Just an 18 STR for a total of +6, action surge, and Mastery Die to get a bonus d8 every hit. He and the warlock pretty much nuke people with damage. Every turn is a potential (2d6+4+1d8 <Action Surge>, 2d6+4+d8) for the fighter (First turn) before switching to duel wielding for (Action: 1d6+4+1d8, BA: 1d6+4+1d8) because of Two Weapon Fighting Style plus he's a Mark of Finding human so he also has Hunter's Mark for an extra 1d6 damage per attack. Total max after action surge is 48 dmg a turn.
Then the warlock has a homebrew item (Scythe) as a weapon, and using the Deathpact Angel as a base the damage is 2d4+cha (Hexblade) plus Booming Blade/Green-flame blade and then hex+Hexblade's Curse so his damage per turn is (2d4+4+1d6+2) normal, then Green-flame blade adds another d8 to a second target, and booming blade adds potential 1d8. So his total is about 20 a turn.
So those damage outputs, high AC, and bonus damage from the ranger and barbarian means that every boss monster or group of monsters goes down after 2-3 turns. 4 if I'm lucky. And it's just like, idk how to make a challenge for the AC/DPS builds that doesn't destroy the casual players. There's some good advice here though, so I think I have an idea on how to go forward.
Just a couple of comments ...
1) At level 4 the fighter has 4 superiority die and three maneuvers. These refresh on a short rest. In your example, they have used 3 of those die in the first two combat rounds and they have only one more remaining. The fighter also used action surge which is also a short rest refresh ability. You have the fighter cast hunters mark, attack with a great sword, drop the great sword and draw a one handed sword as an object interaction in the first round. This nets 2d6+stat+d8+d6 damage = 15+stat = 19 average damage with a 18 stat (IF they hit), zero otherwise and they can action surge to do it twice.
On the second round, they pull out their other weapon - maybe two short swords unless they have the dual wielder feat, for d6+stat+d6+d8 on the both due to TWF = 11.5+stat average/attack = 30 damage average in the second round if both attacks hit.
In the third round, they only have one superiority die left so one attack is 11.5+stat and the other drops to 7+stat on on rounds after 3 the attacks are all 7+stat.
At this point the fighter has expended ALL of their resources. Attacks will always be 7+stat and they will lose the bonus action attack every time they have to move their hunter's mark.
In addition, hunter's mark from mark of finding is ONCE each long rest.
So - how is it that the fighter is able to do this every combat? This happens when the DM runs a game in which there is one combat / long rest (allowing the use of long rest resources every combat) or the DM allows the party to take a short rest after every combat which lets the short rest resource classes use all their resources with impunity.
2) Hexblade warlock looks like the same story.
Hexblade's curse, hex (spell slot) are also short rest resources for a hexblade.
2d4+stat+1(magic?)+d6 (hex) + 2 (hexblades curse) ... however, the character can't start both hex and hexblade's curse on the same turn since they both require a bonus action.
13.5 average damage on the first turn ... going to 15.5 on the second after hexblade's curse is added.
Green flame blade will add the spell casting ability modifier to an adjacent target - so in this case an extra 4 damage to a different target. If they choose to use booming blade instead it does nothing.
Do you realize that the hexblade would do about the same damage just using agonizing blast? d10+stat+d6+2 ... EB is 5.5 average while 2d4+1 is only 6 damage. At level 5, EB will be doing substantially more unless they go pact of the blade and pick up thirsting blade in which case they are again about the same.
Anyway, the issue is that the hexblade is using up hexblade's curse to boost damage and one of their only two spells to boost damage.
3) The other ranger can cast hunter's mark themselves and can actually cast it more often than the Mark of finding fighter. They don't get the superiority die but these amount to a total of 18 extra damage every short rest. The barbarian has reckless attack which helps their attacks hit plus the benefits of rage.
Anyway, I think the issue with this party is that ... they have very little healing resources so they burn all their short rest resources at the start of every combat to get it over as quickly as possible so they minimize the damage they take. However, they still take some damage. After the fight if they are hurt then they take a long rest to get all their hit points back or a short rest to restore resources and use some hit die.
The problem isn't the characters ... the game isn't designed around the characters utilizing every resource they have at the start of every combat. The first combat ends up over very quickly then ... BUT the next combat is more challenging. So I think if you want a better balance to encounters you need to stack a few up without allowing the party time to rest and you need to track long rest resources and make sure that you keep track of concentration. The fighter and hexblade will lose their hunters mark or hex on a failed concentration save when they get hit.
If you want your next boss fight to be more interesting ... have the players deal with a bunch of minions first and then have the boss walk in on turn four. Alternatively, have a couple of softening up encounters before the final one with the circumstances preventing rests in between.
Also, if the players are over-geared for combat, that usually means they are seriously undergeared for non-combat threats. Assuming your players enjoy other types of encounters, like puzzle solving or RP challenges, AC action surge, and blur don't help you with those....
I'm not suggesting that you do a bunch of puzzles and traps and RP challenges to a group of players who only like combat. But if they like all of the "pillars," reduce the size of the combat pillar and increase the size of the non-combat ones.
Also, as people have suggested, make the combat about more than just doing, or avoiding, massive single-target weapon damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I can certainly understand trying to make characters powerful, but there comes a point where every encounter is a cake walk.
Being able to blow through encounters is fun at first, but it would get boring fast. I wouldn't be surprised if the power players start losing interest.
The warlock has the equivalent of half-plate with the max allowed dexterity, a shield, and is spending their first two rounds of combat casting defensive spells rather than attacking? They're not a threat, but if you want to make them feel impotent then hit them with AoEs their bolstered defenses cannot protect against.
The fighter is...okay, the first round is greatsword is dealing 18 (3d6+1d8+4+1d6) damage, twice because of Action Surge, all from multiple sources and abilities. Somewhere along the line, they drop the greatsword, draw two shortswords, and go do town dealing 15 (2d6+1d8+4) and 11 (2d6+1d8) with their main and off-hands, respectively. That's definitely a total mean of 62 damage, assuming all three attacks hit, for 31 damage per round. The action economy is a little fuzzy, with all those weapons changing hands. But, for the sake of argument, we'll say it all checks out.
That's also all of the fighter's superiority dice in just two rounds. Yes, they'll kill shit quickly. But it's boring. So I have some thoughts.
The battle master is, generally, about helping the party by buffing them or debuffing the enemy. Yes, there's extra damage, but it really shines as a controller subclass.
Some of the battle master maneuvers that add damage without requiring a bonus action are dependant on something. Disarming Strike, for example, only works on handheld weapons and not natural weapons.
So we want enemies for the fighter who can challenge them in other ways. I suggest throwing some undead at them. And there are plenty of undead monsters for each tier of play. You could literally have an undead-themed campaign from 1-20 and never run out of enemies.
Zombies have Undead Fortitude. This can make them hang around for a long time.
No clerics or paladins means there's no turning these guys. And undead can easily attack in large numbers.
Liches, Necromancers (VGtM), and Vampires make for excellent bosses. And don't forget to include their underlings. Bosses aren't solo monsters, not even legendary dragons.
A lot of other creatures have resistance, or even immunity, to nonmagical weapon damage. Don't let your players just buy their way out of this.
The only one of them who might be able to be armed with a magic weapon, without treasure, is the warlock. This assumes they took Pact of the Blade and the Improved Pact Weapon invocation.
Any magic items you give them you can control. A +1 longsword will hit more often than the mundane weapons, but it also averages 1 damage less than the greatsword. And they won't be using their two-weapon style with it, either.
Other monsters that have resistance or immunity to mundane damage include lycanthropes. I think a campaign like Curse of Strahd would really screw with them. They're level 4, a little higher than recommended to start, but you can just delay leveling up until you're ready.
Also a thing to keep in mind is balanced Cr fights for the level you were at don’t often have creatures with resistance to non magical bludgeoning piercing & slashing. Level 4+ can be a rude awakening on that front
This might be outside the box, but ... if your players combat stats make combat challenges less interesting, have you considered non-combat encounters? You can make social situations enounters. Traps can be encounters. Puzzles can be encounters. Not every problem needs to be solved by hitting it really hard.
Sure, you should throw a combat at them now and then, but if there is a disparity, there should be social and exploration based challenges to give the other players a chance to shine.
Creating combat challenges that deliberately punish players that are good at combat are really dissatisfying. I remember playing a fighter with a ridiculously high AC and when my DM got frustrated with my supposed invincibility, he'd fudge rolls so I'd get hit. An uncanny number of 18's and 19's started getting rolled. Unfortunately, characters with high ACs don't necessarily have indestructable HP counts, which led to the DM then fudging the rolls in the players favour after his interference caused the line to collapse. As a player, I can say that was really frustrating and not fun. Avoid making fights certain characters are designed to lose. Instead, focus on contests that other players can contribute more readily to.
-Black puddings, Blistercoil Weird, Poison Weird, Fire Elemental or Salamanders. Every hit on the Black Pudding destroys the weapon, does splash damage and if the pudding hits it destroys armor. A creature that attacks a salamander takes fire damage. the rest does AE if near them.
-Rust Monsters to destroy their armor.
Attack their Weakness:
-Send creatures that have charm, suggestion, enemies abound, dominate etc against the low wisdom Barbarians and Fighter. All of a sudden the Battle Master is doing 30+ damage to a party member. Allip or create a Sorcerer or Bard with plenty of protection.
They went really one note, I take it you are dumping healing potions like candy and allow them to use the potions as a bonus action? The ranger won't be able to do much of anything to keep them up frankly. If they had added a druid, cleric, sorcerer or wizard, they could most likely deal with what I listed a bit easier, any form of mind control they don't have much of a dispeller and seeing how at least 3 of them are going to be attacking close up, any splash damage monster is going to really screw with them.
A big +1 to all the advice about varied encounters. Hit the party with things that need attack rolls, things that need saving throws, and things that need ability checks (for example, grapples and shoves).
Use different types of monsters. What's better than an encounter with ogres? An encounter with ogres, goblin archers, and a couple of wolves prowling around going after downed foes.
Use the environment. Have the ogres push the fighter into a bonfire. Have the goblins flit from cover to cover, popping up to fire a couple of arrows. Make the players choose between attacking and searchingand readying.
Give them an escort quest. *evil grin*
Also, make sure you throw in some encounters where the warlock and/or fighter players can feel badass. Let them mow through swathes of enemies and feel awesome. They chose those abilities and classes and features, so give them chances to enjoy them
But also, you shouldn't pick on players just because they're a bit stronger. Try a rust monster to weaken a high level fighter or paladin as a nasty surprise and use LOTS.
I have found the solution to the characters bursting is not sending in the true threat until a later round or another encounter that comes before they can short rest. Making environments where they have to go through 2-3 encounters before they can short rest is a good way to make them use their skills in moderation. I have the same issue with my party with a barbarian and fighter who can do some crazy burst if they connect with GWM.
Making more smaller encounters mixed with nasty saves that you know they are weak against will create challenges for the entire group to overcome.
But also, you shouldn't pick on players just because they're a bit stronger. Try a rust monster to weaken a high level fighter or paladin as a nasty surprise and use LOTS.
I think the DM has to pick on them to a degree. If a character has strengths, then they must have weaknesses. Those can and should be exploited. Especially, I think, when a player decides to optimize too far in a single direction. Say you have a character with proficiency with Constitution saving throws and the War Caster Feat. A +6 modifier, with advantage, yields a 98% chance of succeeding on a DC 10 saving throw to maintain a spell. The DC needs to be 17, so 34-35 damage, before the odds drop to only 75%. The DM must then accept the fact that damage is unlikely to force a loss of concentration before the spellcaster loses consciousness. Which narrows their options. They can either eat it, accepting the fact spells just won't drop, pile on the damage, or target a weakness that War Caster can't help against.
As a DM, I want my players to succeed. I also want victories that feel earned and are fun for for me to play because I'm a player too. If my dice don't like me, if my rolls are crap that session, it negatively affects my mood. I try not to show it, but it sips through sometimes. And if I never make any headway during a combat that is supposed to challenge them, I similarly feel dejected. And some classes are just annoying with how strong those saves can be, like artificers, monks, and paladins. So, yes, I think we should pick on them a little. And I think doing so encourages players to work together to shore up those weaknesses.
Just a couple of comments ...
1) At level 4 the fighter has 4 superiority die and three maneuvers. These refresh on a short rest. In your example, they have used 3 of those die in the first two combat rounds and they have only one more remaining. The fighter also used action surge which is also a short rest refresh ability. You have the fighter cast hunters mark, attack with a great sword, drop the great sword and draw a one handed sword as an object interaction in the first round. This nets 2d6+stat+d8+d6 damage = 15+stat = 19 average damage with a 18 stat (IF they hit), zero otherwise and they can action surge to do it twice.
On the second round, they pull out their other weapon - maybe two short swords unless they have the dual wielder feat, for d6+stat+d6+d8 on the both due to TWF = 11.5+stat average/attack = 30 damage average in the second round if both attacks hit.
In the third round, they only have one superiority die left so one attack is 11.5+stat and the other drops to 7+stat on on rounds after 3 the attacks are all 7+stat.
At this point the fighter has expended ALL of their resources. Attacks will always be 7+stat and they will lose the bonus action attack every time they have to move their hunter's mark.
In addition, hunter's mark from mark of finding is ONCE each long rest.
So - how is it that the fighter is able to do this every combat? This happens when the DM runs a game in which there is one combat / long rest (allowing the use of long rest resources every combat) or the DM allows the party to take a short rest after every combat which lets the short rest resource classes use all their resources with impunity.
2) Hexblade warlock looks like the same story.
Hexblade's curse, hex (spell slot) are also short rest resources for a hexblade.
2d4+stat+1(magic?)+d6 (hex) + 2 (hexblades curse) ... however, the character can't start both hex and hexblade's curse on the same turn since they both require a bonus action.
13.5 average damage on the first turn ... going to 15.5 on the second after hexblade's curse is added.
Green flame blade will add the spell casting ability modifier to an adjacent target - so in this case an extra 4 damage to a different target. If they choose to use booming blade instead it does nothing.
Do you realize that the hexblade would do about the same damage just using agonizing blast? d10+stat+d6+2 ... EB is 5.5 average while 2d4+1 is only 6 damage. At level 5, EB will be doing substantially more unless they go pact of the blade and pick up thirsting blade in which case they are again about the same.
Anyway, the issue is that the hexblade is using up hexblade's curse to boost damage and one of their only two spells to boost damage.
3) The other ranger can cast hunter's mark themselves and can actually cast it more often than the Mark of finding fighter. They don't get the superiority die but these amount to a total of 18 extra damage every short rest. The barbarian has reckless attack which helps their attacks hit plus the benefits of rage.
Anyway, I think the issue with this party is that ... they have very little healing resources so they burn all their short rest resources at the start of every combat to get it over as quickly as possible so they minimize the damage they take. However, they still take some damage. After the fight if they are hurt then they take a long rest to get all their hit points back or a short rest to restore resources and use some hit die.
The problem isn't the characters ... the game isn't designed around the characters utilizing every resource they have at the start of every combat. The first combat ends up over very quickly then ... BUT the next combat is more challenging. So I think if you want a better balance to encounters you need to stack a few up without allowing the party time to rest and you need to track long rest resources and make sure that you keep track of concentration. The fighter and hexblade will lose their hunters mark or hex on a failed concentration save when they get hit.
If you want your next boss fight to be more interesting ... have the players deal with a bunch of minions first and then have the boss walk in on turn four. Alternatively, have a couple of softening up encounters before the final one with the circumstances preventing rests in between.
Also, if the players are over-geared for combat, that usually means they are seriously undergeared for non-combat threats. Assuming your players enjoy other types of encounters, like puzzle solving or RP challenges, AC action surge, and blur don't help you with those....
I'm not suggesting that you do a bunch of puzzles and traps and RP challenges to a group of players who only like combat. But if they like all of the "pillars," reduce the size of the combat pillar and increase the size of the non-combat ones.
Also, as people have suggested, make the combat about more than just doing, or avoiding, massive single-target weapon damage.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I can certainly understand trying to make characters powerful, but there comes a point where every encounter is a cake walk.
Being able to blow through encounters is fun at first, but it would get boring fast. I wouldn't be surprised if the power players start losing interest.
So we want enemies for the fighter who can challenge them in other ways. I suggest throwing some undead at them. And there are plenty of undead monsters for each tier of play. You could literally have an undead-themed campaign from 1-20 and never run out of enemies.
Other monsters that have resistance or immunity to mundane damage include lycanthropes. I think a campaign like Curse of Strahd would really screw with them. They're level 4, a little higher than recommended to start, but you can just delay leveling up until you're ready.
Also a thing to keep in mind is balanced Cr fights for the level you were at don’t often have creatures with resistance to non magical bludgeoning piercing & slashing. Level 4+ can be a rude awakening on that front
Know what I do?? I home-brew a monster that can permanently weaken them and, BOOM! target them.
BOB
This might be outside the box, but ... if your players combat stats make combat challenges less interesting, have you considered non-combat encounters? You can make social situations enounters. Traps can be encounters. Puzzles can be encounters. Not every problem needs to be solved by hitting it really hard.
Sure, you should throw a combat at them now and then, but if there is a disparity, there should be social and exploration based challenges to give the other players a chance to shine.
Creating combat challenges that deliberately punish players that are good at combat are really dissatisfying. I remember playing a fighter with a ridiculously high AC and when my DM got frustrated with my supposed invincibility, he'd fudge rolls so I'd get hit. An uncanny number of 18's and 19's started getting rolled. Unfortunately, characters with high ACs don't necessarily have indestructable HP counts, which led to the DM then fudging the rolls in the players favour after his interference caused the line to collapse. As a player, I can say that was really frustrating and not fun. Avoid making fights certain characters are designed to lose. Instead, focus on contests that other players can contribute more readily to.
Attack their Strength:
-Black puddings, Blistercoil Weird, Poison Weird, Fire Elemental or Salamanders. Every hit on the Black Pudding destroys the weapon, does splash damage and if the pudding hits it destroys armor. A creature that attacks a salamander takes fire damage. the rest does AE if near them.
-Rust Monsters to destroy their armor.
Attack their Weakness:
-Send creatures that have charm, suggestion, enemies abound, dominate etc against the low wisdom Barbarians and Fighter. All of a sudden the Battle Master is doing 30+ damage to a party member. Allip or create a Sorcerer or Bard with plenty of protection.
They went really one note, I take it you are dumping healing potions like candy and allow them to use the potions as a bonus action? The ranger won't be able to do much of anything to keep them up frankly. If they had added a druid, cleric, sorcerer or wizard, they could most likely deal with what I listed a bit easier, any form of mind control they don't have much of a dispeller and seeing how at least 3 of them are going to be attacking close up, any splash damage monster is going to really screw with them.
OOOH you could try something like a hill giant that goes for the toughest of the lot.
A big +1 to all the advice about varied encounters. Hit the party with things that need attack rolls, things that need saving throws, and things that need ability checks (for example, grapples and shoves).
Use different types of monsters. What's better than an encounter with ogres? An encounter with ogres, goblin archers, and a couple of wolves prowling around going after downed foes.
Use the environment. Have the ogres push the fighter into a bonfire. Have the goblins flit from cover to cover, popping up to fire a couple of arrows. Make the players choose between attacking and searchingand readying.
Give them an escort quest. *evil grin*
Also, make sure you throw in some encounters where the warlock and/or fighter players can feel badass. Let them mow through swathes of enemies and feel awesome. They chose those abilities and classes and features, so give them chances to enjoy them
I love it when a player hits with an attack and finds out this creature is immune to nonmagical attacks.
But also, you shouldn't pick on players just because they're a bit stronger. Try a rust monster to weaken a high level fighter or paladin as a nasty surprise and use LOTS.
I have found the solution to the characters bursting is not sending in the true threat until a later round or another encounter that comes before they can short rest. Making environments where they have to go through 2-3 encounters before they can short rest is a good way to make them use their skills in moderation. I have the same issue with my party with a barbarian and fighter who can do some crazy burst if they connect with GWM.
Making more smaller encounters mixed with nasty saves that you know they are weak against will create challenges for the entire group to overcome.
If 1 year after the original post the guy still needs advice, there is smth really wrong - the campaign is probably over already.
Post Necromancy needs to have limits, honestly...
I think the DM has to pick on them to a degree. If a character has strengths, then they must have weaknesses. Those can and should be exploited. Especially, I think, when a player decides to optimize too far in a single direction. Say you have a character with proficiency with Constitution saving throws and the War Caster Feat. A +6 modifier, with advantage, yields a 98% chance of succeeding on a DC 10 saving throw to maintain a spell. The DC needs to be 17, so 34-35 damage, before the odds drop to only 75%. The DM must then accept the fact that damage is unlikely to force a loss of concentration before the spellcaster loses consciousness. Which narrows their options. They can either eat it, accepting the fact spells just won't drop, pile on the damage, or target a weakness that War Caster can't help against.
As a DM, I want my players to succeed. I also want victories that feel earned and are fun for for me to play because I'm a player too. If my dice don't like me, if my rolls are crap that session, it negatively affects my mood. I try not to show it, but it sips through sometimes. And if I never make any headway during a combat that is supposed to challenge them, I similarly feel dejected. And some classes are just annoying with how strong those saves can be, like artificers, monks, and paladins. So, yes, I think we should pick on them a little. And I think doing so encourages players to work together to shore up those weaknesses.
For the Warlock, I recommend using monsters with Saving Throw - based attacks. No amount of AC can help escape an angry drow that knows web.
Former Spider Queen of the Spider Guild, and friendly neighborhood scheming creature.
"Made by spiders, for spiders, of spiders."
My pronouns are she/her.
Web Weaver of Everlasting Narrative! (title bestowed by Drummer)