At this point, everybody knows about how casters get much better damage-wise and survialbility-wise than martials with their distance, 8d6 spells etc. at higher levels. So I would suggest every martial get some buffs starting at level 10 to increase their damage and tankness. That is something I want to implement in my campagins, see if you like.
At 10th level, you have increased the mastery of weapons and became even more proficient with them. You can add your proficiency bonus to the damage roll of weapons you are proficient with. Furthermore, martial weapons get improved when used by you: 1d4 becomes 1d6, 1d6 becomes1d8, 1d8 or 2d4 become 1d10 or 1d6+1d4, 1d12 or 2d6 become 1d6+1d8 or 1d10+1d4.
At the 12th level, your journey has taught you new battle tricks. You get one of the manuvers from Battle Master and one use of it, except that it is 1d6. You get another one at the 14th, 16th, 18th and 20th level, totalizing 5 dice and 5 uses of them. You can use one manuver multiple times, however once uses are over you need a short rest to regain them.
At the 15th level, your mastery of martial attacks has unleashed the ultimate balance between attack and defense. Once per round after suceeding on an attack roll you can roll an extra damage roll and temporarily add a +2 bonus to your AC that will last until your next turn.
At 20th level, you've becomed an unparallel and unswerving martial master. You have advantage on all saving throws against all attacks and spells that deal damage.
Martial classes are already superior to casters when it comes to sustained, single-target damage output. They absolutely don't need any sort of buff in this department. The issue is that the higher level you get, the more non-combat options casters get from their spells so martial classes become less and less useful outside of combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Does everyone know that, though? I feel like maybe I don't. A wizard can cast an 8d6 fireball for an average of 28 damage, save for half, meaning a decent chance that's 14 damage - unless I have resistance, in which case it's 7/14 damage. My barbarian will do something on the order of 3d6+15. Now, sure, he has to hit, but he has advantage on his attack rolls, and he can attack three times each round.
I think you'll find that 62 points of potential damage is reasonably in favor of the barbarian over the mages 7. Or 14. Or even 28 =)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
At this point, everybody knows about how casters get much better damage-wise and survialbility-wise than martials with their distance, 8d6 spells etc. at higher levels.
I'm not sure that's true.
What specific 8d6 spell you're talking about is quite vague, but I'll assume you're talking about Fireball. Let's look at that for a moment. An L6 Wizard can do that four times a day, then all their most powerful slots are gone. An L6 Barbarian 4d6+10 damage Action (assuming a standard Greatsword and a +5 to Strength), 40 times a day. Sure, Fireball is AoE, but unless you hit on average 10+ people each time, then the Barbarian is still outdoing you. I generally get half that. 10 is an awesome once in a campaign type of event, not my standard. Martials are more capable of consistent damage - I've just shown how, in the long run, Barbs do multiple times more damage. They're just not as flashy as a Wizard's Fireball. And bear in mind, Fireball is especially powerful and OP for its level - this is the Wizard doing pretty well.
As for being more survivable...really? A L6 Fighter is probably packing an AC of 20ish and Max HP of 58, versus a Wizard who will probably an AC of 16 (so already, CR6 Drider with +6 to hit will hit 60% more often against the Wizard than the Fighter) and a Max HP of 38. On average, a Wizard will die after 11 attacks by a Drider using its longsword one-handed (so a little under four rounds), a Fighter will last 28 attacks, or just over 9 rounds. Over twice as long.
Casters rely on martials for survivability. The martials keep the enemies back so casters can cast spells...mostly to help martials kill the enemies. The instant casters get targeted, problems happen.
The problem with martials is not their combat prowess. The problem is this: They trade off flashiness and instant power for consistency. A Wizard can turn the flow of a battle on a dime by doing the right thing at the right time. However, martials do more in the long run. Sure, they can't cast Fireball and obliterate a squad in a single Action, but they will steadily work through the enemies and overall do more damage (outside of specific circumstances). The problem is that what casters can do becomes much more flashy and exciting. Martials just do the same thing, but more of it. Solutions to problems start off somewhat balanced, maybe be even tilted to the martials, but end up favouring casters for most things.
Martials end up envying casters. If you want to balance martials and casters, you have to give martials better non combat abilities. Let them stay relevant for longer. Let them bring something new to the table, which is what I think they lack. Casters bring new stuff to the table all the time. Most levels see them bring new capabilities to the table, either through new spell levels, new spells or new class abilities, and often end up encroaching on the martial's skill sets. Martial's just do what they've always done, just more of it.
Martials need more new abilities that they can bring to the table. People who are complaining about balance between the two kinds of class, in my experience,. haven't sat down and done the maths, they're seeing that a Wizard can create new planes of reality on their level up, while their own Fighter can...hit enemies with a sword an extra time. That sucks and is causing resentment. Giving them an extra die to roll for damage won't solve that feeling - they already have it. They need new abilities that players can feel fulfilled by.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Damage output really isn't the issue, but more manuvers would be welcome because it would mean more options
I also like the increase in damage did but just for melee say at like lvl 4 to give melee options some incentive over ranged
But a lot of people want to give pure martials some kind of boost to their out of combat abilities which is tough to design because just slapping on more proficiencies for skills starts to muscle out rogues n the such.
I'd honestly provide something like fighters more in combat options as designing those out of combat ones is stupidly messy.. something like rallying shout that can provide buffs to friends, or temp HP. Something like imposing presence that can force disadvantage or fear. Move indomitable to earlier lvls and at the lvl they normally get it allow it to be used on allies as well would be nice
While it remains combat focused it's stuff that isn't just adding damage or more attacks and can help to bolster their roles while making the out of combat stuff not suck as much since they can do more in combat than just attacking
If the goal is to make all martials tankier and better at protecting their allies, try this:
Improve OAs/Melee: Right now reach makes a weapon worse at preventing an enemy from reaching an ally. Change all OAs so they happen whenever a creature would leave a space you threaten.
Also, let OAs Grapple and Shove.
Also, let all Monks use Wisdom for Athletics, not just Astral Self Monks.
Improve Shields: Let anyone using a Shield provide 3/4 cover rather than 1/2 cover to allies.
Also, consider letting cover apply to some or all Strength save effects where appropriate, as most Str save effects that have a point of origin such that cover could be relevant are flavored to be just like Dex save effects.
Improve Reach: inflict the penalty for ranged attacks within 5' of a hostile on anyone within reach of a hostile.
Improve Heavy Melee: let anyone with a Heavy Melee weapon Shove with it (allowing Shoves at Reach with non-whips)
Improve Shove: have Shove scale with how much the winner won by, when shoving a distance. If the shover beats the shovee by 0-4, 5'. By 5-9, 10'. And so on. So if you roll a 27 to shove and your target rolls a 12, you shove them 15'.
Does everyone know that, though? I feel like maybe I don't. A wizard can cast an 8d6 fireball for an average of 28 damage, save for half, meaning a decent chance that's 14 damage - unless I have resistance, in which case it's 7/14 damage. My barbarian will do something on the order of 3d6+15. Now, sure, he has to hit, but he has advantage on his attack rolls, and he can attack three times each round.
I think you'll find that 62 points of potential damage is reasonably in favor of the barbarian over the mages 7. Or 14. Or even 28 =)
You're really trying to compare the best damage your barbarian could do versus the worst damage a wizard could do.
You're really trying to compare the best damage your barbarian could do versus the worst damage a wizard could do.
Am I? That's a level 5 barbarian vs a level 5 wizard. Explain to me what much better options the wizard has.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
At this point, everybody knows about how casters get much better damage-wise and survialbility-wise than martials with their distance, 8d6 spells etc. at higher levels. So I would suggest every martial get some buffs starting at level 10 to increase their damage and tankness. That is something I want to implement in my campagins, see if you like.
At 10th level, you have increased the mastery of weapons and became even more proficient with them. You can add your proficiency bonus to the damage roll of weapons you are proficient with. Furthermore, martial weapons get improved when used by you: 1d4 becomes 1d6, 1d6 becomes1d8, 1d8 or 2d4 become 1d10 or 1d6+1d4, 1d12 or 2d6 become 1d6+1d8 or 1d10+1d4.
At the 12th level, your journey has taught you new battle tricks. You get one of the manuvers from Battle Master and one use of it, except that it is 1d6. You get another one at the 14th, 16th, 18th and 20th level, totalizing 5 dice and 5 uses of them. You can use one manuver multiple times, however once uses are over you need a short rest to regain them.
At the 15th level, your mastery of martial attacks has unleashed the ultimate balance between attack and defense. Once per round after suceeding on an attack roll you can roll an extra damage roll and temporarily add a +2 bonus to your AC that will last until your next turn.
At 20th level, you've becomed an unparallel and unswerving martial master. You have advantage on all saving throws against all attacks and spells that deal damage.
Martial classes are already superior to casters when it comes to sustained, single-target damage output. They absolutely don't need any sort of buff in this department. The issue is that the higher level you get, the more non-combat options casters get from their spells so martial classes become less and less useful outside of combat.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Does everyone know that, though? I feel like maybe I don't. A wizard can cast an 8d6 fireball for an average of 28 damage, save for half, meaning a decent chance that's 14 damage - unless I have resistance, in which case it's 7/14 damage. My barbarian will do something on the order of 3d6+15. Now, sure, he has to hit, but he has advantage on his attack rolls, and he can attack three times each round.
I think you'll find that 62 points of potential damage is reasonably in favor of the barbarian over the mages 7. Or 14. Or even 28 =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I would rather have other non combat features than more damage.
I'm not sure that's true.
What specific 8d6 spell you're talking about is quite vague, but I'll assume you're talking about Fireball. Let's look at that for a moment. An L6 Wizard can do that four times a day, then all their most powerful slots are gone. An L6 Barbarian 4d6+10 damage Action (assuming a standard Greatsword and a +5 to Strength), 40 times a day. Sure, Fireball is AoE, but unless you hit on average 10+ people each time, then the Barbarian is still outdoing you. I generally get half that. 10 is an awesome once in a campaign type of event, not my standard. Martials are more capable of consistent damage - I've just shown how, in the long run, Barbs do multiple times more damage. They're just not as flashy as a Wizard's Fireball. And bear in mind, Fireball is especially powerful and OP for its level - this is the Wizard doing pretty well.
As for being more survivable...really? A L6 Fighter is probably packing an AC of 20ish and Max HP of 58, versus a Wizard who will probably an AC of 16 (so already, CR6 Drider with +6 to hit will hit 60% more often against the Wizard than the Fighter) and a Max HP of 38. On average, a Wizard will die after 11 attacks by a Drider using its longsword one-handed (so a little under four rounds), a Fighter will last 28 attacks, or just over 9 rounds. Over twice as long.
Casters rely on martials for survivability. The martials keep the enemies back so casters can cast spells...mostly to help martials kill the enemies. The instant casters get targeted, problems happen.
The problem with martials is not their combat prowess. The problem is this: They trade off flashiness and instant power for consistency. A Wizard can turn the flow of a battle on a dime by doing the right thing at the right time. However, martials do more in the long run. Sure, they can't cast Fireball and obliterate a squad in a single Action, but they will steadily work through the enemies and overall do more damage (outside of specific circumstances). The problem is that what casters can do becomes much more flashy and exciting. Martials just do the same thing, but more of it. Solutions to problems start off somewhat balanced, maybe be even tilted to the martials, but end up favouring casters for most things.
Martials end up envying casters. If you want to balance martials and casters, you have to give martials better non combat abilities. Let them stay relevant for longer. Let them bring something new to the table, which is what I think they lack. Casters bring new stuff to the table all the time. Most levels see them bring new capabilities to the table, either through new spell levels, new spells or new class abilities, and often end up encroaching on the martial's skill sets. Martial's just do what they've always done, just more of it.
Martials need more new abilities that they can bring to the table. People who are complaining about balance between the two kinds of class, in my experience,. haven't sat down and done the maths, they're seeing that a Wizard can create new planes of reality on their level up, while their own Fighter can...hit enemies with a sword an extra time. That sucks and is causing resentment. Giving them an extra die to roll for damage won't solve that feeling - they already have it. They need new abilities that players can feel fulfilled by.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Damage output really isn't the issue, but more manuvers would be welcome because it would mean more options
I also like the increase in damage did but just for melee say at like lvl 4 to give melee options some incentive over ranged
But a lot of people want to give pure martials some kind of boost to their out of combat abilities which is tough to design because just slapping on more proficiencies for skills starts to muscle out rogues n the such.
I'd honestly provide something like fighters more in combat options as designing those out of combat ones is stupidly messy.. something like rallying shout that can provide buffs to friends, or temp HP. Something like imposing presence that can force disadvantage or fear. Move indomitable to earlier lvls and at the lvl they normally get it allow it to be used on allies as well would be nice
While it remains combat focused it's stuff that isn't just adding damage or more attacks and can help to bolster their roles while making the out of combat stuff not suck as much since they can do more in combat than just attacking
If the goal is to make all martials tankier and better at protecting their allies, try this:
Try those and see how it goes for you.
Thank you!! Those are really good ideas
You're really trying to compare the best damage your barbarian could do versus the worst damage a wizard could do.
You're really trying to compare the best damage your barbarian could do versus the worst damage a wizard could do.
Am I? That's a level 5 barbarian vs a level 5 wizard. Explain to me what much better options the wizard has.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
https://youtu.be/u1rb9kFFbkA?si=AEAmlskovPUKQ_Yz