Not surprised. The playtesting in the PH by WOTC was not as robust as it should be, the official stuff released in even less playtest books gets worse, so a class by some indie who is selling in their marketplace I'd expect to be even further off the mark.
Halfling for the fun of it. Sweet Science. Soldier background to get the strength boost. Rolled well and dumped everything into Strength (19) and Constitution (18). Level 4. In a turn he can land 3d8+12 damage. He can out barbarian barbarians and out monk monks.
I made a character and uploaded the character sheet to my AI. I'd been testing various level 5 Unarmed Fighting builds the last few weeks. I ran the Pugilist through the same scenarios and it destroyed all the scenarios that were balanced against barbarians and fighters.
The issue I ran into wasn't that the damage was overwhelming (although it was better), it was the control mechanics. A pugilist can easily grapple and knock prone two enemies (rendering them completely useless and hampering their saves) and still combat a third enemy easily. If you take the Grapple feat at level 4 you can even drag your two prone enemies at full speed while chasing after a ranged attacker.
In one scenario the pugilist took on 5 similar leveled "bandits" easily, and only lost when I had 6 enemies (all similarly leveled to him) that included 2 ranged attackers AND the pugilist lost the initiative. Even then he'd killed 3 of them. I was using the Wrestler sub-class... Squared Circle.
Previously my most successful Unarmed Fighter was a Battle-Master 4/Barbarian 1 multiclass who could handle 4 like-tiered bandits but couldn't deal against 5.
Right now no DMs in my local store will allow this class.
I made a character and uploaded the character sheet to my AI. I'd been testing various level 5 Unarmed Fighting builds the last few weeks. I ran the Pugilist through the same scenarios and it destroyed all the scenarios that were balanced against barbarians and fighters.
I wouldn't recommend using AI, either in the general nor this specific case -- it doesn't (and cannot) understand the rules.
But, that said, do you have a control weapon fighter for your testing? I have no opinion on the Pugilist class (never read it), but the available options for unarmed fighters are, to the best of my knowledge, not all that good, and so the Pugilist being better than them doesn't mean all that much in terms of balance in the larger scope.
I would have gone gnome for the mental shortcomings. Then again, as I understand it, it sounds like they don’t really need dexterity at all outside of initiative boosts. Could/did you put anything into wisdom? Just curious.
As far as the simulations, I agree they aren’t the same as actual play, but it’s better than nothing. If anything, it’s just a moral choice at this point whether or not to use AI.
Just saying.
But yeah, I’m worried about it too. I made another forum topic similar, but there’s a kid in my DnD group who really wants this and I’m worried not only that it will affect future games for our current DM and the rest of us, but also I’m suppose to run my first one-shot at some point, and that would be the perfect time to use it! A friend on here recommended I not let him do it since I’m a new DM and all, but I can’t help but have mixed feelings.
I made a character and uploaded the character sheet to my AI. I'd been testing various level 5 Unarmed Fighting builds the last few weeks. I ran the Pugilist through the same scenarios and it destroyed all the scenarios that were balanced against barbarians and fighters.
I wouldn't recommend using AI, either in the general nor this specific case -- it doesn't (and cannot) understand the rules.
To clarify, it wasn't an automated process. I played my PC, it managed the NPCs. The prompt I use outlined the scene and I let it pick the opponents based on the scenario.
Also, some AI understand the rules very well. The model I use for this is GPT 5.2 (Thinking). It's understanding of the rules and strategy while managing the NPC was incredible. (It's the best at rules, but Claude is the best at story-telling.)
If anything, it’s just a moral choice at this point whether or not to use AI.
Just saying.
But yeah, I’m worried about it too. I made another forum topic similar, but there’s a kid in my DnD group who really wants this and I’m worried not only that it will affect future games for our current DM and the rest of us, but also I’m suppose to run my first one-shot at some point, and that would be the perfect time to use it! A friend on here recommended I not let him do it since I’m a new DM and all, but I can’t help but have mixed feelings.
I have no moral issues it. It's just a tool. It doesn't replace playing with humans... for me, anyway.
And, leaning back to the topic at hand, AI hasn't banned me from the Pugilist yet. ;)
I gave him wisdom 14. It doesn't really do anything as a perk, I don't think. I'm going to have him at a fighting ring in a mercenaries camp. I've got three players who are basically playing Battle Beast and Vegeta and want to fight EVERYONE one on one, for in character reasons. I also have a kid who runs a plasmoid monk who he thinks is invincible and who wants to fight everything.
I also used GPT 5.2 as a sounding board and it declared the pugilist "broken all to hell." It was where I got the line "it out barbarians barbarians and out monks monks."
I also used GPT 5.2 as a sounding board and it declared the pugilist "broken all to hell." It was where I got the line "it out barbarians barbarians and out monks monks."
It stole that from somebody else. You do know that ChatGPT doesn't actually say anything original, right? It just regurgitates.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
I also used GPT 5.2 as a sounding board and it declared the pugilist "broken all to hell." It was where I got the line "it out barbarians barbarians and out monks monks."
AI is a truly terrible system for evaluating content like this as it does not understand the "why" of something and can only spit out what others have said. D&D is far too complex and contains too many different variables for present AI models to accurately perform their own evaluations. In this case, it is correct, but that is because the data it drew upon happened to be correct, and it spat out that data. The why is important, since that is the meat of why this class is a severe disappointment and really needed more time in the editing room. Here, there are two specific issues at play - the intersection with Monk abilities and with Barbarian abilities.
For Monks, their core class identity is having the most hits and getting an additional resource pool that combines with those hits. Pugilist takes that core class identity and surpasses it - it gets the same number of hits as a monk, but its hits do more damage, and it gets a number of abilities it can spend and refresh easier than a Monk can. That means it, as a class, steps on the core identity of a Monk - which is both bad design and can feel bad for other players if you have someone who wanted the Monk archetype, and has to watch someone use a different class to live out the Monk power fantasy in a better manner.
Barbarian's core identity is being able to deal out significant damage while reducing their own damage through resistance to the most common damage types. Pugilist gets that second ability, and can do so with relative ease - even the penalty for using it multiple times is mitigated within the very same ability (which, itself, is a very useful ability conferred as a secondary to copying the Barbarian's core schtick). This creates the same problems listed for Monks above.
All told, this is one of the more poorly designed pieces of content presently on D&D Beyond - but that should be evaluated through actually reading the abilities and comparing them to existing content, not by asking what is effectively a glorified Magic 8-Ball.
I test bedded one at level 4. That thing is BROKEN. I'm considering not using them.
Not surprised. The playtesting in the PH by WOTC was not as robust as it should be, the official stuff released in even less playtest books gets worse, so a class by some indie who is selling in their marketplace I'd expect to be even further off the mark.
Agreed.
What feat and species did you go with?
Halfling for the fun of it. Sweet Science. Soldier background to get the strength boost. Rolled well and dumped everything into Strength (19) and Constitution (18). Level 4. In a turn he can land 3d8+12 damage. He can out barbarian barbarians and out monk monks.
I like the class, but I'm going to have to nerf it to make it fair.
Oh, and Tough feat. He's got like 55 hit points.
I made a character and uploaded the character sheet to my AI. I'd been testing various level 5 Unarmed Fighting builds the last few weeks. I ran the Pugilist through the same scenarios and it destroyed all the scenarios that were balanced against barbarians and fighters.
The issue I ran into wasn't that the damage was overwhelming (although it was better), it was the control mechanics. A pugilist can easily grapple and knock prone two enemies (rendering them completely useless and hampering their saves) and still combat a third enemy easily. If you take the Grapple feat at level 4 you can even drag your two prone enemies at full speed while chasing after a ranged attacker.
In one scenario the pugilist took on 5 similar leveled "bandits" easily, and only lost when I had 6 enemies (all similarly leveled to him) that included 2 ranged attackers AND the pugilist lost the initiative. Even then he'd killed 3 of them. I was using the Wrestler sub-class... Squared Circle.
Previously my most successful Unarmed Fighter was a Battle-Master 4/Barbarian 1 multiclass who could handle 4 like-tiered bandits but couldn't deal against 5.
Right now no DMs in my local store will allow this class.
I wouldn't recommend using AI, either in the general nor this specific case -- it doesn't (and cannot) understand the rules.
But, that said, do you have a control weapon fighter for your testing? I have no opinion on the Pugilist class (never read it), but the available options for unarmed fighters are, to the best of my knowledge, not all that good, and so the Pugilist being better than them doesn't mean all that much in terms of balance in the larger scope.
I would have gone gnome for the mental shortcomings. Then again, as I understand it, it sounds like they don’t really need dexterity at all outside of initiative boosts. Could/did you put anything into wisdom? Just curious.
As far as the simulations, I agree they aren’t the same as actual play, but it’s better than nothing. If anything, it’s just a moral choice at this point whether or not to use AI.
Just saying.
But yeah, I’m worried about it too. I made another forum topic similar, but there’s a kid in my DnD group who really wants this and I’m worried not only that it will affect future games for our current DM and the rest of us, but also I’m suppose to run my first one-shot at some point, and that would be the perfect time to use it! A friend on here recommended I not let him do it since I’m a new DM and all, but I can’t help but have mixed feelings.
To clarify, it wasn't an automated process. I played my PC, it managed the NPCs. The prompt I use outlined the scene and I let it pick the opponents based on the scenario.
Also, some AI understand the rules very well. The model I use for this is GPT 5.2 (Thinking). It's understanding of the rules and strategy while managing the NPC was incredible. (It's the best at rules, but Claude is the best at story-telling.)
I have no moral issues it. It's just a tool. It doesn't replace playing with humans... for me, anyway.
And, leaning back to the topic at hand, AI hasn't banned me from the Pugilist yet. ;)
I gave him wisdom 14. It doesn't really do anything as a perk, I don't think. I'm going to have him at a fighting ring in a mercenaries camp. I've got three players who are basically playing Battle Beast and Vegeta and want to fight EVERYONE one on one, for in character reasons. I also have a kid who runs a plasmoid monk who he thinks is invincible and who wants to fight everything.
I also used GPT 5.2 as a sounding board and it declared the pugilist "broken all to hell." It was where I got the line "it out barbarians barbarians and out monks monks."
It stole that from somebody else. You do know that ChatGPT doesn't actually say anything original, right? It just regurgitates.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
AI is a truly terrible system for evaluating content like this as it does not understand the "why" of something and can only spit out what others have said. D&D is far too complex and contains too many different variables for present AI models to accurately perform their own evaluations. In this case, it is correct, but that is because the data it drew upon happened to be correct, and it spat out that data. The why is important, since that is the meat of why this class is a severe disappointment and really needed more time in the editing room. Here, there are two specific issues at play - the intersection with Monk abilities and with Barbarian abilities.
For Monks, their core class identity is having the most hits and getting an additional resource pool that combines with those hits. Pugilist takes that core class identity and surpasses it - it gets the same number of hits as a monk, but its hits do more damage, and it gets a number of abilities it can spend and refresh easier than a Monk can. That means it, as a class, steps on the core identity of a Monk - which is both bad design and can feel bad for other players if you have someone who wanted the Monk archetype, and has to watch someone use a different class to live out the Monk power fantasy in a better manner.
Barbarian's core identity is being able to deal out significant damage while reducing their own damage through resistance to the most common damage types. Pugilist gets that second ability, and can do so with relative ease - even the penalty for using it multiple times is mitigated within the very same ability (which, itself, is a very useful ability conferred as a secondary to copying the Barbarian's core schtick). This creates the same problems listed for Monks above.
All told, this is one of the more poorly designed pieces of content presently on D&D Beyond - but that should be evaluated through actually reading the abilities and comparing them to existing content, not by asking what is effectively a glorified Magic 8-Ball.
It reminds me of the Fighter/Monk hybrid class from Pathfinder 1st Eddition.