Frenzy is roughly 7 damage a turn until level 9. Even without GWM the current Berserker can easily surpass that with a bonus action attack. At level 9 it jumps up to about 10 damage. An attack still surpasses that. With GWM it’s no contest.

So we lost power attack damage and we lost a native bonus action attack without needing a feat. And we gained roughly -20 damage per round. Polearms will still dominate, and maybe now also TWF. So we swapped out heavy weapons for Nick weapons, maybe.

I don’t see the big improvement here.

[Gignere]

My comment doesn’t take Exhaustion into account, just the massive drop in damage potential. They could have removed exhaustion and kept the bonus action attack, but decided to change that to bonus damage instead.

Even still, it’s not until level 3 exhaustion that you lose Advantage on attacks, and GWM is still an increase in dpr without advantage.

The UA Frenzy is roughly 7 damage a turn until level 9. Even without GWM the current Berserker can easily surpass that with a bonus action attack. At level 9 it jumps up to about 10 damage. An attack still surpasses that. With GWM it’s no contest.

So we lost power attack damage and we lost a native bonus action attack without needing a feat. And we gained roughly -20 damage per round. Polearms will still dominate, and maybe now also TWF. So we swapped out heavy weapons for Nick weapons, maybe.

I don’t see the big improvement here.

They already said they don’t like how GWM / SS are the be all and end all feats for lots of build. They nerfed the feats not the class. I think if you compared a featless berserker from 5e and 5.5e it’s a better comp.

[Dr.Samurai]

Nerfing these feats is certainly nerfing some classes.

But still, I’m not sure how +2d6 once per turn is better than an extra attack.

[Gignere]

Nerfing these feats is certainly nerfing some classes.

But still, I’m not sure how +2d6 once per turn is better than an extra attack.

It scales up to 4d6 and current berserker only gets the extra attack in one maybe two combats if you’re pushing it. I think 2d6 - 4d6 in every fight that you can rage is better than current frenzy.

Whereas a higher level 1D&D berserker basically gets the bonus damage in every fight that matters.

[Hytheter]

They said it was because it got in the way of the Barbarian's new "use your BA to keep your Rage up" option, but honestly they could have just said if the Berserk uses Frenzy to attack the Rage stays up.

I'm pretty sure they're actually referring to the initial bonus action to enter Rage. It was a longstanding problem that Frenzy offers no benefit in the first turn since your BA is already occupied by entering the frenzy.

[Dr.Samurai]

It scales up to 4d6 and current berserker only gets the extra attack in one maybe two combats if you’re pushing it. I think 2d6 - 4d6 in every fight that you can rage is better than current frenzy.

Whereas a higher level 1D&D berserker basically gets the bonus damage in every fight that matters.
For most of the game it is 2d6 and then maybe 3d6, both of which are outpaced by a bonus attack. Heck, at the levels it reaches 4d6 a berserker’s bonus attack will surpass that too on a hit (7 weapon, 4-5 strength, rage damage). We’re not even including magic weapons.

And remember, UA’s rage is now competing with Primal Knowledge, maybe you can rage 2 or 3 or 4 times a day. Depends on if you use your other new feature and if you enter combat while it’s active. Don’t forget you auto lose your rage on stuns and paralysis now as well, whereas the normal barbarian doesn’t.

I agree with you that it’s better than the current frenzy but that’s not because of the damage. The damage is a downgrade. It’s because Exhaustion has been removed. Removing Power Attack and Frenzy Attack is a clear nerf in damage.

I'm pretty sure they're actually referring to the initial bonus action to enter Rage. It was a longstanding problem that Frenzy offers no benefit in the first turn since your BA is already occupied by entering the frenzy.
Agreed. But this could have been easily fixed by simply saying you can make the attack as part of the same bonus action to Rage. Many features work like this.

[Mastikator]

I’m going off memory so I might definitely be forgetting something.

First attack is 2d6 weapon plus 2d6 Frenzy plus 4 strength and 2 rage and 3 GWM (I think it’s once per turn Prof bonus damage).

Second attack is 2d6 weapon plus 4 strength and 2 rage.

And third attack is 1d4 PAM weapon plus 4 strength and 2 rage.

Apologies if I remembered incorrectly.

What polearm are you using that has a weapon dice of 2d6?

[DarknessEternal]

Why would you want sustained damage? Do you get in lots of fights that are 10 rounds long? I doubt it.

Limited burst damage, like a Samurai's Fighting Spirit, is going mean more in actual play.

[animorte]

Access to Bonus Action attacks - Frenzy, Two Weapon Fighting, Martial Arts, etc

Ways to increase accuracy - Reckless Attacks, Archery fighting style, Darkness/Devil's Sight, Elven Accuracy, etc

Bonus damage on each hit - Hex, Hunter's Mark, Rage, Brutal Critical/Half-Orc, Colossus Slayer, Sneak Attack, Superiority Dice, Divine Smite, Smite spells, etc

Increased critical threat range - Hexblade's Curse or Champion Fighter (i believe these are the only methods in official materials)


If you can make a build without the listed Feats, and check three or more of these criteria, your sustained damage will be quite high, considering the limitations.
Just want to second every bit of this. Keep these things in mind when thinking about your combat effectiveness.

Also, you could have a look at RED to gauge your potential.

[Dr.Samurai]

What polearm are you using that has a weapon dice of 2d6?
The "DocSam always forgets PAM requires a d10 weapon when he posts" polearm lol.

[Gignere]

Just want to second every bit of this. Keep these things in mind when thinking about your combat effectiveness.

Also, you could have a look at RED to gauge your potential.

He’s missing access to bladetrips. That also helps with DPR particularly the rogue and Bladesinger.

[Mongobear]

If you're attacking at all your rage stays up anyway.

This.

Also, theoretically speaking, you could punch yourself in the face and keep it going, or my personal favorite, carry around a vial or two of alchemist's fire, and dunk yourself.

[Amechra]

Just set yourself on fire. Ninjas Shadow monks can't catch you if you're on fire.

[Kane0]

I guess i'll just take a stab at a standard fighter using the playtest stuff. We'll avoid TWF because it has back-and-forth'd a bit.

We have the new Goliath, so let's go with that. Hill's Tumble frees up a Weapon Mastery and doesn't use any actions.

Fighter 1 we pick a Style and three Weapon Masteries. Let's go with your choice of Dueling or Great Weapon and Graze, Push and Slow.
Fighter 2 is action surge, nothing to choose from really.
Fighter 3 we go with Champion because it's our only option.
Fighter 4 we pick up Sentinel and a new Mastery, let's get Cleave.
Fighter 5 is another feat, choose whatever you like. You specifically want damage so I'd say pick Charger
Fighter 6 is a second fighting style, Protection is probably best so you can always use both at the same time. A free advantage once per fight is also welcome.
Fighter 7 lets you swap around your masteries. Good for if you pick up a magic weapon.
Fighter 8 is another feat, Magic Initiate will let us pick up a Bonus Action damage booster like Hunter's Mark but you may just want to pick another feat that boosts Strength like Shield Master or Mage Slayer. Hell even Mounted Combatant or Athlete if you want.
Fighter 9 is Indomitable
Fighter 10 Champ expands your crits again, and you can pick another mastery. Maybe Topple if you find yourself running out of Hill's Tumble charges or Vex just in case you need to use a backup weapon like a bow or knife.
Fighter 11 you get your third attack
Fighter 12 is another feat, pick something you didn't before from level 5/8
Fighter 13 you can set a second trait on your weapon and switch between the two whenever you like. Pair up a damage one (Cleave, Graze) with a control one (Push, Slow)
Fighter 14 you get your Champion regeneration
Fighter 15 is another feat, pick something you didn't at level 5/8/12. At this point you should have maxed out Str from your feats and be able to switch to boosting Con
Fighter 16 and 19 are more feats, pick something you didn't at level 5/8/12/15
Fighter 20 is your epic boon, for damage output Irresistible Offense is the default pick.

As a bonus this guy doesn't really care what weapon he's using beyond 'does it work with my fighting style' and whatever is drawn from feats (Shield Master, notably). If you wanted pure damage you can always pick the +1d10 Fire instead of Prone from Goliath, or a bit of half-and-half with the +1d6 Cold damage and 10' slow.

[verbatim]

The substance of the martial changes seems to mainly being about raising the floor (I assume everyone thinks this is good).

Personally, being of the opinion that maybe the ceiling shouldn't have come down, I'm leaning towards keeping some of the old power attack feats or maybe making it a universal mechanic.

[Mongobear]

The substance of the martial changes seems to mainly being about raising the floor (I assume everyone thinks this is good).

Personally, being of the opinion that maybe the ceiling shouldn't have come down, I'm leaning towards keeping some of the old power attack feats or maybe making it a universal mechanic.

Losing the various Power Attacks is... odd, since technically GWM still adds bonus damage, but Sharpshooter doesnt. I feel like they couldve kept it around, but had it scale, maybe via proficiency bonus. -Prof to the attack roll/+double that to damage. It would keep relative balance until higher levels.

[Woggle]

Losing the various Power Attacks is... odd, since technically GWM still adds bonus damage, but Sharpshooter doesnt. I feel like they couldve kept it around, but had it scale, maybe via proficiency bonus. -Prof to the attack roll/+double that to damage. It would keep relative balance until higher levels.

Interestingly, the bonus damage from GWM works with both longbows and heavy crossbows since they are both heavy, and GWM's bonus damage doesn't require a melee weapon.

[Saelethil]

The substance of the martial changes seems to mainly being about raising the floor (I assume everyone thinks this is good).

Personally, being of the opinion that maybe the ceiling shouldn't have come down, I'm leaning towards keeping some of the old power attack feats or maybe making it a universal mechanic.

I have a house rule that whenever you attack with a melee weapon that you’re proficient with you can forgo adding your PB to the attack to instead add double your PB to your damage. The most popular melee classes for my group are paladin in rogue, though, so for the most part accuracy is more important than an extra couple points of damage and I haven’t seen it used much outside of fighting pits.

[Mongobear]

I have a house rule that whenever you attack with a melee weapon that you’re proficient with you can forgo adding your PB to the attack to instead add double your PB to your damage. The most popular melee classes for my group are paladin in rogue, though, so for the most part accuracy is more important than an extra couple points of damage and I haven’t seen it used much outside of fighting pits.


this is similar to the GWM/SS house rule in my own group. they both work identically otherwise, but the -5/+10 is instead changed to -Prof Bonus/+Double Prof, so that it isn't quite as powerful early, and late game is (a tiny bit) stronger. scaling from -2/+4 to -6/+12 is healthier than always -5/+10 starting as early as 1st level for Humans

[5eNeedsDarksun]

On GWM specifically it just hasn't been that good at my table. SS and/or CBE has been very good every time; I'd attribute this in part due to Archery style providing an attack bonus that the melee styles don't get, and in part due to the benefits of attacking from range: both the ability to attack on round 1 and to avoid damage even without a shield. PAM has also been good, either in combination with Sentinel and a pole arm or with Shield and spear.

GWM? We've had a few characters try it, and probably the only one where it was consistently good was a Barb; ability to get regular advantage and take 1/2 damage with limited impact on action economy was key. For every other character the power attack was often unreliable and/ or required setup by either the character or other party member to provide some attack bonus. Also, missing the 2AC points from the shield means you're taking a lot more damage.
The current character that's trying it is a Paly. He's gone back to flail + shield at the moment for most combats; he's still managed to trigger the bonus attack by targeting weak or injured foes somewhat regularly so he's getting that benefit. Casting Shield of Faith + holding a Shield has meant he's been able to hang in combat for longer. We're still tier 1, so once he hits 5th level I'd think the math will start to work more in favor of bringing out the big weapon more regularly, but I remain of the opinion that GWM is usually a moderate to good feat, not 'S tier'.

Summary to the OP: 3 of the 4 feats you mention are great; for most martials one doesn't help with 'sustained damage' that much. GWM's power attack is often unreliable or requires setup impacting action economy, and fighting in melee without a shield (or an ability to prevent attacks like PAM + Sentinel) leaves you to vulnerable to attacks to the point where it's a liability.

[Kane0]

On GWM specifically it just hasn't been that good at my table.

Have you had a chance at using the playtest version?

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Have you had a chance at using the playtest version?

Not planning to switch to the new edition any time soon.

[Kane0]

Not planning to switch to the new edition any time soon.

Nor I, but you can always pinch what works. Once per turn +prof to damage might work better than -5/+10 for you.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Nor I, but you can always pinch what works. Once per turn +prof to damage might work better than -5/+10 for you.

I actually think the -5/+10 is about right for GWM. As I said earlier, I think the feat is moderate to good in most situations, so about right, and competitive with many other feats and just bumping ASI.

[verbatim]

Also, missing the 2AC points from the shield means you're taking a lot more damage.

One of the really hard to plug antipatterns in 5e is that shields are 100% great for any caster that can find the proficiency, but actually a trade off for martials wherein they have to forgo power attack builds to use one.

I don't expect this to change for OneDND but also like... idk what would they even do if they tried to fix this that wouldn't be super decisive?

[Mongobear]

One of the really hard to plug antipatterns in 5e is that shields are 100% great for any caster that can find the proficiency, but actually a trade off for martials wherein they have to forgo power attack builds to use one.

I don't expect this to change for OneDND but also like... idk what would they even do if they tried to fix this that wouldn't be super decisive?

They could try something like 3.5e, where Power attack scaled better based on the weapon you were using.

Light you couldnt even use it, 1h was -1/+1, 2h was -1/+2.

Porting that into 5e, and adjusting it for a scaling bonus based on level/proficiency bonus, and even iteration on the differences between 1h, versatile, and heavy.

1h weapons you can power attack at a 1:1, -2/+2 assuming level 4 proficiency bonus.
Versatile weilded with 2h, would be a 1:1.5, -2/+3 at level 4
2h Heavy weapons, would be 1:2, -2/+4 at 4th level.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

One of the really hard to plug antipatterns in 5e is that shields are 100% great for any caster that can find the proficiency, but actually a trade off for martials wherein they have to forgo power attack builds to use one.

I don't expect this to change for OneDND but also like... idk what would they even do if they tried to fix this that wouldn't be super decisive?

Hmm, I'm not sure that's so hard to plug on the martial side. PAM + Shield is very good, particularly at low levels; you're getting 2-3 attacks every round vs. 1, and you get the benefit of the shield. Shield Master: these rulings have gone back and forth, but allowing the shove before the attack makes this a solid option. Providing decent magic items, both shields and weapons improves AC and (disperportionally) non-power attacks. If you have a Flame Tongue for example risking a miss on the power attack becomes less likely to be worth it due to higher base damage. Some of these are reasons I don't really value GWM that much. Admittedly SS, with the ability to attack more safely and reliably from distance + Archery style is a different kettle of fish.

[Hytheter]

One of the really hard to plug antipatterns in 5e is that shields are 100% great for any caster that can find the proficiency, but actually a trade off for martials wherein they have to forgo power attack builds to use one.

This so much. It's painful being a melee fighter and realising you're actually less durable than the spellcasters.

[verbatim]

To clarify:
the antipattern is that having a shield involves trade offs for martials, the character archetypes that use shields in fantasy and real life, but not for the "squishy" casters. By definition there are two ways to address this:
- make it so that shields don't stop you from using 2H weapons/bows/etc
- add active mechanics (not just passive barriers) that discourage casters from using shields.

I can't imagine there's much appetite for either.

[Hytheter]

Personally I wouldn't complain if it was harder for casters to do their thing while using shields and armours. At least a higher barrier than a 1 level dip for proficiency. For example, you can never cast spells while using armour unless you have a feature that specifically enables it, rather than just requiring proficiency; you can further refine this by having those features be specific in which spells can be used eg liming to that class's spells only.

[DarknessEternal]

Personally I wouldn't complain if it was harder for casters to do their thing while using shields and armours. At least a higher barrier than a 1 level dip for proficiency..

There's nothing worth losing a full caster level for in any class.

[Hytheter]

Well, the number of Hexblade and Order Cleric dips I've seen beg to differ.

[Xihirli]

Just set yourself on fire. Ninjas Shadow monks can't catch you if you're on fire.

I bet I could catch you if you were on fire.


To clarify:
the antipattern is that having a shield involves trade offs for martials, the character archetypes that use shields in fantasy and real life, but not for the "squishy" casters. By definition there are two ways to address this:
- make it so that shields don't stop you from using 2H weapons/bows/etc
- add active mechanics (not just passive barriers) that discourage casters from using shields.

I can't imagine there's much appetite for either.

Idea off the top of my head, gate shields behind strength? Or take a page out of heavy armor rules and reduce speed if you don't meet strength requirements?
11 strength required, buckler, +1 AC
13 strength required, Standard shield, +2 AC
15 strength required, tower shield, +3 AC
17 strength required, hoplon, +4 AC

And if your strength is 2 higher than the requirement, you're strong enough to support it strapped to your arm rather than holding it and can keep the free hand. So a level 1 fighter with 16 strength has a choice between a standard shield strapped to his arm or a tower shield that he holds, but a wizard is likely holding a buckler up until level 20.

[Amechra]

I bet I could catch you if you were on fire.

People forget the classics. (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/ninjas-cant-catch-you-if) :smallfrown:

---

As for Shields... honestly, the easiest way to handle it would be to just make somatic components require either two free hands OR a focus in one hand and nothing in the other.

Anyway... I'm going to say something heretical here, and say that it's a good thing that they're removing the power attacks from 5+E. Why?



They produced hard outliers for martial characters. You wanted to deal optimized damage? You're either a polearm user (because PAM was and is hilariously overtuned, and GWM works well with it) or a ranged weapon user (because SS gave a big damage boost and eliminated cover and range as stuff you have to worry about — seriously, what were they thinking when they wrote that feat?).
They're a false choice. No, seriously — optimal use of power attacking is something you can calculate pretty easily. You have a "choice", it's just between "deal less expected damage" and "deal more expected damage", Contrast that with, say, Reckless Attack, where optimal usage is less cut-and-dry,
It's seems kinda weird that they made a big hullabaloo about consolidating combat penalties into "you have disadvantage on attack rolls" and then turned around and went "you can take a -5 to your attack roll to do this". I mean, it's pretty obvious why they didn't go with disadvantage, but it still feels off.


Honestly, both GWM and SS should have been about trading accuracy for an extra rider on your attack, not extra damage. "-X to hit, but +Y to damage!" is just +Z to damage with extra steps.

[Xihirli]

People forget the classics. (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/ninjas-cant-catch-you-if) :smallfrown:


Not me.

http://drmcninja.com/comics/2006-08-304p18.gif

[Frogreaver]

People forget the classics. (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/ninjas-cant-catch-you-if) :smallfrown:

---

As for Shields... honestly, the easiest way to handle it would be to just make somatic components require either two free hands OR a focus in one hand and nothing in the other.

Anyway... I'm going to say something heretical here, and say that it's a good thing that they're removing the power attacks from 5+E. Why?



They produced hard outliers for martial characters. You wanted to deal optimized damage? You're either a polearm user (because PAM was and is hilariously overtuned, and GWM works well with it) or a ranged weapon user (because SS gave a big damage boost and eliminated cover and range as stuff you have to worry about — seriously, what were they thinking when they wrote that feat?).
They're a false choice. No, seriously — optimal use of power attacking is something you can calculate pretty easily. You have a "choice", it's just between "deal less expected damage" and "deal more expected damage", Contrast that with, say, Reckless Attack, where optimal usage is less cut-and-dry,
It's seems kinda weird that they made a big hullabaloo about consolidating combat penalties into "you have disadvantage on attack rolls" and then turned around and went "you can take a -5 to your attack roll to do this". I mean, it's pretty obvious why they didn't go with disadvantage, but it still feels off.


Honestly, both GWM and SS should have been about trading accuracy for an extra rider on your attack, not extra damage. "-X to hit, but +Y to damage!" is just +Z to damage with extra steps.

I agree that -5/+10 is bad for martial to martial balance.

However, it almost seems required to outperform a wizard using something as simple as summon fey and fire bolt or a cleric using spirit guardians, spiritual weapon and sacred flame.

I’d love to see -5/+10 removed but it would require martial floors to be increased.

[Mongobear]

I agree that -5/+10 is bad for martial to martial balance.

However, it almost seems required to outperform a wizard using something as simple as summon fey and fire bolt or a cleric using spirit guardians, spiritual weapon and sacred flame.

I’d love to see -5/+10 removed but it would require martial floors to be increased.

Spirit Guardians will eventually run out of duration, that same Cleric will also eventually run out of spell slots. All of these builds of spellcasters top meters ignore the time factor, and just assume everyone is at full power forever.

Long after your Cleric has burnt his last spell slot shredding people with Spirit Guardians, and it running on the fumes of cantrip spam, the Martials are still hacking away, because short of their weapon getting broken, they never run out of the ability to swing it.

So while yes, when you're calculating damage output in a '5 minute adventuring day' scenario, when everyone gets a full rest after every encounter, and never has to worry about resources, spellcasters feel like a guy bringing a Cobra Gunship to a knife fight, the reality is that sometimes it isn't worth it to blow high level spells on stuff, and you might need to conserve those resources for a later fight.

[Kane0]

Dont forget the changes to spirirual weapon in the playtest

[Amechra]

Not me.

Dang it! I've been Rayner'd.


I think that what they're trying to do is raise the floor on martials — both by actually raising the floor on underperforming stuff like TWF, and by nerfing common non-martial damage boosts likeHex and Spiritual Weapon. Which makes sense, since damage is one of the primary means of combat scaling in 5e, so having outliers is probably something that they're not interested in.

It's also important to consider that a lot of "optimized caster damage" builds (ignoring stuff like cheese-grater builds or summoning) assume the inclusion of stuff that hasn't shown up in the playtest. I think it's pretty safe to assume that 5+E isn't going to have Nuclear Wizards or whatever right out of the gate.

[Mongobear]

Dont forget the changes to spirirual weapon in the playtest

Can you elaborate? I missed it.

[Kane0]

SPIRITUAL WEAPON
2nd-Level Evocation Spell (Divine)
Casting Time: Bonus Action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute
You create a floating, spectral force that
resembles a weapon of your choice and that lasts
for the duration. The force appears within range
in a space of your choice, and you can
immediately make one melee spell attack against
a creature within 5 feet of the force. On a hit, the
target takes Force Damage equal to 1d8 + your
spellcasting ability modifier.
As a Bonus Action on your later turns, you can
move the force up to 20 feet and repeat the
attack against a creature within 5 feet of it.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this Spell
using a Spell Slot of 3rd level or higher, the
damage increases by 1d8 for every slot level
above 2nd.

[Mongobear]

What's new about it? it seems identical to the normal version.

[Kane0]

Needs concentration now, so you cant use it with spirt guardians.
It also upcasts better

[verbatim]

Personally I wouldn't complain if it was harder for casters to do their thing while using shields and armours. At least a higher barrier than a 1 level dip for proficiency. For example, you can never cast spells while using armour unless you have a feature that specifically enables it, rather than just requiring proficiency; you can further refine this by having those features be specific in which spells can be used eg liming to that class's spells only.

One Optimizer complaint for OneDND is that the new Medium Armor feat lets you grab Medium Armor and Shield proficiency with one feat at level 1, removing the (general) need to take a 1 level dip to get those for your Wizard in current 5e. That is to say, they're making it easier instead of harder atm.

I feel like the best approach would be to introduce a tradeoff that goes beyond opportunity cost of some sort so that there is still nuance in whether or not to use a Shield. Maybe make some spells 2 handed?

[Gignere]

One Optimizer complaint for OneDND is that the new Medium Armor feat lets you grab Medium Armor and Shield proficiency with one feat at level 1, removing the (general) need to take a 1 level dip to get those for your Wizard in current 5e. That is to say, they're making it easier instead of harder atm.

I feel like the best approach would be to introduce a tradeoff that goes beyond opportunity cost of some sort so that there is still nuance in whether or not to use a Shield. Maybe make some spells 2 handed?

Or just say shield spell and a shield AC bonus don’t stack. Like how different formulas for ACs don’t stack. A little more complicated. Alternatively maybe a level 1 shield slot grants +3 AC and every spell level above first grants an additional +1 up to a max of +5.

[Mongobear]

Or just say shield spell and a shield AC bonus don’t stack. Like how different formulas for ACs don’t stack. A little more complicated. Alternatively maybe a level 1 shield slot grants +3 AC and every spell level above first grants an additional +1 up to a max of +5.

I'd personally them just do away with shield as it is, and make it more like Blade Ward/Absorb Elements. Temporary resistance instead of such a huge AC boost, which kind of goes against bounded accuracy (if that is even something 1DND cares about anymore?)

[Hytheter]

I feel like the best approach would be to introduce a tradeoff that goes beyond opportunity cost of some sort so that there is still nuance in whether or not to use a Shield. Maybe make some spells 2 handed?

Material components use one hand, somatic uses the other hand. :smallamused:

[Dr.Samurai]

Arkham Horror has spells that require 1 hand and some that require 2 hands. Never thought about that as a concept for D&D before :smallconfused:.

[Saelethil]

Or just say shield spell and a shield AC bonus don’t stack. Like how different formulas for ACs don’t stack. A little more complicated. Alternatively maybe a level 1 shield slot grants +3 AC and every spell level above first grants an additional +1 up to a max of +5.

I’ve considered “2 + level of spell slot” with some boosts when cast at high enough levels.

[Witty Username]

The easiest fix for the shield spell is delete the shield spell.
The first question to ask with shield is if it is a tool casters need to or should have. It is definitely unnecessary, so there is no harm in its removal.

[Mongobear]

The easiest fix for the shield spell is delete the shield spell.
The first question to ask with shield is if it is a tool casters need to or should have. It is definitely unnecessary, so there is no harm in its removal.

I think something like Blade Ward in it's place would be more appropriate/balanced. Instead of flat out avoiding the entire attack(s), you just take less damage until your next turn starts.

[Kane0]

I think something like Blade Ward in it's place would be more appropriate/balanced. Instead of flat out avoiding the entire attack(s), you just take less damage until your next turn starts.

Maybe reduce damage taken by a diceroll or flat amount, which allows for upcasting. Itll help against crits and might still help you from needing to make a concentration save, but then again might not.

[LudicSavant]

Based on current hot discussion because the new UA and not attended promises from WotC that martials would be able to cause good damage without feats, what are effective methods today to optimize for that without using the aforementioned feats?

Here's a few writeups for martial builds which not only manage comparable damage to GWM/SS/PAM/CBE builds, but are good at other things to boot:
Demonweb Spider Battle Master / Monk (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24890247&postcount=831)
Shadowblade Eldritch Knight (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24681222&postcount=523)
Thuranni Dexadin (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24941211&postcount=938)

There's a bunch of others, but those are ones that I already have a neatly formatted GitP post for =P

[Gignere]

Here's a few writeups for martial builds which not only manage comparable damage to GWM/SS/PAM/CBE builds, but are good at other things to boot:
Demonweb Spider Battle Master / Monk (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24890247&postcount=831)
Shadowblade Eldritch Knight (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24681222&postcount=523)
Thuranni Dexadin (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24941211&postcount=938)

There's a bunch of others, but those are ones that I already have a neatly formatted GitP post for =P

They all share one commonality, they all rely on Elven Accuracy. I think this is why 5e seems so limiting because if you want to do good damage you’re either GWM/SS or EA. Especially for rogues it really is EA or bust, for good damage.

[LudicSavant]

They all share one commonality, they all rely on Elven Accuracy. I think this is why 5e seems so limiting because if you want to do good damage you’re either GWM/SS or EA. Especially for rogues it really is EA or bust, for good damage.

True, all the ones I linked use Elven Accuracy. However, there are other methods that I don't have Eclectic Builds posts for yet!

For example, MPMM Bugbears are lean mean alpha striking machines, and their bonus damage is enough that -5/+10 is often not worth it for them. For another, Beast Barbarians can put up numbers comparable to GWM Barbarians.

...I really should get back to making Eclectic Builds posts at some point...

[animorte]

...I really should get back to making Eclectic Builds posts at some point...
Uh... Yeah. You think? :smalltongue:

But really, they are a staple of this community and Psyren started a new thread. Always a pleasure to see your input.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

They all share one commonality, they all rely on Elven Accuracy. I think this is why 5e seems so limiting because if you want to do good damage you’re either GWM/SS or EA. Especially for rogues it really is EA or bust, for good damage.

Hmm, when I've seen the math on EA the 3rd dice is not a particularly big bump on accuracy vs the 2nd. It's way more impactful to get a build that reliably provides advantage than it is to get the 3rd dice, so, for example, a Familiar with AT is massive. This isn't to say EA isn't good; it's just over-valued by people who think, "I get 3 dice" as opposed to "I get a 3rd dice if I have managed to get a 2nd".

[Gignere]

Hmm, when I've seen the math on EA the 3rd dice is not a particularly big bump on accuracy vs the 2nd. It's way more impactful to get a build that reliably provides advantage than it is to get the 3rd dice, so, for example, a Familiar with AT is massive. This isn't to say EA isn't good; it's just over-valued by people who think, "I get 3 dice" as opposed to "I get a 3rd dice if I have managed to get a 2nd".

It’s still a big bump up to 45% (if you need 20 to hit) more damage depending on AC and it is a half feat. Unlike GWM it actually punches up. Basically against bosses that tends to have higher AC EA gives you more damage.

Edit:,Most of the builds and rogues using EA can basically get advantage on demand.

[LudicSavant]

Hmm, when I've seen the math on EA the 3rd dice is not a particularly big bump on accuracy vs the 2nd. It's big enough to be a noticeable bump to DPR. Note it also bumps critrate too, and that can be important for, say, a smiting Paladin or a BB/Shadowblade EK.

It's also a half-feat, which means you're also effectively getting your +2 ASI by 4 on a non-Vhuman race, and all the good features that come with that (like being a Shadarkai or half-drow).

Compared to a nonvhuman GWMer, you effectively have an earlier main stat bump *and* the benefits of the triple advantage. Compared to a VHuman GWMer you are both on the same statline track but the elf gets more racial features on top (and some of the elf racial features are really darned good)

[Mongobear]

Not to mention EA on something like a Darkness/Devil's Sight Hexblade is pretty nuts, or even something as generic as a Finesse Champion Fighter with Shield Master using it to trip people.

[Skrum]

Take at least 2 levels of paladin, and then switch to a full casting class.

Or take 2 levels of paladin, and then keep taking levels of paladin.

It's not sustained in a mathematical sense, but it's "damage when it matters most." Practically speaking, it's just as good.

Other option is convince the DM that martials really need +d6 damage weapons. Which they actually do, but YMMV.

[Witty Username]

Hmm, when I've seen the math on EA the 3rd dice is not a particularly big bump on accuracy vs the 2nd. It's way more impactful to get a build that reliably provides advantage than it is to get the 3rd dice, so, for example, a Familiar with AT is massive. This isn't to say EA isn't good; it's just over-valued by people who think, "I get 3 dice" as opposed to "I get a 3rd dice if I have managed to get a 2nd".

It can be very significant on a build that already has reliable advantage, Treantmonk covered a build from a player in one of his one shots, rogue using steady aim with a phantom steed. Elven accuracy was part of it having reliable high damage. Was somelike like 3 times the dpr of his baseline.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

ItÂ’s still a big bump up to 45% (if you need 20 to hit) more damage depending on AC and it is a half feat. Unlike GWM it actually punches up. Basically against bosses that tends to have higher AC EA gives you more damage.

Edit:,Most of the builds and rogues using EA can basically get advantage on demand.

I take the point on punching up, but a 20 is really an edge case. If you need an 11 you're hitting 1/2 the time straight up, 3/4 of the time with advantage, and 7/8 of the time with ad + EA. So, providing you get advantage, it's a 12.5% accuracy boost, with a slightly higher damage boost due to crits.

By no means am I saying it's not good; it is for the reasons people have mentioned, including it being a 1/2 feat. I think we're in agreement that reliable advantage is key here and that should be the first priority. There are also a whole lot of ways that advantage can be neutralized, particularly in a game where 2 advantage + 1 disadvantage = straight up.

One other thing I'd say is that in any discussion around EA (except at high levels or where tables are 'rolling' and getting high ability scores, or tables where Custom Lineage particularly and VHuman are banned) is that EA comes at the expense of either 2 feats or a feat + ASI because of the Elf prerequisite, when it comes to determining damage.

[LudicSavant]

I take the point on punching up, but a 20 is really an edge case. If you need an 11 you're hitting 1/2 the time straight up, 3/4 of the time with advantage, and 7/8 of the time with ad + EA. So, providing you get advantage, it's a 12.5% accuracy boost, with a slightly higher damage boost due to crits.

By no means am I saying it's not good; it is for the reasons people have mentioned, including it being a 1/2 feat. I think we're in agreement that reliable advantage is key here and that should be the first priority. There are also a whole lot of ways that advantage can be neutralized, particularly in a game where 2 advantage + 1 disadvantage = straight up. I think he's just noting 'up to' for completeness.

A 12.5% acccuracy boost (that's more than the Archery fighting style on a Normal roll!) and a crit boost is sufficient for a Dex half-feat.


One other thing I'd say is that in any discussion around EA (except at high levels or where tables are 'rolling' and getting high ability scores, or tables where Custom Lineage particularly and VHuman are banned) is that EA comes at the expense of either 2 feats or a feat + ASI because of the Elf prerequisite, when it comes to determining damage.

Given that races like MPMM Shadar-Kai, Mark of Shadow elves, and Half-Drow are among the best races in the game currently, I don't really consider this an expense. If anything I look at it that opposite way:

Being Vhuman puts you up only half of a feat (because you +1/+1 instead of +2/+1), and comes at the cost of charm resistance, darkvision, buffed trance, always-on Resistance to one of the most common monster damage types (Necrotic), and Prof uses of a teleport that gives you Resistance to all damage. If you could get all of that stuff for half a feat, people would totally buy it (It's better than Fey-Touched!)

[Witty Username]

I think he's just noting 'up to' for completeness.
Given that races like MPMM Shadar-Kai, Mark of Shadow elves, and Half-Drow are among the best races in the game currently, I don't really consider this an expense. If anything I look at it that opposite way:

Being Vhuman puts you up only half of a feat (because you +1/+1 instead of +2/+1), and comes at the cost of charm resistance, darkvision, buffed trance, always-on Resistance to one of the most common monster damage types (Necrotic), and Prof uses of a teleport that gives you Resistance to all damage. If you could get all of that stuff for half a feat, people would totally buy it (It's better than Fey-Touched!)

Even the PHB elves aren't that bad off, Treantmonk's vid had High elf in use, as I recall to get booming blade primarily, (and swapped a proficiency for heavy crossbow). Cantrips, elf weapon training, movement speed increase in the case of wood elf, aren't nothing in terms of gains.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I think he's just noting 'up to' for completeness.

A 12.5% acccuracy boost (that's more than the Archery fighting style on a Normal roll!) and a crit boost is sufficient for a Dex half-feat.



Given that races like MPMM Shadar-Kai, Mark of Shadow elves, and Half-Drow are among the best races in the game currently, I don't really consider this an expense. If anything I look at it that opposite way:

Being Vhuman puts you up only half of a feat (because you +1/+1 instead of +2/+1), and comes at the cost of charm resistance, darkvision, buffed trance, always-on Resistance to one of the most common monster damage types (Necrotic), and Prof uses of a teleport that gives you Resistance to all damage. If you could get all of that stuff for half a feat, people would totally buy it (It's better than Fey-Touched!)

I'm aware the 20 was just an example, and I did say I take the point it punches up. 11 (with a 12.5% bonus in accuracy) is probably a lot closer to the norm though. The real outlier here is Custom; with point buy or array you can get to 18 including a half feat to support damage at 1. By 4th if you're ranged you can have SS on top of that or a 20. The ASI alone is a significant increase in accuracy, with all the other benefits that go along with it. This is a thread about optimizing damage, and while the things you mention are good, until mid game at most tables Custom has a lot going for it.

[Gignere]

I'm aware the 20 was just an example, and I did say I take the point it punches up. 11 (with a 12.5% bonus in accuracy) is probably a lot closer to the norm though. The real outlier here is Custom; with point buy or array you can get to 18 including a half feat to support damage at 1. By 4th if you're ranged you can have SS on top of that or a 20. The ASI alone is a significant increase in accuracy, with all the other benefits that go along with it. This is a thread about optimizing damage, and while the things you mention are good, until mid game at most tables Custom has a lot going for it.

It’s more than 12.5% though see following example.

Assume 10 damage on hit 50% hit chance
Advantage expected damage is 7.5
EA expected damage is 8.75

8.75/7.5 = 1.1666, so 16.66% increase in damage/accuracy.

There are very few feats much less half feats that provides this much of a damage buff and actually works better against bosses instead of mooks.

Even in the more common CR appropriate hit rate of 60%, EA is still an 11.4% increase in expected damage over normal advantage.

As long as your build has fairly easy access to advantage or your teammates are good at generating advantage EA is almost a no brainer feat if you don’t use strength to attack. It’s so good that I think it is dumb to restrict to elves.

[Mongobear]

It’s more than 12.5% though see following example.

Assume 10 damage on hit 50% hit chance
Advantage expected damage is 7.5
EA expected damage is 8.75

8.75/7.5 = 1.1666, so 16.66% increase in damage/accuracy.

There are very few feats much less half feats that provides this much of a damage buff and actually works better against bosses instead of mooks.

Even in the more common CR appropriate hit rate of 60%, EA is still an 11.4% increase in expected damage over normal advantage.

As long as your build has fairly easy access to advantage or your teammates are good at generating advantage EA is almost a no brainer feat if you don’t use strength to attack. It’s so good that I think it is dumb to restrict to elves.

This makes me sad that Barbarians can't use EA... I have a Double-Bladed Scimitar Barbarian that would absolutely love to combine EA with Reckless Attacks.

[Dr.Samurai]

This makes me sad that Barbarians can't use EA... I have a Double-Bladed Scimitar Barbarian that would absolutely love to combine EA with Reckless Attacks.
Yeah, it's a silly restriction.

I think one of the issues with Weapon Masteries is how static they are. They should grow, to differentiate a barbarian or fighter weapon master, from someone that just nabs the feat.

As an example, a Barbarian using a Vex weapon with Reckless Attack could get some sort of triple advantage effect like with Elven Accuracy at later levels.

[da newt]

I assume that EA is limited so that it cannot be combined w/ ST increasing magic items like belts of giant ST and Barbarian's RE. If EA did work w/ ST based attacks, things would get silly especially when combined w/ GWM.

[Gignere]

I assume that EA is limited so that it cannot be combined w/ ST increasing magic items like belts of giant ST and Barbarian's RE. If EA did work w/ ST based attacks, things would get silly especially when combined w/ GWM.

It’d be silly because the barbarian will basically be rolling 3 dice on every single attack + GWM.

[stoutstien]

It’d be silly because the barbarian will basically be rolling 3 dice on every single attack + GWM.

Eh. Samurai fighters have been using EA for a while now and SS is more erroneous as far as keeping things in a band.
Having advantage all the time isn't that much better than having it when you need it.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'd be curious to know if a barbarian with EA on strength attacks would do more damage than all the Dex/Int/Wis/Cha builds that currently use it.

[LudicSavant]

I'd be curious to know if a barbarian with EA on strength attacks would do more damage than all the Dex/Int/Wis/Cha builds that currently use it.

At low levels or high levels?

Barbarian damage scaling sort of falls off a cliff after low levels.

[Amechra]

Nah, they'd still be way behind Samurai Archer builds, simply because the samurai has better accuracy, makes more attacks, and gets online faster.

[Gignere]

Nah, they'd still be way behind Samurai Archer builds, simply because the samurai has better accuracy, makes more attacks, and gets online faster.

I personally think BM archer has more staying power and opportunities to generate advantage if you grab quick toss and a bunch of nets to get advantage. Samurai has on demand advantage 3x a day.

[stoutstien]

I'd be curious to know if a barbarian with EA on strength attacks would do more damage than all the Dex/Int/Wis/Cha builds that currently use it.

Brabs have a relatively low ceiling thanks to attacks volume so I'd say it would be an increase but still behind PaM.

Saying that I had a player who ran a DEX focused barbarian who did take EA and did surprisingly well even without RA. advantage is cheap.

[Mongobear]

I assume that EA is limited so that it cannot be combined w/ ST increasing magic items like belts of giant ST and Barbarian's RE. If EA did work w/ ST based attacks, things would get silly especially when combined w/ GWM.

I mean sure, but there's still the part that until the last year or two of 5e's life span, you'd still be an Elf playing a Strength build. unless you're rolling stats for a home rules game, youd never have a good starting array for something like AL and it'd take you forever to reach a 20.