Fighters do MUCH more damage than rogues at most tiers, and have much higher AC than Barbarians. If you played a Battlemaster and weren’t the hands-down rockstar of the group, then it sounds like your group’s uneven ability score distributions made you feel weaker than you should have been. That, or you just didn’t optimize feats and maneuvers effectively…
You absolutely should branch out and try some other classes, but you’ll find that all the other martial classes have to make significant compromises in areas (feat selection, AC, abilities per day, action economy, etc) that Fighters are just good at.
I'm not too sure about Fighters doing more damage than Rogues. That I will have to see. So far, thanks to sneak attack, they can explode like a bomb on a crit, and even if they don't crit, they get to dual wield, so that adds to their damage. I've got a shield in one of my hands. It's one of those base damage versus spike damage things. Over a period of time, a Fighter may pull ahead, but usually fights don't last long enough for that. Action Surge may level things out at some point, but it's very limited, you only get one more action to use, they had to clarify it, because people thought Action Surge gave them a second bonus attack and a second Reaction. You get to do it once, and then you need a short rest, so it's one time per combat basically. I suspect the Rogue is still coming out ahead. I'm only in Tier 1 now. I'll have to see what happens later.
I'm 4th level now, and in about 30 sessions, we have yet to get a Short Rest. Three days have passed in game. I have yet to get to use one of my maneuvers, because I'm waiting for a boss fight of some kind and we haven't gotten near one yet.
You are correct, my scores made me weaker. I didn't optimize well. I was trying to provide the tank that I thought the party needed, and they still do need one, but I wanted to be able to do decent damage, so I have the Defensive fighting style to make me a better tank, I took a half-decent Dex, mostly for the Initiative, and so if I dump my chainmail and get some half plate, my armor class goes up by one. The feat I have is Dual Wielder, and that's not all that helpful to a tank. I took a Battle Master, but I've come to find out from reading the forums is that I should have taken the Cavalier sub-class.
You said I should have been a rock star. That's essentially why I feel like Fighter is the weakest class. They are second fiddle, every other class is better at one of the things a Fighter ought to be able to do well. I probably should have played a Paladin, they make good tanks, and they can deal out some pretty decent damage. The poll up at the top of this thread shows them as being the second strongest class, and Fighter comes in at around 6th place. With the scores I had, and a good build, maybe then I could have been a Rock Star, only I'd have to sing Gospel I think, and I'm not fond of that genre. Actually, come to think about it, if you want to be a Rock Star, play a Bard.
There is no sense in never using your resources. If you want to save 1 or 2, fine, but don't not use your maneuvers.
Fighter has edged out rogue and barbarian to be the second strongest melee class according to these polls and it is partly because of features you are choosing not to use.
If your stats are so much worse than everyone else's ask your DM for a reroll.
As for paladins, yeah they are pretty great. They have a fighter's AC, a rogue's DPS, a monk's frontline support, and with healing a barbarian's HP. And you don't have to be religious to be a paladin in 5e, they are more like knights now, serving a cause instead of a god.
Fighters do MUCH more damage than rogues at most tiers, and have much higher AC than Barbarians. If you played a Battlemaster and weren’t the hands-down rockstar of the group, then it sounds like your group’s uneven ability score distributions made you feel weaker than you should have been. That, or you just didn’t optimize feats and maneuvers effectively…
You absolutely should branch out and try some other classes, but you’ll find that all the other martial classes have to make significant compromises in areas (feat selection, AC, abilities per day, action economy, etc) that Fighters are just good at.
Rogues are much better at the exploration and social aspects of the game, and Fighters are better at the killing stuff aspect of the game. It's the intent of the game designers that this be the case. How these two classes compare to each other will vary from game to game because some games will emphasize exploration and social more than other games will. But the Fighter should always be doing more damage than the Rogue in every game. In some games, being good at sneaking around, at lock picking, at deception, at insight, etc. will be more important than being able to kill stuff faster.
The Fighter's ability to kill stuff faster doesn't make them the best class. It makes them the best class in the way some people's games go. But in other games, a Rogue is going to be much better. But the Fighter is definitely the best martial class at killing stuff.
That's why the whole premise of this thread is a flawed. Hopefully we can all at least agree that the PHB Ranger sucks. But the Ranger subclasses in Xanthar's, and the upgrades in Tasha's help close this gap. But when it comes to comparing a Wizard to a Fighter, how the hell are you supposed to make this comparison? They do completely different things.
I'm not too sure about Fighters doing more damage than Rogues. That I will have to see. So far, thanks to sneak attack, they can explode like a bomb on a crit, and even if they don't crit, they get to dual wield, so that adds to their damage. I've got a shield in one of my hands. It's one of those base damage versus spike damage things. Over a period of time, a Fighter may pull ahead, but usually fights don't last long enough for that. Action Surge may level things out at some point, but it's very limited, you only get one more action to use, they had to clarify it, because people thought Action Surge gave them a second bonus attack and a second Reaction. You get to do it once, and then you need a short rest, so it's one time per combat basically. I suspect the Rogue is still coming out ahead. I'm only in Tier 1 now. I'll have to see what happens later.
I'm 4th level now, and in about 30 sessions, we have yet to get a Short Rest. Three days have passed in game. I have yet to get to use one of my maneuvers, because I'm waiting for a boss fight of some kind and we haven't gotten near one yet.
You are correct, my scores made me weaker. I didn't optimize well. I was trying to provide the tank that I thought the party needed, and they still do need one, but I wanted to be able to do decent damage, so I have the Defensive fighting style to make me a better tank, I took a half-decent Dex, mostly for the Initiative, and so if I dump my chainmail and get some half plate, my armor class goes up by one. The feat I have is Dual Wielder, and that's not all that helpful to a tank. I took a Battle Master, but I've come to find out from reading the forums is that I should have taken the Cavalier sub-class.
You said I should have been a rock star. That's essentially why I feel like Fighter is the weakest class. They are second fiddle, every other class is better at one of the things a Fighter ought to be able to do well. I probably should have played a Paladin, they make good tanks, and they can deal out some pretty decent damage. The poll up at the top of this thread shows them as being the second strongest class, and Fighter comes in at around 6th place. With the scores I had, and a good build, maybe then I could have been a Rock Star, only I'd have to sing Gospel I think, and I'm not fond of that genre. Actually, come to think about it, if you want to be a Rock Star, play a Bard.
If you're still only level 4, then I can see why you'd feel like Fighter hasn't really come online yet, and especially if your DM isn't permitting short rests often enough. If you're sword and shield, then I'm assuming you've taken the Dueling style (+2 damage on your attacks), or Defensive style (+1 AC), or Superior Technique (1 more maneuver and superiority die); if you instead took something else like Protection, I'd really suggest re-training that to one of those three whenever your DM allows. Even if your Dex is 14ish, in Plate with a Shield, your AC should be 20 (or, 21 if you took Defensive), which is high enough that you're very "tanky" without needing to dedicate feats to improving your constitution or taking Tough. If you stay in Half Plate, that 19 (or 20) AC is also pretty good.
I'm assuming you took something at 4 that gave you a +1 in your attack stat (Strength? Dexterity?), maybe Skill Expert or Slasher etc, and are probably sitting at an 18 in your attack stat? Or, at least 16? If you're wanting something interesting to do in combats that doesn't rely on DM providing room for short rests, I'd encourage you take Shield Master at 6. With your two attacks per Attack from Extra Attack at 5, you'll be set up to Attack once, Bonus-action Shove your enemy prone, and then follow up with a second Attack with advantage.... and maybe even an Action Surge for two more attacks with advantage as well? At level 11, on an Action Surge turn, you might be making five attacks with advantage after shoving an opponent prone, and you'll find you're doing plenty of damage against major targets. Your rogue will also really appreciate these plentiful shoves! The feat also make you even better at some Dexterity saves, and get a light version of Evasion using your Reaction, which is nice... Shield Master is really a quite good feat, if you plan on using a Shield.
As a Battlemaster, you do have the flexibility to play a powerful support or control role in combat, rather than focusing on pure damage. If you're feeling like you don't shine because the Barbarian and Rogue are doing more damage than you... stop trying to compete with that, and consider leaning into ways to help them shine as a team commander! Commander's Strike is very good for parties that have a Rogue, because Rogues aren't often in a position to use their reactions for Opportunity Attacks, and thus usually only deliver one sneak attack per round. Maneuvering Attack can really save your squishy party members from certain death, or help your other melee teammates get into great position to threaten the enemy back line. Menacing Attack is a powerful debuff that exerts hard control on an enemy (they cannot move in a way that brings them closer to you) while also debuffing all of their attacks against your whole party. Between those moves, and knocking enemies prone with your Bonus Action shield shoves every round, you'll start to play a very meaningful role in combat even if you aren't doing quite as much damage as your teammates. Once you end up sitting on five or six superiority dice, you really should have the flexibility to be using a maneuver once or twice every combat... but if the short rests really aren't permitting that, just maybe consider having a conversation with your DM that you feel it's hard to justify using your class features if they won't allow you to short rest at least once every two or three encounters.
Still not sure about the damage Rogues can do. It is possible they do less. I've got an 18 strength, they have a 19 dexterity. I'm using a Longsword and shield, they are using a Rapier and dagger, and while the DM knows they shouldn't get their damage bonus on the dagger, they let the player add it anyway. I'm kind of a stickler, and I refuse to do similar things. The Rapier lets them get the same damage as my Longsword, but adds their dexterity bonus, so they get a tiny bit more damage with it than I get with my Longsword. So yes, they do more damage than I do at base, an they get to sneak attack quite often on top of that.
Our Ranger has the Archery fighting style, Colossus Slayer, Favored Foe, and Hunter's Mark. It takes a bit to get that all rocking, but it sure add a lot of damage once it's up there. Their dex again. Far high than mine, and while my str is higher than their dex, I'm not getting to make as many attacks.
The Wizard has a higher str than I do. And of naturally, they have a 20 Int, so their primary score again, is two points better than mine.
Like I said. We never get Short Rests. That's not because the DM isn't making it possible, it's because everyone else in the party ignores my advise. We were outside of the room we thought a boss was inside and the Wizard, who was our primary healer at that point (the Druid was off doing something else outside the dungeon) was completely out of spells, from healing us all. So while we were at full hit points, there was nothing that we had to keep us alive, and the Wizard would be useless to us outside of their ability to use a custom weapon that I would have said they couldn't use in the first place, as I'd have called a two-handed weapon with the damage of a Maul a Martial weapon and the DM let them have it. That's the DM's philosophy; Let people have stuff if they think it's fun. I'm the only one who isn't willing to abuse that. I said "Hey, we need to take a Short Rest at the least, and a Long Rest would be better. We can do that here, and keep an eye out, so the bad guy won't sneak up on us. Let's rest. Nope. Everyone said we were just fine and we went on. Good thing for us, the bad guy had already escaped through the handy secret door that they always seem to have and were long gone before we reached the door to their room.
Pretty much all my problems are my own fault. I'm not willing to cheat. The DM doesn't mind if people do. Everyone else is willing to do so as well. I tried to do two things well, and maybe it could work, but I'm stuck in the tank role, so I have no chance to try the damage role, and I've gone on and on about why I'm not having much luck with tanking. The Ranger, for example, is pretty good about following the rules, but they have an extra two score points that they gave to themselves because they couldn't quite figure out how to get the Character Builder to give the numbers they wanted. I think they used random rolls with something other than the tool. They made an honest mistake, and of course, the DM wasn't about to mention it. I noticed, I explained to the player, who is a close friend I might add, and she said she knew she was wrong, but she hasn't lowered her scores. She likes them where they are and she's right. All she did is get the numbers to match what she rolled. Why should anyone expect her to lower them?
The pole says the Wizard is the strongest class by far. I come in at 6th, Rogue comes in lower by a whole one vote, the Druid is more powerful, and as an PC/NPC I don't a while lot care, but it's annoying, the Ranger is by far the least of the strong, and the weakest of the weak, but they are doing better than I am. I'm not willing to compromise my principals and I will have to admit that in the end, I'm not a very good player.
18 and 19 have the same modifier of +4, so you should have the same base hit and damage modifiers.
The rogue shouldn't even be able to attack with the dagger let alone at their damage mod to it without a feat and fighting style (which should require a second feat or multiclass).
A level 4 rogue might do a little more damage that a level 4 fighter, but that changes at level 5.
A ranger will do about the same damage assuming you are both using your resources.
Not sure how the wizard is a healer? That is literally the only magic they are bad at (healing and melee are their biggest flaws).
It actually sounds like your main stat is comparable to the main stats of every other character. But other players are using the DM's house rules and you aren't.
The Wizard is a healer because when they were created, the DM knew there wasn't a healer and let them use something that came from the UA forum a long time ago that was rejected. The College of Theurgy. It's basically a Cleric thing from one of the Domains. The DM added in her pet Druid later on, but never took back the homebrew college. The Rogue probably doesn't have any of the things that would let them dual wield effectively but the DM doesn't care. I had a 16 Strength at the start I believe. At 4th I used both of the points from my ASI to raise my Strength.
The DM doesn't really have house rules as such. What shes does is ignore the existing ones in favor of the players. She actually asked me to tell her in private if I saw someone break the rules, and sometimes she has mentioned it to the other players, but she still doesn't enforce it, so nothing happens. The Rangers has broken a few, but they are honest mistakes, and while the DM never says a word about it, if I send a private message to her, she quits doing it.
The Ranger uses all her abilities to the fullest, and more. Colossus Slayer is the only one that has no limitations other than the target being damaged, and by the time she got Favored Foe, I had given up on telling anyone about rule breaking, so the fact that she was supposed to only get it twice a day has slipped though the cracks.
For myself, I get 4 uses of my maneuvers, and since we never do a Short Rest, that's 4 times per day. I don't want to waste them on anything less than a boss, and we haven't met one yet. Given the game I am in, I could probably get away with using a maneuver for every attack I made, but on the other hand, I once asked if, before we entered a fight, I could look at the situation and use my knowledge of tactics from my Soldier background to add my own bonus to Initiative to everyone else's. There is a Wizard ability called Tactical Wit that does something similar. She said "I will think about it" and I haven't heard anything back in the last two sessions. I wanted to drop my chainmail armor and get some Half-Plate. It would give me a whopping one higher AC. Nope. None available in town. It's a mining town, but I guess there's no call for a Blacksmith there. I suppose that's fair, an Armorsmith would require more training I guess, and none of the stores might have them. Not much call for medium armor in a town surrounded by Gobins, Hobgoblins, Bugbears, and undead after all.
You have still chosen to skip 12 opportunities to use maneuvers in order to save 4 for a bossbattle that probably won't last long enough to use that many, in a campaign where no one is tracking limited uses any way.
Like I said before, it is fine to save your last 1 or 2, but pointless to never use it at all.
Ask your DM about all the limited resource abuse and see if they want to crack down on it or let you use it too. And any difference in play from official rules is a house rule, all rogues automatically getting the 2 weapon fighting style and not needing to use light weapons is a clear example of that...
It's like I keep saying. We don't get Short Rests. Not even once. 30 odd game sessions, 3 hours each, no Short Rests. 3 days in game have passed. We have gotten nothing but Long Rests, and I have had to fight with the other players to get two of them. I said 4 per day, because that's what I am dealing with.
As far as "house rules" go, you are correct. We define the term differently. I see a house rule as something that is discussed before the game starts, or a new player is told before the session. That's not what happened. The DM just chooses to ignore the existing rules. I had no way of knowing about it before hand, and when I brought it up, she told the Rogue, but nothing was done.
I'm sorry all. I'm whining. I haven't been all that happy with my Fighter, I'm not pleased with the game, and if not for the fact the the person playing the Ranger was my Significant Other I might well have just bailed out much earlier.
I'm still not entirely convinced about how strong Fighters are, but mine is the only character I have so far played in 5th edition, and I probably wouldn't have such a bad impression if I was playing in a game where the rules were followed.
I really don't understand the "monks are weak" perspective, considering that they do more damage, have higher AC's, more immunities, and more abilities to incapacitate enemies, with a flexible short-rest rechargeable resource... even before you get into examining which subclass you're talking about. But other than that, I agree that Rangers and Sorcerers lag behind other classes, not because their numbers necessarily suck, but more because they don't really do anything that other classes don't do better (Fighters are better archers than Rangers are, Wizards or Warlocks are better explosion slingers than sorcerers are). I'm not sure if I'd really call any class out as 'weak" other than those two.
A bit late to the discussion but I just discovered this thread! When you start considering feats, multiclassing etc. monks really start to taper off damage wise at the end of tier 2. Unlike other classes, they also have to land more attacks than barbarians, fighters and paladins to deal similar damage, and landing 4 attacks is just more unlikely than landing 2 attacks.
With polearm master a fighter could deal 31.5 damage per round, before any dmg increasing abilities are considered. A barbarian with reckless attack and great weapon master could be dealing 48 dmg a round if both hits connect, 50+ with polearm master and great weapon master. Fighters also get more leverage out of their magic weapons at higher tiers, so a flame tongue sword could let them deal 6d6 extra fire damage with 3 attacks.
Monks are also more reliant on ability score increases than other martial classes just to stay relevant, while the others can pick more feats instead.
Monks just taper off in the long run, they are great at low levels, but fall off hard damage wise.
It's like I keep saying. We don't get Short Rests. Not even once. 30 odd game sessions, 3 hours each, no Short Rests. 3 days in game have passed. We have gotten nothing but Long Rests, and I have had to fight with the other players to get two of them. I said 4 per day, because that's what I am dealing with.
As far as "house rules" go, you are correct. We define the term differently. I see a house rule as something that is discussed before the game starts, or a new player is told before the session. That's not what happened. The DM just chooses to ignore the existing rules. I had no way of knowing about it before hand, and when I brought it up, she told the Rogue, but nothing was done.
I'm sorry all. I'm whining. I haven't been all that happy with my Fighter, I'm not pleased with the game, and if not for the fact the the person playing the Ranger was my Significant Other I might well have just bailed out much earlier.
I'm still not entirely convinced about how strong Fighters are, but mine is the only character I have so far played in 5th edition, and I probably wouldn't have such a bad impression if I was playing in a game where the rules were followed.
I cant give your party advice on how to make you feel better. I can only give you advice. My advice is to use the class features you gained at level 2 and 3 so you do more damage than a level 1 character. Even just 1 per battle (I don't know how many battles you have per day).
As for getting the party to take short rests: it will heal without using slots, the druid recharges wild shape's, the wizard can use arcane recovery to get slots back, and they could have even more resources to recover depending on subclasses. Assuming they are taking damage and tracking resources, they should want to rest. If they aren't, you shouldn't either.
At 2nd level, I'd get Second Wind and Action Surge to work with. I assume those are what you mean. I use Second Wind freely. 1d10+4 hit points at 4th level isn't worth saving for a boss fight. Second wind once per day isn't going to add to my damage by a whole lot. I guess I could go ahead and burn that too, it isn't all that important after all. Third level, I get 3 different maneuvers, I have Precision Strike, Riposte, and Trip Attack. So each time I use the Attack action, I could use two of them. Once I have used them, I get them back once per day. You're right. I should use them. They aren't powerful enough to save up for an important fight when you only get any of them back once per day.
I'm glad you have given me some suggestions to pass on to the Wizard and the Druid. Especially the Wizard, since that's our primary healer. The Druid is after all, an NPC, and she's usually not with us during fights. The fact that they don't need to rest as often as I do will help them out a lot. As for me, I have no such abilities.
Any given encounter will be about half a dozen opponents. We have been fighting skeletons, Goblins, Bugbears, Hobgoblins and some NPC types who have a pair of scimitars they use for multi-attack. We probably have 3 fights per session. In the encounter before the boss fight, luck was not with me, but the DM had it. I missed with most of my attacks, the most dangerous looking guy in the room was the one I went right after, so I was on him the entire fight while his six buddies kept everyone else busy. He got about 5 crits on me. I was down to 16 hit points, the others were damaged a bit, and it took all the spells the Wizard had left to get me back up to five points under my max and heal everyone else back to full. That's when I asked for a Short Rest at the very least and said that a Long Rest would be better. Nope. We went on to the next room anyway. The was nobody there. The boss had already escaped.
The next game session, we spent the entire 3 hours look for treasure. I narrated how I was going through each room, looking under the furniture and poking around, there were two bridges I looked under, and so on. The DM was probably ignoring me, because I didn't find a thing. The other players were telling the DM all about how they were searching, and usually rolling checks without asking. "I just rolled a Perception check and I got a 22, what did I find?" The DM kept having to stop and deal with it. They found a treasure chest under the bridge I looked under and missed seeing. So about the only time I got to roll dice that night was to notice some wet footprints that were probably from the boss that had escaped. I rolled a 2, so I didn't get anything. We went back to the inn, got our long rest, and went shopping, where I didn't find anything I could buy that would be useful.
The next session comes up on Wednesday I think. Maybe the week after. I'll be sure to use up everything I have in the first fight. What the heck, I get them all back once per day.
I'm glad you have given me some suggestions to pass on to the Wizard and the Druid. Especially the Wizard, since that's our primary healer. The Druid is after all, an NPC, and she's usually not with us during fights. The fact that they don't need to rest as often as I do will help them out a lot. As for me, I have no such abilities.
Second wind, action surge, and your superiority dice ALL recharge on short rest. Your class is supposed to stop and take a breather after a fight or two. The game is balanced around 2 short rests per day.
No one should have any objections to short rests unless there is a narrative time crunch.
I appreciate that you are trying to help me. I really do. I don't get to decide about how many rests we take. I think we'd all benefit from using Short Rests, but the DM isn't requiring us to take any, and the other players don't seem to want to. I argue with them, I get outvoted, and we go on. Nope. No narrative time crunch. I have to keep trying to keep the story moving, or the Rogue (She's got Charisma as a dump score and says it comes from Autism) wants to roleplay having breakfast. She's really very focused on food.
I don't much enjoy having to keep pushing to keep the story moving. That's the DM's job if anything, but if I don't we don't get anywhere. Earlier sessions before we started this story arc, we did things like spend an entire session buying treats from a shop that sold food rather than eat our breakfast at the inn. I don't know why it was so important, but we had to figure out to the copper how much each item cost, and during all this, the Wizard decided to dump a bunch of platinum that would have paid for everything we got and more, on a child who was late for school.
Our DM isn't very experienced. I was asked for advice, because I've got a lot of experience with earlier versions of the game, and she was a player in the only game I've run in 5th. We had to stop playing that one when I went into the hospital, and by the time I got out, people no longer were available for the time we were using to play. I give advice, she ignores most of it, the stuff she does try to use the players ignore, so it's ultimately useless.
I appreciate that you are trying to help me. I really do. I don't get to decide about how many rests we take. I think we'd all benefit from using Short Rests, but the DM isn't requiring us to take any, and the other players don't seem to want to. I argue with them, I get outvoted, and we go on. Nope. No narrative time crunch. I have to keep trying to keep the story moving,
Idk, remind them that short rests don't have to require roleplay. You could ask to take a short rest to discus what to do next, or after deciding what to do next ask to add a short rest to the beginning. You can also rest while moving if you have a wagon or something. If there is ever an hour of sitting still, ask the DM if that can count as a rest.
I can try that. I can't imagine any objection, but this is a DM who has a lot of trouble "fast forwarding" though the unimportant stuff, so who knows? Maybe I can get away with it if we stop for a meal, and I know the Rogue at least, is all about that.
It's like I keep saying. We don't get Short Rests. Not even once. 30 odd game sessions, 3 hours each, no Short Rests. 3 days in game have passed. We have gotten nothing but Long Rests, and I have had to fight with the other players to get two of them. I said 4 per day, because that's what I am dealing with.
Characters who don't eat will eventually take levels of exhaustion from the starvation. Tell you party to stop for lunch at some point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Twilight and Peace domain moved them well into S+ broken should be banned tier.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Fighters do MUCH more damage than rogues at most tiers, and have much higher AC than Barbarians. If you played a Battlemaster and weren’t the hands-down rockstar of the group, then it sounds like your group’s uneven ability score distributions made you feel weaker than you should have been. That, or you just didn’t optimize feats and maneuvers effectively…
You absolutely should branch out and try some other classes, but you’ll find that all the other martial classes have to make significant compromises in areas (feat selection, AC, abilities per day, action economy, etc) that Fighters are just good at.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm not too sure about Fighters doing more damage than Rogues. That I will have to see. So far, thanks to sneak attack, they can explode like a bomb on a crit, and even if they don't crit, they get to dual wield, so that adds to their damage. I've got a shield in one of my hands. It's one of those base damage versus spike damage things. Over a period of time, a Fighter may pull ahead, but usually fights don't last long enough for that. Action Surge may level things out at some point, but it's very limited, you only get one more action to use, they had to clarify it, because people thought Action Surge gave them a second bonus attack and a second Reaction. You get to do it once, and then you need a short rest, so it's one time per combat basically. I suspect the Rogue is still coming out ahead. I'm only in Tier 1 now. I'll have to see what happens later.
I'm 4th level now, and in about 30 sessions, we have yet to get a Short Rest. Three days have passed in game. I have yet to get to use one of my maneuvers, because I'm waiting for a boss fight of some kind and we haven't gotten near one yet.
You are correct, my scores made me weaker. I didn't optimize well. I was trying to provide the tank that I thought the party needed, and they still do need one, but I wanted to be able to do decent damage, so I have the Defensive fighting style to make me a better tank, I took a half-decent Dex, mostly for the Initiative, and so if I dump my chainmail and get some half plate, my armor class goes up by one. The feat I have is Dual Wielder, and that's not all that helpful to a tank. I took a Battle Master, but I've come to find out from reading the forums is that I should have taken the Cavalier sub-class.
You said I should have been a rock star. That's essentially why I feel like Fighter is the weakest class. They are second fiddle, every other class is better at one of the things a Fighter ought to be able to do well. I probably should have played a Paladin, they make good tanks, and they can deal out some pretty decent damage. The poll up at the top of this thread shows them as being the second strongest class, and Fighter comes in at around 6th place. With the scores I had, and a good build, maybe then I could have been a Rock Star, only I'd have to sing Gospel I think, and I'm not fond of that genre. Actually, come to think about it, if you want to be a Rock Star, play a Bard.
<Insert clever signature here>
There is no sense in never using your resources. If you want to save 1 or 2, fine, but don't not use your maneuvers.
Fighter has edged out rogue and barbarian to be the second strongest melee class according to these polls and it is partly because of features you are choosing not to use.
If your stats are so much worse than everyone else's ask your DM for a reroll.
As for paladins, yeah they are pretty great. They have a fighter's AC, a rogue's DPS, a monk's frontline support, and with healing a barbarian's HP. And you don't have to be religious to be a paladin in 5e, they are more like knights now, serving a cause instead of a god.
Rogues are much better at the exploration and social aspects of the game, and Fighters are better at the killing stuff aspect of the game. It's the intent of the game designers that this be the case. How these two classes compare to each other will vary from game to game because some games will emphasize exploration and social more than other games will. But the Fighter should always be doing more damage than the Rogue in every game. In some games, being good at sneaking around, at lock picking, at deception, at insight, etc. will be more important than being able to kill stuff faster.
The Fighter's ability to kill stuff faster doesn't make them the best class. It makes them the best class in the way some people's games go. But in other games, a Rogue is going to be much better. But the Fighter is definitely the best martial class at killing stuff.
That's why the whole premise of this thread is a flawed. Hopefully we can all at least agree that the PHB Ranger sucks. But the Ranger subclasses in Xanthar's, and the upgrades in Tasha's help close this gap. But when it comes to comparing a Wizard to a Fighter, how the hell are you supposed to make this comparison? They do completely different things.
If you're still only level 4, then I can see why you'd feel like Fighter hasn't really come online yet, and especially if your DM isn't permitting short rests often enough. If you're sword and shield, then I'm assuming you've taken the Dueling style (+2 damage on your attacks), or Defensive style (+1 AC), or Superior Technique (1 more maneuver and superiority die); if you instead took something else like Protection, I'd really suggest re-training that to one of those three whenever your DM allows. Even if your Dex is 14ish, in Plate with a Shield, your AC should be 20 (or, 21 if you took Defensive), which is high enough that you're very "tanky" without needing to dedicate feats to improving your constitution or taking Tough. If you stay in Half Plate, that 19 (or 20) AC is also pretty good.
I'm assuming you took something at 4 that gave you a +1 in your attack stat (Strength? Dexterity?), maybe Skill Expert or Slasher etc, and are probably sitting at an 18 in your attack stat? Or, at least 16? If you're wanting something interesting to do in combats that doesn't rely on DM providing room for short rests, I'd encourage you take Shield Master at 6. With your two attacks per Attack from Extra Attack at 5, you'll be set up to Attack once, Bonus-action Shove your enemy prone, and then follow up with a second Attack with advantage.... and maybe even an Action Surge for two more attacks with advantage as well? At level 11, on an Action Surge turn, you might be making five attacks with advantage after shoving an opponent prone, and you'll find you're doing plenty of damage against major targets. Your rogue will also really appreciate these plentiful shoves! The feat also make you even better at some Dexterity saves, and get a light version of Evasion using your Reaction, which is nice... Shield Master is really a quite good feat, if you plan on using a Shield.
As a Battlemaster, you do have the flexibility to play a powerful support or control role in combat, rather than focusing on pure damage. If you're feeling like you don't shine because the Barbarian and Rogue are doing more damage than you... stop trying to compete with that, and consider leaning into ways to help them shine as a team commander! Commander's Strike is very good for parties that have a Rogue, because Rogues aren't often in a position to use their reactions for Opportunity Attacks, and thus usually only deliver one sneak attack per round. Maneuvering Attack can really save your squishy party members from certain death, or help your other melee teammates get into great position to threaten the enemy back line. Menacing Attack is a powerful debuff that exerts hard control on an enemy (they cannot move in a way that brings them closer to you) while also debuffing all of their attacks against your whole party. Between those moves, and knocking enemies prone with your Bonus Action shield shoves every round, you'll start to play a very meaningful role in combat even if you aren't doing quite as much damage as your teammates. Once you end up sitting on five or six superiority dice, you really should have the flexibility to be using a maneuver once or twice every combat... but if the short rests really aren't permitting that, just maybe consider having a conversation with your DM that you feel it's hard to justify using your class features if they won't allow you to short rest at least once every two or three encounters.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Still not sure about the damage Rogues can do. It is possible they do less. I've got an 18 strength, they have a 19 dexterity. I'm using a Longsword and shield, they are using a Rapier and dagger, and while the DM knows they shouldn't get their damage bonus on the dagger, they let the player add it anyway. I'm kind of a stickler, and I refuse to do similar things. The Rapier lets them get the same damage as my Longsword, but adds their dexterity bonus, so they get a tiny bit more damage with it than I get with my Longsword. So yes, they do more damage than I do at base, an they get to sneak attack quite often on top of that.
Our Ranger has the Archery fighting style, Colossus Slayer, Favored Foe, and Hunter's Mark. It takes a bit to get that all rocking, but it sure add a lot of damage once it's up there. Their dex again. Far high than mine, and while my str is higher than their dex, I'm not getting to make as many attacks.
The Wizard has a higher str than I do. And of naturally, they have a 20 Int, so their primary score again, is two points better than mine.
Like I said. We never get Short Rests. That's not because the DM isn't making it possible, it's because everyone else in the party ignores my advise. We were outside of the room we thought a boss was inside and the Wizard, who was our primary healer at that point (the Druid was off doing something else outside the dungeon) was completely out of spells, from healing us all. So while we were at full hit points, there was nothing that we had to keep us alive, and the Wizard would be useless to us outside of their ability to use a custom weapon that I would have said they couldn't use in the first place, as I'd have called a two-handed weapon with the damage of a Maul a Martial weapon and the DM let them have it. That's the DM's philosophy; Let people have stuff if they think it's fun. I'm the only one who isn't willing to abuse that. I said "Hey, we need to take a Short Rest at the least, and a Long Rest would be better. We can do that here, and keep an eye out, so the bad guy won't sneak up on us. Let's rest. Nope. Everyone said we were just fine and we went on. Good thing for us, the bad guy had already escaped through the handy secret door that they always seem to have and were long gone before we reached the door to their room.
Pretty much all my problems are my own fault. I'm not willing to cheat. The DM doesn't mind if people do. Everyone else is willing to do so as well. I tried to do two things well, and maybe it could work, but I'm stuck in the tank role, so I have no chance to try the damage role, and I've gone on and on about why I'm not having much luck with tanking. The Ranger, for example, is pretty good about following the rules, but they have an extra two score points that they gave to themselves because they couldn't quite figure out how to get the Character Builder to give the numbers they wanted. I think they used random rolls with something other than the tool. They made an honest mistake, and of course, the DM wasn't about to mention it. I noticed, I explained to the player, who is a close friend I might add, and she said she knew she was wrong, but she hasn't lowered her scores. She likes them where they are and she's right. All she did is get the numbers to match what she rolled. Why should anyone expect her to lower them?
The pole says the Wizard is the strongest class by far. I come in at 6th, Rogue comes in lower by a whole one vote, the Druid is more powerful, and as an PC/NPC I don't a while lot care, but it's annoying, the Ranger is by far the least of the strong, and the weakest of the weak, but they are doing better than I am. I'm not willing to compromise my principals and I will have to admit that in the end, I'm not a very good player.
<Insert clever signature here>
18 and 19 have the same modifier of +4, so you should have the same base hit and damage modifiers.
The rogue shouldn't even be able to attack with the dagger let alone at their damage mod to it without a feat and fighting style (which should require a second feat or multiclass).
A level 4 rogue might do a little more damage that a level 4 fighter, but that changes at level 5.
A ranger will do about the same damage assuming you are both using your resources.
Not sure how the wizard is a healer? That is literally the only magic they are bad at (healing and melee are their biggest flaws).
It actually sounds like your main stat is comparable to the main stats of every other character. But other players are using the DM's house rules and you aren't.
The Wizard is a healer because when they were created, the DM knew there wasn't a healer and let them use something that came from the UA forum a long time ago that was rejected. The College of Theurgy. It's basically a Cleric thing from one of the Domains. The DM added in her pet Druid later on, but never took back the homebrew college. The Rogue probably doesn't have any of the things that would let them dual wield effectively but the DM doesn't care. I had a 16 Strength at the start I believe. At 4th I used both of the points from my ASI to raise my Strength.
The DM doesn't really have house rules as such. What shes does is ignore the existing ones in favor of the players. She actually asked me to tell her in private if I saw someone break the rules, and sometimes she has mentioned it to the other players, but she still doesn't enforce it, so nothing happens. The Rangers has broken a few, but they are honest mistakes, and while the DM never says a word about it, if I send a private message to her, she quits doing it.
The Ranger uses all her abilities to the fullest, and more. Colossus Slayer is the only one that has no limitations other than the target being damaged, and by the time she got Favored Foe, I had given up on telling anyone about rule breaking, so the fact that she was supposed to only get it twice a day has slipped though the cracks.
For myself, I get 4 uses of my maneuvers, and since we never do a Short Rest, that's 4 times per day. I don't want to waste them on anything less than a boss, and we haven't met one yet. Given the game I am in, I could probably get away with using a maneuver for every attack I made, but on the other hand, I once asked if, before we entered a fight, I could look at the situation and use my knowledge of tactics from my Soldier background to add my own bonus to Initiative to everyone else's. There is a Wizard ability called Tactical Wit that does something similar. She said "I will think about it" and I haven't heard anything back in the last two sessions. I wanted to drop my chainmail armor and get some Half-Plate. It would give me a whopping one higher AC. Nope. None available in town. It's a mining town, but I guess there's no call for a Blacksmith there. I suppose that's fair, an Armorsmith would require more training I guess, and none of the stores might have them. Not much call for medium armor in a town surrounded by Gobins, Hobgoblins, Bugbears, and undead after all.
<Insert clever signature here>
You have still chosen to skip 12 opportunities to use maneuvers in order to save 4 for a bossbattle that probably won't last long enough to use that many, in a campaign where no one is tracking limited uses any way.
Like I said before, it is fine to save your last 1 or 2, but pointless to never use it at all.
Ask your DM about all the limited resource abuse and see if they want to crack down on it or let you use it too. And any difference in play from official rules is a house rule, all rogues automatically getting the 2 weapon fighting style and not needing to use light weapons is a clear example of that...
It's like I keep saying. We don't get Short Rests. Not even once. 30 odd game sessions, 3 hours each, no Short Rests. 3 days in game have passed. We have gotten nothing but Long Rests, and I have had to fight with the other players to get two of them. I said 4 per day, because that's what I am dealing with.
As far as "house rules" go, you are correct. We define the term differently. I see a house rule as something that is discussed before the game starts, or a new player is told before the session. That's not what happened. The DM just chooses to ignore the existing rules. I had no way of knowing about it before hand, and when I brought it up, she told the Rogue, but nothing was done.
I'm sorry all. I'm whining. I haven't been all that happy with my Fighter, I'm not pleased with the game, and if not for the fact the the person playing the Ranger was my Significant Other I might well have just bailed out much earlier.
I'm still not entirely convinced about how strong Fighters are, but mine is the only character I have so far played in 5th edition, and I probably wouldn't have such a bad impression if I was playing in a game where the rules were followed.
<Insert clever signature here>
A bit late to the discussion but I just discovered this thread! When you start considering feats, multiclassing etc. monks really start to taper off damage wise at the end of tier 2. Unlike other classes, they also have to land more attacks than barbarians, fighters and paladins to deal similar damage, and landing 4 attacks is just more unlikely than landing 2 attacks.
With polearm master a fighter could deal 31.5 damage per round, before any dmg increasing abilities are considered. A barbarian with reckless attack and great weapon master could be dealing 48 dmg a round if both hits connect, 50+ with polearm master and great weapon master. Fighters also get more leverage out of their magic weapons at higher tiers, so a flame tongue sword could let them deal 6d6 extra fire damage with 3 attacks.
Monks are also more reliant on ability score increases than other martial classes just to stay relevant, while the others can pick more feats instead.
Monks just taper off in the long run, they are great at low levels, but fall off hard damage wise.
I cant give your party advice on how to make you feel better. I can only give you advice. My advice is to use the class features you gained at level 2 and 3 so you do more damage than a level 1 character. Even just 1 per battle (I don't know how many battles you have per day).
As for getting the party to take short rests: it will heal without using slots, the druid recharges wild shape's, the wizard can use arcane recovery to get slots back, and they could have even more resources to recover depending on subclasses. Assuming they are taking damage and tracking resources, they should want to rest. If they aren't, you shouldn't either.
At 2nd level, I'd get Second Wind and Action Surge to work with. I assume those are what you mean. I use Second Wind freely. 1d10+4 hit points at 4th level isn't worth saving for a boss fight. Second wind once per day isn't going to add to my damage by a whole lot. I guess I could go ahead and burn that too, it isn't all that important after all. Third level, I get 3 different maneuvers, I have Precision Strike, Riposte, and Trip Attack. So each time I use the Attack action, I could use two of them. Once I have used them, I get them back once per day. You're right. I should use them. They aren't powerful enough to save up for an important fight when you only get any of them back once per day.
I'm glad you have given me some suggestions to pass on to the Wizard and the Druid. Especially the Wizard, since that's our primary healer. The Druid is after all, an NPC, and she's usually not with us during fights. The fact that they don't need to rest as often as I do will help them out a lot. As for me, I have no such abilities.
Any given encounter will be about half a dozen opponents. We have been fighting skeletons, Goblins, Bugbears, Hobgoblins and some NPC types who have a pair of scimitars they use for multi-attack. We probably have 3 fights per session. In the encounter before the boss fight, luck was not with me, but the DM had it. I missed with most of my attacks, the most dangerous looking guy in the room was the one I went right after, so I was on him the entire fight while his six buddies kept everyone else busy. He got about 5 crits on me. I was down to 16 hit points, the others were damaged a bit, and it took all the spells the Wizard had left to get me back up to five points under my max and heal everyone else back to full. That's when I asked for a Short Rest at the very least and said that a Long Rest would be better. Nope. We went on to the next room anyway. The was nobody there. The boss had already escaped.
The next game session, we spent the entire 3 hours look for treasure. I narrated how I was going through each room, looking under the furniture and poking around, there were two bridges I looked under, and so on. The DM was probably ignoring me, because I didn't find a thing. The other players were telling the DM all about how they were searching, and usually rolling checks without asking. "I just rolled a Perception check and I got a 22, what did I find?" The DM kept having to stop and deal with it. They found a treasure chest under the bridge I looked under and missed seeing. So about the only time I got to roll dice that night was to notice some wet footprints that were probably from the boss that had escaped. I rolled a 2, so I didn't get anything. We went back to the inn, got our long rest, and went shopping, where I didn't find anything I could buy that would be useful.
The next session comes up on Wednesday I think. Maybe the week after. I'll be sure to use up everything I have in the first fight. What the heck, I get them all back once per day.
<Insert clever signature here>
Second wind, action surge, and your superiority dice ALL recharge on short rest. Your class is supposed to stop and take a breather after a fight or two. The game is balanced around 2 short rests per day.
No one should have any objections to short rests unless there is a narrative time crunch.
I appreciate that you are trying to help me. I really do. I don't get to decide about how many rests we take. I think we'd all benefit from using Short Rests, but the DM isn't requiring us to take any, and the other players don't seem to want to. I argue with them, I get outvoted, and we go on. Nope. No narrative time crunch. I have to keep trying to keep the story moving, or the Rogue (She's got Charisma as a dump score and says it comes from Autism) wants to roleplay having breakfast. She's really very focused on food.
I don't much enjoy having to keep pushing to keep the story moving. That's the DM's job if anything, but if I don't we don't get anywhere. Earlier sessions before we started this story arc, we did things like spend an entire session buying treats from a shop that sold food rather than eat our breakfast at the inn. I don't know why it was so important, but we had to figure out to the copper how much each item cost, and during all this, the Wizard decided to dump a bunch of platinum that would have paid for everything we got and more, on a child who was late for school.
Our DM isn't very experienced. I was asked for advice, because I've got a lot of experience with earlier versions of the game, and she was a player in the only game I've run in 5th. We had to stop playing that one when I went into the hospital, and by the time I got out, people no longer were available for the time we were using to play. I give advice, she ignores most of it, the stuff she does try to use the players ignore, so it's ultimately useless.
<Insert clever signature here>
Idk, remind them that short rests don't have to require roleplay. You could ask to take a short rest to discus what to do next, or after deciding what to do next ask to add a short rest to the beginning. You can also rest while moving if you have a wagon or something. If there is ever an hour of sitting still, ask the DM if that can count as a rest.
I can try that. I can't imagine any objection, but this is a DM who has a lot of trouble "fast forwarding" though the unimportant stuff, so who knows? Maybe I can get away with it if we stop for a meal, and I know the Rogue at least, is all about that.
<Insert clever signature here>
Characters who don't eat will eventually take levels of exhaustion from the starvation. Tell you party to stop for lunch at some point.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Ceric is #1 imo.
Twilight and Peace domain moved them well into S+ broken should be banned tier.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.