Because I'm giving equations for how to actually calculate the meaningful difference. As have others. You're not, which means your conclusions are arrived at incorrectly. Which means they cannot be trusted.
And you still haven't answered the all-important question as to why you started this toxic mess.
My numbers are absolutely correct
Average roll for a d8 is 4.5 (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8)÷8 = 4.5
Strength modifier 16 STR = +3
This means average damage per hit = 4.5 + 3 = 7.5
With a 50% chance to hit, to calculate the average damage per attack you divide it by two: 7.5 ÷ 2 = 3.75 average damage per attack, BUT
There is also a 5% chance to crit (P=.05). Extra crit damage = average dice roll = 4.5. Since P = 0.05 you get 4.5 x .05 = 0.225 average crit damage per attack
Now add them together: 3.75 + 0.225 = 3.975 average damage per swing for a level 3 base fighter.
Champion adds the same crit damage on top of the above result, because they get an additional 5% chance to crit. 3.975 + 0.225 = 4.2
Instead of just saying "no you're wrong," I'm going to sit here and eat popcorn, waiting for you to point out exactly which of the above is not correct.
That 0.35 represents an increase in output of 8.8% over normal damage output. The problem with most armchair experts is that they compare 0.35 (which is a hit-adjusted number) to an average damage of 7.5 (which is not hit-adjusted).
The problem is that we compare it to options that are straight up better.
Over two medium encounters (expected average between short rests) at level 3 you can figure on 6 normal Attack actions, 1 Attack action from action surge, maybe 2 Opportunity attacks, total 9. For the champion at level 3, the expected gain is 0.45 critical hits (0.75 with 2WF), worth 2.025 damage with d8 weapons, 2.375 damage with 2x 1d6 weapons, 3.75 damage with a greatsword and great weapon fighting. In the same time, the battle master will use up 4 superiority dice, either for bonus damage (always hits) or possibly for bonus attacks such as riposte (can miss, but does a lot more damage if it does hit). This is worth at least 18 damage.
Now, it happens that the Champion does scale better than the Battle Master. At level 20 in the same time frame you can figure on 34 attacks (4 per attack action, and getting 2x action surge) which will give 3.4 extra critical hits, and you might well have abilities that increase the potency of your critical hits. This has a reasonable chance of scaling favorably relative to 6d12. However, most games never reach level 20, let alone spending long periods at those levels, so I generally pay more attention to tier 1/2 balance.
It doesn't even matter because his numbers are just plain wrong, as I explained earlier:
Which might be relevant if I were using someone else's numbers. Every number I used was explicitly stated in my post.
Without even checking their accuracy, the numbers you came up with were still dismal.
Because I'm giving equations for how to actually calculate the meaningful difference. As have others. You're not, which means your conclusions are arrived at incorrectly. Which means they cannot be trusted.
And you still haven't answered the all-important question as to why you started this toxic mess.
My numbers are absolutely correct
Average roll for a d8 is 4.5 (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8)÷8 = 4.5
Strength modifier 16 STR = +3
This means average damage per hit = 4.5 + 3 = 7.5
With a 50% chance to hit, to calculate the average damage per attack you divide it by two: 7.5 ÷ 2 = 3.75 average damage per attack, BUT
There is also a 5% chance to crit (P=.05). Extra crit damage = average dice roll = 4.5. Since P = 0.05 you get 4.5 x .05 = 0.225 average crit damage per attack
Now add them together: 3.75 + 0.225 = 3.975 average damage per swing for a level 3 base fighter.
Champion adds the same crit damage on top of the above result, because they get an additional 5% chance to crit. 3.975 + 0.225 = 4.2
Instead of just saying "no you're wrong," I'm going to sit here and eat popcorn, waiting for you to point out exactly which of the above is not correct.
Cute. You could just write (1+8)/2=4.5, but sure.
Now, answer the dang question. Why did you create such a toxic thread? What's your game?
For reference to anyone else that says “0.35 bad”, here’s why it’s more nuanced than you think.
Champions get Improved Crit at level 3. At level 3, your Attack Bonus might be +5 if you’re lucky. And you might be wielding a rapier (1d8)+3 for ability modifier.
Total damage vs an AC 16 opponent:
Non-Champion = 10/20 chances hit. Average damage per hit is 7.5, or 12 on a crit. That’s ((7.5*9)+(12))/20 = 3.975 damage Ave.
Champion = ((7.5*8)+(12*2))/20 = 4.2 damage Ave.
That 0.35 represents an increase in output of 8.8% over normal damage output. The problem with most armchair experts is that they compare 0.35 (which is a hit-adjusted number) to an average damage of 7.5 (which is not hit-adjusted).
Throw in a feat that combines with critical hits like Greater Weapon Master and Piercer, or Vicious weapons, etc and this effect becomes more pronounced.
3.5 is for a greatsword. Why would you compare a the added damage from Champion carrying a 2d6 weapon, then compare that to non-Champion using a 1d8 weapon? Also your numbers are incomplete.
1d8 weapon averages 4.5 damage.
We'll use your 50% chance to hit.
Average Crit damage ÷ 20 = 0.225
__________
Normal Damage
(4.5 + 3 STR mod) = 7.5
50% chance to hit: 7.5 ÷ 2 = 3.75
Plus crit damage: 3.75 + 0.225 = 3.975
Normal Average Damage Per Swing = 3.975
Improved Critical Damage:
3.975 + 0.225 = 4.2
0.225 ÷ 3.975 = .0566
Improved Critical Adds 5.66% Damage
AND, it gets worse when more of your attacks are hitting and as non-dice bonuses increase.
Did you just get corrected by an "armchair expert"? Ouch!
You're right, I did make a mistake and you're right, it's 5.66% damage increase at level 3. But you failed once again to do anything but dig yourself into a corner.
You know what the damage increase is at level 20 with GWM and Piercer on a Champion vs. a BM with the same feats (against an AC 16 target)? 18.8% PER ROUND. Oh, and it only takes the Champion a total of EIGHT rounds of combat to catch up to the damage output of Maneuvers.
Oh, and if you have a 1d6 Bonus to your weapon damage? That Champion now does 46.5 damage per round vs. 36.1 for a normal fighter. That's a 28.8% increase in damage and it reduces it to FOUR rounds of combat to catch up to the Maneuver damage.
Let's continue with more examples because you love them so much:
AC 20 Target
Level 5 Champ/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 9.198 dmg
Level 5 BM/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 8.075 dmg
Increase of 13.9% - breakeven in 16
Level 11 Champ/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 20.77 dmg
Level 11 BM/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 17.76 dmg
Increase of 17% - breakeven in 9
Level 15 Champ/20 Str... : 29.457
Level 15 BM/20 Str...: 22.941
Increase of 28.4% - breakeven in 5
Do I really need to continue? If anything, this is proof that two feats literally make the Champion one of the most damaging archetypes in the game. My god, it feels like this is falling on deaf ears and people have made up their minds despite the overwhelming evidence that a crit-focused Champion build is far more potent than "lol 0.35".
Edit... you know what, I do need to continue, because I totally forgot to even throw in Great Weapon Fighting into the mix.... more to come.
For reference to anyone else that says “0.35 bad”, here’s why it’s more nuanced than you think.
Champions get Improved Crit at level 3. At level 3, your Attack Bonus might be +5 if you’re lucky. And you might be wielding a rapier (1d8)+3 for ability modifier.
Total damage vs an AC 16 opponent:
Non-Champion = 10/20 chances hit. Average damage per hit is 7.5, or 12 on a crit. That’s ((7.5*9)+(12))/20 = 3.975 damage Ave.
Champion = ((7.5*8)+(12*2))/20 = 4.2 damage Ave.
That 0.35 represents an increase in output of 8.8% over normal damage output. The problem with most armchair experts is that they compare 0.35 (which is a hit-adjusted number) to an average damage of 7.5 (which is not hit-adjusted).
Throw in a feat that combines with critical hits like Greater Weapon Master and Piercer, or Vicious weapons, etc and this effect becomes more pronounced.
3.5 is for a greatsword. Why would you compare a the added damage from Champion carrying a 2d6 weapon, then compare that to non-Champion using a 1d8 weapon? Also your numbers are incomplete.
1d8 weapon averages 4.5 damage.
We'll use your 50% chance to hit.
Average Crit damage ÷ 20 = 0.225
__________
Normal Damage
(4.5 + 3 STR mod) = 7.5
50% chance to hit: 7.5 ÷ 2 = 3.75
Plus crit damage: 3.75 + 0.225 = 3.975
Normal Average Damage Per Swing = 3.975
Improved Critical Damage:
3.975 + 0.225 = 4.2
0.225 ÷ 3.975 = .0566
Improved Critical Adds 5.66% Damage
AND, it gets worse when more of your attacks are hitting and as non-dice bonuses increase.
Did you just get corrected by an "armchair expert"? Ouch!
You're right, I did make a mistake and you're right, it's 5.66% damage increase at level 3. But you failed once again to do anything but dig yourself into a corner.
You know what the damage increase is at level 20 with GWM and Piercer on a Champion vs. a BM with the same feats (against an AC 16 target)? 18.8% PER ROUND. Oh, and it only takes the Champion a total of EIGHT rounds of combat to catch up to the damage output of Maneuvers.
Oh, and if you have a 1d6 Bonus to your weapon damge? That Champion now does 46.5 damage per round vs. 36.1 for a normal fighter. That's a 28.8% increase in damage and it reduces it to FOUR rounds of combat to catch up to the Maneuver damage.
Let's continue with more examples because you love them so much:
AC 20 Target
Level 5 Champ/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 9.198 dmg
Level 5 BM/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 8.075 dmg
Increase of 13.9% - breakeven in 16
Level 11 Champ/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 20.77 dmg
Level 11 BM/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 17.76 dmg
Increase of 17% - breakeven in 9
Level 15 Champ/20 Str... : 29.457
Level 15 BM/20 Str...: 22.941
Increase of 28.4% - breakeven in 5
Do I really need to continue? If anything, this is proof that two feats literally make the Champion one of the most damaging archetypes in the game. My god, it feels like this is falling on deaf ears and people have made up their minds despite the overwhelming evidence that a crit-focused Champion build is far more potent than "lol 0.35".
If you use GWM at the wrong time (AC is too high)it actually LOWERS your base damage, improving the percentage of damage from crits.Those are times when you should NOT be using GWM, because you're lowing your DPS. You think I would not have noticed that little trick?
But just in case the "armchair expert" needs to correct your math AGAIN, I'll go ahead and crunch the numbers on those. BRB
If you use GWM at the wrong time (AC is too high)it actually LOWERS your base damage, improving the percentage of damage from crits.
GWM gives the ability to make a bonus action attack on a crit regardless of whether you use the attack penalty; that is always a benefit. At level 20, a generic fighter with GWM has an 18.54% chance per round of getting a bonus action attack (33.7% on an action surge round), whereas a champion has a 47.8% chance.
Let's compare how a regular Fighter compares to a Champion, both with GWF, GWM, and Piercer, with a Pike (because a piercing weapon which I missed above). Versus an AC of 20 let's say:
Champion Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 8.508
Fighter Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 7.488
Improvement of 1.02, 13.62%
Champion Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 19.283
Fighter Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 16.546
Improvement of 2.737, 16.54%
Champion Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 27.443
Fighter Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 21.511
Improvement of 5.932, 27.57%
But then you'll say, "but Duelling is WAY better comparison because then the Champion can't use GWM!". Alright, it's silly, but sure! Let's do it. The Champ will still take GWF at level 10.
Level 5 Proficiency Bonus (+3), Strength 16 (+3) GWM (-5) to hit you have a total of +1 to hit. Against a 20 AC that *lowers* your damage per hit, so this is a really dumb comparison, and I suspect it was done so on purpose. Nevertheless, you must roll a 19 or 20 to hit.
Greatword average damage: 7, ASI bonus 4, GWM damage 10 = 21 damage per hit
WITH GWM Only 10% chance to hit: 21 x 0.1 = 2.1 average points of damage per attack, WITH great weapon master.
WITHOUT GWM there is a 35% chance to hit. Greatsword average damage = (7 + 4 ) x 0.35 = 3.85 average points damage.
You massaged the scenario using ridiculously high AC levels to add GWM to. Was this because of a lack of understanding, or was it dishonesty?
PLUS you snuck in a feat that adds to critical damage, and THEN on top you added Superior Critical at Level 15, when I was referring to Improved Critical. A side note, SC is still bad overall as a 15th level ability.
Level 5 Proficiency Bonus (+3), Strength 16 (+3) GWM (-5) to hit you have a total of +1 to hit. Against a 20 AC that *lowers* your damage per hit, so this is a really dumb comparison, and I suspect it was done so on purpose. Nevertheless, you must roll a 19 or 20 to hit.
Greatword average damage: 7, ASI bonus 4, GWM damage 10 = 21 damage per hit
WITH GWM Only 10% chance to hit: 21 x 0.1 = 2.1 average points of damage per attack, WITH great weapon master.
WITHOUT GWM there is a 35% chance to hit. Greatsword average damage = 7 + ASI = 3.85 average points damage.
You massaged the scenario using ridiculously high AC levels to add GWM to. Was this because of a lack of understanding, or was it dishonesty?
PLUS you snuck in a feat that adds to critical damage, and THEN on top you added Superior Critical at Level 15, when I was referring to Improved Critical. A side note, SC is still bad overall as a 15th level ability.
I'm not even using the -5 to hit, +10 damage, I'm just using the chance of a critical hit allowing an extra attack as a bonus action. But feel free to go ahead and make that calculation then? And "snuck" in? I made the point that adding GWM to the build actually improves the build, to be clear as to why I was doing it. I swear... this is getting annoying, but I'll keep throwing in more examples for you....
Level 5 Proficiency Bonus (+3), Strength 16 (+3) GWM (-5) to hit you have a total of +1 to hit. Against a 20 AC that *lowers* your damage per hit, so this is a really dumb comparison, and I suspect it was done so on purpose. Nevertheless, you must roll a 19 or 20 to hit.
Greatword average damage: 7, ASI bonus 4, GWM damage 10 = 21 damage per hit
WITH GWM Only 10% chance to hit: 21 x 0.1 = 2.1 average points of damage per attack, WITH great weapon master.
WITHOUT GWM there is a 35% chance to hit. Greatsword average damage = 7 + ASI = 3.85 average points damage.
You massaged the scenario using ridiculously high AC levels to add GWM to. Was this because of a lack of understanding, or was it dishonesty?
PLUS you snuck in a feat that adds to critical damage, and THEN on top you added Superior Critical at Level 15, when I was referring to Improved Critical. A side note, SC is still bad overall as a 15th level ability.
I'm not even using the -5 to hit, +10 damage, I'm just using the chance of a critical hit allowing an extra attack as a bonus action. But feel free to go ahead and make that calculation then? And "snuck" in? I made the point that adding GWM to the build actually improves the build, to be clear as to why I was doing it. I swear... this is getting annoying, but I'll keep throwing in more examples for you....
Why would you NOT factor in +10, -5 to hit? It's part of the game mechanics, is it not? How can you possibly crunch the numbers without doing so? And I can crunch the numbers that way if you like, IF you decide not to be dishonest and apply GWM to an AC level that doesn't LOWER your DPS.
By the way, I'll play the game and compare FAIR numbers all day long with feats. But is this a declaration on your part that Improved Critical relies on feats to be effective?
And OH, by the way. That extra attack DOES NOT MATTER. We're talking about damage PER ATTACK. Giving both an extra attack does NOTHING to affect the damage PER attack. If the "armchair expert" can figure that out, why can't you?
Let me break it down in simple terms. If you raise the average damage *without* raising the dice damage, Improved Critical becomes worse (percentage wise). Since GWM adds 10 non-dice damage, if it's appropriately applied it will always lower the (percentage) that Improved Critical adds. It has to.
I take your word that you didn't do that on purpose, so I apologize for calling you dishonest.
Let me break it down in simple terms. If you raise the average damage *without* raising the dice damage, Improved Critical becomes worse (percentage wise). Since GWM adds 10 non-dice damage, if it's appropriately applied it will always lower the (percentage) that Improved Critical adds. It has to.
I take your word that you didn't do that on purpose, so I apologize for calling you dishonest.
I think what you're missing from your calculations is the probability of getting an entire extra action and that attack getting +10 on it as well. This is why all my calculations include GWM, GWF, and Piercer, specifically because they all function well under systems that improve Critical Hits.
Let me break it down in simple terms. If you raise the average damage *without* raising the dice damage, Improved Critical becomes worse (percentage wise). Since GWM adds 10 non-dice damage, if it's appropriately applied it will always lower the (percentage) that Improved Critical adds. It has to.
I take your word that you didn't do that on purpose, so I apologize for calling you dishonest.
I think what you're missing from your calculations is the probability of getting an entire extra action and that attack getting +10 on it as well. This is why all my calculations include GWM, GWF, and Piercer, specifically because they all function well under systems that improve Critical Hits.
Actually, that's a good point. They get an extra attack an additional 5% of the time. And you were calculating that, not applying the (optional) +10 damage. That's my bad.
It's too late for me to do anymore math, but out of curiosity I'll pick some realistic numbers to crunch sometime tomorrow and see how they fair. It could be that there's a specific Champion build that I can get behind. I just think a worthwhile subclass feature should be able to stand on its own two feet, without requiring the player to make specific choices to be effective.
Ugh, more variables to figure out. If the player also picks polearm master, it severely diminishes whatever benefit that feature brings.
SeanJP you nailed it right on the head in the first post. The Champion abilities offer very little at all to the Fighter base class.
I feel that Champion fighters are pretty much included just for inexperienced players and players who don't want to have to learn many rules to give them something that they don't have to think about too much. That is fine, there is a place for that in the game.
The 'baseline damage' idea needs to take into account that ranged damage should count as higher than melee damage, especially with a 120ft range, since it is easier to deploy. At worst you get disadvantage due to enemy proximity, compared to being completely unable to attack a target. So a warlock spamming EB should have a damage multiplier applied in comparison to melee attacks which require the attacker to expose themself and to be in the right position far more than they do for a ranged attacker.
Worrying too hard about specific numbers and balance isn't really something that most players do in my experience. A druid using Summon Animals is as likely to summon some giant goats because they think it's interesting as they are to summon Wolves which are much better in combat due to pack tactics and take downs, because it's flavourful and they wanted goats. But overall, the biggest complaint about a Champion ought to be that Champions are just really boring. I can't see why anyone would ever play a Champion over a Battlemaster, unless they just wanted a simpler class.
Kerrec, you're overcomplicating this. What it all boils down to you is the more attacks you make, the more you will crit. That's for everyone. More attacks means more damage, again, that's for everyone.
All you have to do is calculate the average added damage per attack to gauge how effective an ability is (damage wise), setting aside abilities that give you additional attacks (you have to calculate those as well). Given the choice between:
1. Improved Critial (the level 3 Champion ability that many people rave about), and
2. Dueling Fighting Style (a level 1 ability for basic Fighters)
It doesn't matter how many swings you make. The Dueling Fighting Style (considered a modest ability by nearly everyone) destroys Improved Critical. With that said, if your point is the Duel-Weapon Fighting Style is superior (damage-wise) to the Dueling Fighting Style, I haven't crunched the numbers but at face value I find that very believable. In fact, I don't need to. If you're doing 50% more attacks then you're going to do 50% more damage (not factoring in using a less powerful weapon in your offhand, or a single attack from a bigger weapon).
You're funny. This entire thread you challenge people to provide math for their claims to shut down any argument they make. I challenged the assumptions you used to come to your conclusion AND I gave you some math and all you do is hand wave it away. OK fine.
It is obvious you don't understand crit fishing. It's not just a question of how many attacks you make, it's a question of how many DICE you roll To-Hit. And that makes a HUGE difference. Assuming both a Champion and a non-Champion are equally lucky (probability to crit), then the Champion is going to crit 4 times when the non-Champion crits once.
No classes are going to play in a vacuum. They are going to have a party supporting them. I know this is an inconvenient truth because you can't math what that brings to any given class. A Champion doesn't need to have built in methods of getting advantage if his party does it for him because they understand what that means.
Anyway, as has been said many times: Champions are too simple (beyond building one to min-max crit fishing) and tend to be boring. But if I had to play one for some reason, I'd build it to crit-fish and go bludgeoning with the Crusher feat. Advantage to all attacks for the entire party until my next turn? YUM. Calculate that damage in your average AND by all means, do the math to see what the other party members would think of that.
NORMAL AVERAGE DAMAGE PER SWING FOR BOTH CHAMPION AND NON-CHAMPTION: (7 + 4) x 0.6 = 6.6 Damage
Non-Champion adds 0.35 for chance to crit: 6.6 + 0.35 = 6.95
Champion adds 0.70 for chance to crit: 6.6 = 0.7 = 7.3
With GWM the Non-Champion has a 2.5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 6.95 + (6.95 x .025) = 7.12375
With GWM the Champion has a 5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 7.3 + (7.3 x .05) = 7.665
7.665/7.12375 = 1.076
The Champion is doing 7.6% more damage if using GWM. This amounts to increasing damage form 20 to 21.52 on a hit.
Using GWM for the extra attacks helps a LOT, and it is still unimpressive.
Level 3 Improved Critical: You get to crit on a 19 or 20. Let's look at the math with a Greatsword. Everyone already crits on a 20. You also crit on a 19. That is a 1/20 chance per roll that the ability will add to your damage (or 5% of the time) for an extra 2d6. 2d6 average roll = 7 damage.
Greatsword: 7 x 0.05 = 0.35 average extra damage per attack. Glaive = 0.275 extra damage. Longsword: 0.225
Here's another attempt to explain. Your example above assumes you roll 1 To-Hit die, which gives the champion an extra 5% chance on top of the base 5% any other class also gets for rolling a 20 (a crit).
The reason why this is wrong is because the % chance starts to diverge for the Champion when MORE To-Hit dice are rolled. If a non-Champion and a Champion both have advantage from some external source (ex: target is lit by faerie fire), then:
That 5% for the non-Champion becomes 9.75% with advantage. For a 2d6 weapon average damage: 7 x 0.0975 = 0.68 extra damage per attack.
that 10% for the Champion becomes 19% with advantage. For a 2d6 weapon average damage: 7 x 0.19 = 1.33 extra damage per attack.
That difference only grows when you build for crit fishing. By ALOT.
NORMAL AVERAGE DAMAGE PER SWING FOR BOTH CHAMPION AND NON-CHAMPTION: (7 + 4) x 0.6 = 6.6 Damage
Non-Champion adds 0.35 for chance to crit: 6.6 + 0.35 = 6.95
Champion adds 0.70 for chance to crit: 6.6 = 0.7 = 7.3
With GWM the Non-Champion has a 2.5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 6.95 + (6.95 x .025) = 7.12375
With GWM the Champion has a 5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 7.3 + (7.3 x .05) = 7.665
7.665/7.12375 = 1.076
The Champion is doing 7.6% more damage if using GWM. This amounts to increasing damage form 20 to 21.52 on a hit.
Using GWM for the extra attacks helps a LOT, and it is still unimpressive.
Why not use my spreadsheet for this? It takes into effect percentage chance to hit, all possible values per hit, chances of GWM triggering (and potential critical hits from those attacks), etc.
Fighter average damage per round: 14.58
Champion average damage per round: 15.99
But you're missing a fighting style as well. And you're getting 18 Str which is unlikely unless a) You're using manual rolling, or b) using a human Fighter. However, when we add GWF:
Fighter: 16.40
Champion: 18.03
So a difference of 1.63 per round in damage. If Superiority Dice do an average of 4.5 at this level, and you have 4, that's an average of 18. 18/1.63 = 11 rounds of combat to breakeven given these small parameters. Again, this gap closes quickly when other feats are added that provide other various advantages. Crusher, for example, with a high critical hit probability, can grant almost continual advantage on a specific opponent. I'd have to run a Python script to test this one, but you can see the side-benefits of playing this class once you see its synergy with Feats.
However, can you not at least accept that a small increase in Critical Hit damage can make a huge difference in overall damage? I don't argue that the Champion class is built differently than Battlemaster, just that Critical Hits are largely misunderstood.
My numbers are absolutely correct
Average roll for a d8 is 4.5 (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8)÷8 = 4.5
Strength modifier 16 STR = +3
This means average damage per hit = 4.5 + 3 = 7.5
With a 50% chance to hit, to calculate the average damage per attack you divide it by two: 7.5 ÷ 2 = 3.75 average damage per attack, BUT
There is also a 5% chance to crit (P=.05). Extra crit damage = average dice roll = 4.5. Since P = 0.05 you get 4.5 x .05 = 0.225 average crit damage per attack
Now add them together: 3.75 + 0.225 = 3.975 average damage per swing for a level 3 base fighter.
Champion adds the same crit damage on top of the above result, because they get an additional 5% chance to crit. 3.975 + 0.225 = 4.2
Instead of just saying "no you're wrong," I'm going to sit here and eat popcorn, waiting for you to point out exactly which of the above is not correct.
Without even checking their accuracy, the numbers you came up with were still dismal.
Cute. You could just write (1+8)/2=4.5, but sure.
Now, answer the dang question. Why did you create such a toxic thread? What's your game?
You're right, I did make a mistake and you're right, it's 5.66% damage increase at level 3. But you failed once again to do anything but dig yourself into a corner.
You know what the damage increase is at level 20 with GWM and Piercer on a Champion vs. a BM with the same feats (against an AC 16 target)? 18.8% PER ROUND. Oh, and it only takes the Champion a total of EIGHT rounds of combat to catch up to the damage output of Maneuvers.
Oh, and if you have a 1d6 Bonus to your weapon damage? That Champion now does 46.5 damage per round vs. 36.1 for a normal fighter. That's a 28.8% increase in damage and it reduces it to FOUR rounds of combat to catch up to the Maneuver damage.
Let's continue with more examples because you love them so much:
AC 20 Target
Level 5 Champ/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 9.198 dmg
Level 5 BM/GWM/Greatsword/16 Str: 8.075 dmg
Increase of 13.9% - breakeven in 16
Level 11 Champ/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 20.77 dmg
Level 11 BM/GWM/Piercer/18 Str: 17.76 dmg
Increase of 17% - breakeven in 9
Level 15 Champ/20 Str... : 29.457
Level 15 BM/20 Str...: 22.941
Increase of 28.4% - breakeven in 5
Do I really need to continue? If anything, this is proof that two feats literally make the Champion one of the most damaging archetypes in the game. My god, it feels like this is falling on deaf ears and people have made up their minds despite the overwhelming evidence that a crit-focused Champion build is far more potent than "lol 0.35".
Edit... you know what, I do need to continue, because I totally forgot to even throw in Great Weapon Fighting into the mix.... more to come.
If you use GWM at the wrong time (AC is too high)it actually LOWERS your base damage, improving the percentage of damage from crits.Those are times when you should NOT be using GWM, because you're lowing your DPS. You think I would not have noticed that little trick?
But just in case the "armchair expert" needs to correct your math AGAIN, I'll go ahead and crunch the numbers on those. BRB
GWM gives the ability to make a bonus action attack on a crit regardless of whether you use the attack penalty; that is always a benefit. At level 20, a generic fighter with GWM has an 18.54% chance per round of getting a bonus action attack (33.7% on an action surge round), whereas a champion has a 47.8% chance.
Here we gooooooo....
Let's compare how a regular Fighter compares to a Champion, both with GWF, GWM, and Piercer, with a Pike (because a piercing weapon which I missed above). Versus an AC of 20 let's say:
Champion Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 8.508
Fighter Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 7.488
Improvement of 1.02, 13.62%
Champion Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 19.283
Fighter Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 16.546
Improvement of 2.737, 16.54%
Champion Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 27.443
Fighter Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 21.511
Improvement of 5.932, 27.57%
But then you'll say, "but Duelling is WAY better comparison because then the Champion can't use GWM!". Alright, it's silly, but sure! Let's do it. The Champ will still take GWF at level 10.
Champion Level 5/16 Str/Duelling/Piercer: 10.35
Fighter Level 5/16 Str/Duelling/Piercer: 9.45
Improvement of 0.9, 9.52%
Champion Level 11/18 Str/Duelling/GWF/Piercer: 21.7125
Fighter Level 11/18 Str/Duelling/Piercer: 18.675
Improvement of 3.0375, 16.265%
Champion Level 15/20 Str/Duelling/GWF/Piercer: 28.6125
Fighter Level 15/20 Str/Duelling/Piercer: 23.775
Improvement of 4.8375, 20.34%
Champion Level 20/20 Str/Duelling/GWF/Piercer: 40.6
Fighter Level 20/20 Str/Duelling/Piercer: 34
Improvement of 6.6, 19.41%
What other combinations do you want me to show?
So right out the gate:
Level 5 Proficiency Bonus (+3), Strength 16 (+3) GWM (-5) to hit you have a total of +1 to hit. Against a 20 AC that *lowers* your damage per hit, so this is a really dumb comparison, and I suspect it was done so on purpose. Nevertheless, you must roll a 19 or 20 to hit.
Greatword average damage: 7, ASI bonus 4, GWM damage 10 = 21 damage per hit
WITH GWM Only 10% chance to hit: 21 x 0.1 = 2.1 average points of damage per attack, WITH great weapon master.
WITHOUT GWM there is a 35% chance to hit. Greatsword average damage = (7 + 4 ) x 0.35 = 3.85 average points damage.
You massaged the scenario using ridiculously high AC levels to add GWM to. Was this because of a lack of understanding, or was it dishonesty?
PLUS you snuck in a feat that adds to critical damage, and THEN on top you added Superior Critical at Level 15, when I was referring to Improved Critical. A side note, SC is still bad overall as a 15th level ability.
I'm not even using the -5 to hit, +10 damage, I'm just using the chance of a critical hit allowing an extra attack as a bonus action. But feel free to go ahead and make that calculation then? And "snuck" in? I made the point that adding GWM to the build actually improves the build, to be clear as to why I was doing it. I swear... this is getting annoying, but I'll keep throwing in more examples for you....
Why would you NOT factor in +10, -5 to hit? It's part of the game mechanics, is it not? How can you possibly crunch the numbers without doing so? And I can crunch the numbers that way if you like, IF you decide not to be dishonest and apply GWM to an AC level that doesn't LOWER your DPS.
By the way, I'll play the game and compare FAIR numbers all day long with feats. But is this a declaration on your part that Improved Critical relies on feats to be effective?
And OH, by the way. That extra attack DOES NOT MATTER. We're talking about damage PER ATTACK. Giving both an extra attack does NOTHING to affect the damage PER attack. If the "armchair expert" can figure that out, why can't you?
Let me break it down in simple terms. If you raise the average damage *without* raising the dice damage, Improved Critical becomes worse (percentage wise). Since GWM adds 10 non-dice damage, if it's appropriately applied it will always lower the (percentage) that Improved Critical adds. It has to.
I take your word that you didn't do that on purpose, so I apologize for calling you dishonest.
This time using GWM Feat, GWF Fighting Style, using the -5/+10 feature of GWM, Piercer when there's a Feat available, vs AC 20...
Champion Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 20.1699
Fighter Level 5/16 Str/GWF/GWM: 18.6573
Seriously bored of calculating percentages now... maybe 8-9%?
Champion Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 39.1539
Fighter Level 11/18 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 35.6374
Almost around 10%?
Champion Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 50.5511
Fighter Level 15/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 42.9597
Just around 17% more...
Champion Level 20/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 70.5060
Fighter Level 20/20 Str/GWF/GWM/Piercer: 60.6269
Around 16%
Lesson? Take GWF Fighting style, pick up a Pike and GWM and Piercer, and have a blast!
I think what you're missing from your calculations is the probability of getting an entire extra action and that attack getting +10 on it as well. This is why all my calculations include GWM, GWF, and Piercer, specifically because they all function well under systems that improve Critical Hits.
Actually, that's a good point. They get an extra attack an additional 5% of the time. And you were calculating that, not applying the (optional) +10 damage. That's my bad.
It's too late for me to do anymore math, but out of curiosity I'll pick some realistic numbers to crunch sometime tomorrow and see how they fair. It could be that there's a specific Champion build that I can get behind. I just think a worthwhile subclass feature should be able to stand on its own two feet, without requiring the player to make specific choices to be effective.
Ugh, more variables to figure out. If the player also picks polearm master, it severely diminishes whatever benefit that feature brings.
SeanJP you nailed it right on the head in the first post. The Champion abilities offer very little at all to the Fighter base class.
I feel that Champion fighters are pretty much included just for inexperienced players and players who don't want to have to learn many rules to give them something that they don't have to think about too much. That is fine, there is a place for that in the game.
The 'baseline damage' idea needs to take into account that ranged damage should count as higher than melee damage, especially with a 120ft range, since it is easier to deploy. At worst you get disadvantage due to enemy proximity, compared to being completely unable to attack a target. So a warlock spamming EB should have a damage multiplier applied in comparison to melee attacks which require the attacker to expose themself and to be in the right position far more than they do for a ranged attacker.
Worrying too hard about specific numbers and balance isn't really something that most players do in my experience. A druid using Summon Animals is as likely to summon some giant goats because they think it's interesting as they are to summon Wolves which are much better in combat due to pack tactics and take downs, because it's flavourful and they wanted goats. But overall, the biggest complaint about a Champion ought to be that Champions are just really boring. I can't see why anyone would ever play a Champion over a Battlemaster, unless they just wanted a simpler class.
You're funny. This entire thread you challenge people to provide math for their claims to shut down any argument they make. I challenged the assumptions you used to come to your conclusion AND I gave you some math and all you do is hand wave it away. OK fine.
It is obvious you don't understand crit fishing. It's not just a question of how many attacks you make, it's a question of how many DICE you roll To-Hit. And that makes a HUGE difference. Assuming both a Champion and a non-Champion are equally lucky (probability to crit), then the Champion is going to crit 4 times when the non-Champion crits once.
No classes are going to play in a vacuum. They are going to have a party supporting them. I know this is an inconvenient truth because you can't math what that brings to any given class. A Champion doesn't need to have built in methods of getting advantage if his party does it for him because they understand what that means.
Anyway, as has been said many times: Champions are too simple (beyond building one to min-max crit fishing) and tend to be boring. But if I had to play one for some reason, I'd build it to crit-fish and go bludgeoning with the Crusher feat. Advantage to all attacks for the entire party until my next turn? YUM. Calculate that damage in your average AND by all means, do the math to see what the other party members would think of that.
Brewsky, revisiting this.
Parameters: Level 5 Fighter, 18 STR, GWM (not adding -5 +10), Greatsword, Enemy 16 AC
NORMAL AVERAGE DAMAGE PER SWING FOR BOTH CHAMPION AND NON-CHAMPTION: (7 + 4) x 0.6 = 6.6 Damage
Non-Champion adds 0.35 for chance to crit: 6.6 + 0.35 = 6.95
Champion adds 0.70 for chance to crit: 6.6 = 0.7 = 7.3
With GWM the Non-Champion has a 2.5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 6.95 + (6.95 x .025) = 7.12375
With GWM the Champion has a 5% chance to obtain another attack (per attack) (5% divided by 2 attacks per turn, because only one bonus attack): 7.3 + (7.3 x .05) = 7.665
7.665/7.12375 = 1.076
The Champion is doing 7.6% more damage if using GWM. This amounts to increasing damage form 20 to 21.52 on a hit.
Using GWM for the extra attacks helps a LOT, and it is still unimpressive.
Here's another attempt to explain. Your example above assumes you roll 1 To-Hit die, which gives the champion an extra 5% chance on top of the base 5% any other class also gets for rolling a 20 (a crit).
The reason why this is wrong is because the % chance starts to diverge for the Champion when MORE To-Hit dice are rolled. If a non-Champion and a Champion both have advantage from some external source (ex: target is lit by faerie fire), then:
That difference only grows when you build for crit fishing. By ALOT.
Why not use my spreadsheet for this? It takes into effect percentage chance to hit, all possible values per hit, chances of GWM triggering (and potential critical hits from those attacks), etc.
Fighter average damage per round: 14.58
Champion average damage per round: 15.99
But you're missing a fighting style as well. And you're getting 18 Str which is unlikely unless a) You're using manual rolling, or b) using a human Fighter. However, when we add GWF:
Fighter: 16.40
Champion: 18.03
So a difference of 1.63 per round in damage. If Superiority Dice do an average of 4.5 at this level, and you have 4, that's an average of 18. 18/1.63 = 11 rounds of combat to breakeven given these small parameters. Again, this gap closes quickly when other feats are added that provide other various advantages. Crusher, for example, with a high critical hit probability, can grant almost continual advantage on a specific opponent. I'd have to run a Python script to test this one, but you can see the side-benefits of playing this class once you see its synergy with Feats.
However, can you not at least accept that a small increase in Critical Hit damage can make a huge difference in overall damage? I don't argue that the Champion class is built differently than Battlemaster, just that Critical Hits are largely misunderstood.