Hey everyone; resident math person here.
Another thread got me thinking about the Champion Fighter again. I had already crunched the numbers on a simple Battlemaster, so it wasn't hard to adjust them for a Champion. What I found was interesting.
So, as many of us already assumed, the Champion is a bit behind the Battlemaster. How far behind? Well, I compared their average damage per round, in the way the DMG's CR calculator has you compare them. I assumed 6 encounters per day and 2 short rests per day, so 2 encounters per short rest. Thus, short rest abiities were divided by 2 to determine how much damage they'd contribute each encounter, and then divided by 3 because the CR calculator uses 3 rounds of damage (with misses, this means combat could last 3 to 6 rounds, or so). So, how far behind was the Champion?
About 3 points of damage. Pretty much across the board. Sure, it varies a little ... 2 at levels 4 through 6, 4 at 10, 2 at 15 through 20 ... actually, it averages to 2.55 (so rounds to 3). This is of concern from levels 3 to 9, when the Champion is identical to the Battleaster. But at leve 10 and above, it's not an issue at all. Why's that? Well, that's when the Champion gets a second fighting style. So what? Well, since I was going for simplicity, and most playes tend to specialize, there was only one fighting style that would help a GWFer (the base choice I made): Defense. So the Champion gets +1 AC at level 10.
In the CR calculator, +1 AC is a +1/2 CR boost to the creature's defensive CR. Since total CR is average of defensive CR and offensive CR, it's simple enough to equate it to a +1 to hit. Each level of a monster gets +6 damage, so 1/2 a CR boost is +3 damage, or about the amount the Champion is behind.
Now, I argue that few people will feel a 3 damage difference, but it's going to come up in the math over a period of time. I'd still like to see something for our poor level 3 to 9 Champion who is a bit behind the BM. But it might not be that bad. This math was done with 3 round combats. In those three rounds, the BM is dealing 9 more damage than the Champion, if they hit with all of their attacks. And use 2 of their superiority dice every encounter for damage. It's a difference, but it's a small one. It's equivalent to a +1 bonus to hit, which would be something, but it's not the end of the world.
I was thinking about giving them something small, like a +1 damage bonus. It would bring them closer in line, and once level 5 came around they'd be exactly balanced. But then the Champion would be a bit ahead at level 10 (effectively +1 damage), further at 11 (effectively 2 ahead), more at 15 (3 ahead), and more so at 20 (5 ahead). I don't want to balance it by completely reversing the imbalance. If I'm going to nit-pick about 2 to 4 damage, I'm not going to swing it 7 points around and make it worse in the other direction.
If crits were x2 damage, like I'm growing to think they should be, this whole thing might correct itself (not quite at 3rd level, but it helps a little).
I wasn't aware that it was supposed to be balanced to the other fighter archetypes, I thought it was just the Fighter for the Basic rules and people that don't want a more complex game.
mellored wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
Every campaign is different so objective tested comparisons are meeningless. This isn't an MMO where all options need to be rigorously compared for perfect symetry. All that really matters is whether or not a build pulls off what it is trying to be without breaking the game.
Wild mages, for example, are far weaker than the better-defenses/more-damage/less-inclined-to-drop-fireballs-on-the-party draconic bloodline. But every wild mage I have seen loves playing them and doesn't care. By that measure the Champion, as a non-complicated straight forward guy who hits things works.
Any table of experienced players doesn't have anything to prove to each other by picking the best options, and a table of less experienced players probably won't notice, so who really cares how balanced two entirely functionable builds works in a vacuum?
I do not find the Champion weak so much as lacking agency.
arnwolf666 wrote:
Lady_Auralla wrote:
Math ==>
Half Orc, 20 STR, great weapon fighting style, great weapon master, greatsword, level 20, 65% base accuracy
Battlemaster
5% crit for 4d6+5+10+1d6 = 1.79125
35% normal for 2d6+5+10 = 8.1655
60% miss
damage = 39.827 * 7/6 + 18d12/36 = 49.7145
Champion
15% crit for 4d6+5+10+1d6 = 5.37375
25% normal for 2d6+5+10 = 5.8325
60% miss
damage = 44.825 * 7/6 = 52.2958
The assumption is 2 short rests and 36 rounds in an average day because it's realistic and it let's 7/6 qualify as an easy coefficient to represent the action surges (13/12 for 1 action surge per short rest). As you can see, the higher crit range gives us more damage before additional dice that might qualify are added and before even considering the higher number of extra attacks the champion will provide throughout the day (3 times as many bonus attacks for a rough idea how much more the bonus attacks will add up).
Battlemasters control damage flow better and surge better but are not necessarily beating champions in average damage. They tend to be close if 2 combat encounters take place per short rest and behind champions if 3 combat encounters take place per short rest, give or take as a general rule. Champions have better skill benefits, an additional fighting style, and survivor to make up for the weaker burst and controlled damage so they seem to be balanced fairly well to one another in my experience.
Unless I'm tired and my math is off. ;)
The increased crit range of the champion keeps them relevant. Keep in mind that this is not just an increase to damage alone, but also gives them a minimum 15% chance to hit since all critical hits are successful hits.
They are what they are: basic, easy-to-play fighters that excel at hurting things.
They are behind, but not far behind.
My main beef is that crit's pretty much say "use a 2-hander", which leaves the sword&board champions out in the cold.
mellored wrote:
We have a champion in our group. Everytime someone else rolls a natural 19 on their attack roll, he chirps in with, "I would have crit on that." Or somesuch. I think it's funny.
He's not lacking. He's not weak. He enjoys his character and does well. Interestingly enough, he's not playing his character in a white room, so that might be part of it.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
what?
mellored wrote:
Thanks for the quick math Ashrym. So they're pretty dang close damage wise, which is good to see. I'm more and more surprised by how balanced 5E is turning out to be.
But, I'm going to have to retract my previous "they're balanced" statement and once again start seeking something out for them. They're balanced on damage. If you take "defense" as their second style, they gain a tiny lead in defense. But the battlemaster has conditions that they get to inflict, and the champion gets none. Lady_Auralla keeps pointing out the Champion's lack of agency; it's one of the only subclasses that doesn't get to say when they use their subclass abilities (unless you're going to say that saying "I attack" is using a class ability). At least in comparison to the other fighters, the champion is lacking in that department. They do get some nice utility with their half-proficiency to non-proficient physical checks, but they don't have any ability at throwing out different effects in combat without giving up their damage (give up an attack for a trip, for instance); the battlemaster gets to add a free trip (just citing a simple example) on as many as 18 attacks each day (and when we're looking at a system that seems to assume 3 rounds of damage for CR and 6 encounters per day, that's pretty nearly every round). Maybe if the basic maneuver system were beefed up anymore, champions would like to have a free trip/push/grapple style maneuver each round? Just a shot in the dark.
As for the decrying of white room playtesting, I (obviously) disagree that there's no merit to it. I've seen several players who inadvertantly built underperforming characters (one a weapon-finesse using two-weapon fighting ranger who simply couldn't deal damage next to the party's two-handed weapon wielding barbarian, another was a monk, and another was a bard, all back in 3E), and as much as they liked their characters, they had less fun playing since they couldn't contribute as much as the other characters. Ever since then, it's been something I've tried to avoid, mostly by retooling systems with house rules. I prefer to avoid "necessary choices" (like 4E's Weapon Expertise feats), to shore up weak choices (TWFing in 3E), and all manner of other house rules for my table (like manditory point buy, no ability score rolling).
I clearly differ from some people on these boards. That's fine. People may be having fun playing Champions. As a DM and a Player, when I look at it, especially side by side with the Battlemaster, I think it looks boring. So I test it in a casual test, find it's damage doesn't lack, and identify areas where it is lacking. That's how I do things. Maybe others will appreciate it when I share it.
There's nothing wrong with champions. As usual, focusing on averages does not tell the whole story. The champion's abilities are "always on". You never know when you might wreck a combat with a string of 18+ crits. His crit & athelete abilities dont care about short or long rests. There is a qualitative aspect to this that cant be adequately accounted for in an averaging process.
The battlemaster's resources on the other hand are short rest limited.
Xeviat-DM wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
Lady_Auralla wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
A Champion rolling a 19 or 20 will always crit. For a bunch of the Battlemaster’s maneuvers, they can spend a superiority dice and still come away without the intended effect, since monsters get to make checks against things like trip and disarm. And as the Champion progresses, getting an additional fighting style is no small thing.
In the hands of a smart player, I don’t think any class/path is going to be worse off.
But...
Controlling the bonus damage is definitely a perk. Average damage just isn't the same thing as deciding to use superiority dice or the better maneuvers available to a battlemaster. There are still some considerations, however. The champion is there for those who want it and not those who don't; I don't think every subclass is meant to cater to every player and a person plays what he or she enjoys. If that's the battlemaster more than the fighter then play the battlemaster. Champions do have decision points in combat with targets, movement, and cover; or standard attack replacement actions; or the nova ability all fighters have in choosing to use the action surge; or use an item etc al -- less active options isn't no active options. The constant DPR metrics tossed around the forums isn't the only calcuable metric available. Champions do better on damage to loss ratios by taking the AC bonus as a second fighting style and while survivor is active.
The half-orc Barbarian/Champion builds that many people go for are quite powerful, and definitely hold their own with any straight battlemaster or barbarian/battlemaster build's I've seen.
I think this is the one Herman the Wise posted. It might not be the perfect build for this, but it gets the job done:
Half-Orc Champion Fighter 11 / Totem Warrior Barbarian 9
This is a build I'm tihnking of trying
Cool end game benefits of this is.
Barbarian Side:
4 Rages
Half Damage On Rages(Bear Totem)
+3 Damge A hit while raging
Fast Movement
2 Extra Damge Die on crit(1 from Half-Orc and 1 from Barbarian 9)
Unarmored Defense
Advantage On Inititive.
Advantage on Dex Saving Throws
Reckless Attack
.....etc.
Fighter Side:
Crit Range 19-20
Great Weapon Fighting Style
3 attacks.
Action Surge
Additonal Fighting Style at level 10
Half-Proficency on Inititive rolls
One Saving Throw Reroll per long rest
Pared With Great Weapon Master Feat.
This build has some serious potential. VERY VERY TANKY and some really nice damage.
Maybe the champion should be given the old 2E Weapom Specialization.
arnwolf666 wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
I would put aditional fighting style at lvl 7 together with athlete and give aditional action surge at lvl10 for champions.
that should be more than enough.
It's worth noting that Champions get an initiative bonus. Since few combats end right at the bottom of a round, that means that a Champion will end up taking more turns over the course his adventuring career, which increases his damage output.
This initiative realization (not limited to Champions) hit me a little while ago, and I wonder why it never really occured to me before.
Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
My only beef with the initiative boost is it's buried so deep in the class - later than any other class' modification to Initiative. That's it, though - it's great otherwise.
For the record, the only ways I know of to improve initiative without directly pumping Dexterity (including if you're already at 20 Dex) or the use of a timed-duration magical effect (which includes things like Wild Shape) are:
- The Alert feat - +5 (but requires feats)
- Bard's Jack of All Trades - half proficiency
- Barbarian's Feral Instincts - advantage
- Champion Fighter's Remarkable Athlete - half proficiency
- Swashbuckler Rogue's Toujours l'Audace - +Charisma (likely to see change)
- A minor weapon quality whose name escapes me - +2
...That's not exactly a big list. And I think we all appreciate what the base Fighter provides on top of this.
(That said, I do like the suggestions others have made about giving champions a bonus-action shove or grapple at some level. It conflicts slightly with Shield Master, but a tweak here can also give that feat advantage for champions.)
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
I like the champion as is.
It's meant to be uncomplicated, not perfectly balanced.
Yup. Lots of people love a simple option. You have to decide when to use your limited resources and may not use them optimally every time. Further if you are doing 26 damage but your enemies have 20hp both classes will perform just as well. It's only the damage on that last hit that matters really. The number of occasions where the differential actually leads to a monster dying a round earlier are not going to be that great.
The champion is right where it needs to be. If you have a problem with the champion, it means it was not made for you. Thats why we have two other subclasses and barbarians and pallys if your looking for something else. Champions are not weak, they are made for the guy that just wants to attack,attack, and attack. Wizards has stataed this from the beginning.
masterfat78 wrote:
IMO, i'd incrase the hit die to d12. Or just leave it as is, since it's close enough.
If you want to worry about under powered class, look at the beastmaster.
Horwath wrote:
mellored wrote:
Lady_Auralla wrote:
Slyck314 wrote:
Slyck314 wrote:
Champion is (marginally) weaker as determined by the DMG guidlines.
Bloodscythe wrote:
masterfat78 wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
GladiusLegis wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote: