In 5E the sword and board options is a little bit underwhelming due to feats like Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master ramping up damage to absurd levels. The trade off between uber damage and +2 AC is often not worth it.
From the DM PoV one can counter this to some extent by magic items as +1 shields are only an uncommon item while a flametongue weapon is a rare item but in the DMG you can add one of those into the game at level 5 or so. This helps keep damage for the PCs spread out a bit. I do not think it would be to much fun being a sword and board guy dealing 1d8+5 or 1d8+6 and then seeing a great weapon fighter deal 2d6+6+10+2d6 with a flametongue sword.
From the player side of things I have noticed that the difference between the weapon styles becomes less if you can add a dice of damage to the weapon somehow kind of like the 8th level cleric ability. This means hunters quarry or smite from the Ranger and Paladin classes or both as an avenging Paladin. The Shield Master feat is also decent as you can make a free shove shield bash as a bonus action which offers some tactical choices mostly while trying to knock opponents prone. That sets up advantage for you and any allies that can make a melee attack so the accuracy boost also helps you out in terms of damage. Just remember to be proficient in athletics (hint be a sailor).
Here are 3 ways where one can also add a bit of oomph to this style that are under the control of the player assuming feats and multiclassing are allowed. One of these is a theory craft build the other 2 I have seen in play and suggested tweaks to them.
The Bladelock.
The bladelock is the bladepact warlock focused on probably melee combat. I do not think this is a very good option with the warlock class but I have seen this multiclass build in action as a great weapon user but one could make a good sword and board PC out of it. Baiscally you start the game with a fighter level dip and then multiclass into the blade lock. This picks you up heavy armour, a weapon style, second wind and proficiency in constitution saves. It is more or less the holy grail fixing the problems the single classed bladelock has. After that you just take pure warlock levels. This gets you more damage via hex and Armour of Agathys is also more damage and damage mitigation. This build also gains some versatility from eldritch blast+ agonizing blast at range. I have seen this build in action and I like it a lot having versatility +spells+ decent hit points.
The Valor Bard.
I played the valor bard with the idea of being a shield basher with expertise and later enhance ability. The build does work but with the default array you are a bit squishy. If I had to do it again I would probably play a half elf or roll stats. With the default array I would multiclass with the 1 level fighter dip and have a decent strength, con and cha and take the +2 damage part with the duelist weapon style. Valor bards do not tend to deal much damage and it is a long wait to level 10 to steal some spells off the other classes so. With the default array just take a fighter level dip and by dip I mean start the game as a fighter.
The Thief Shield Basher.
There are 3 ways of building this. One way is doing a fighter level dip (fighter 1/thiefX) high dex and a moderate strength. The other way is having a high strength build and focusing on shield bashing as the thief has expertise in a skill at level 1. You gian +2 AC or more via the shield, use a rapier in one hand and go to town. When you knock someone prone you also gain advantage to hit them which matters on occasion as Rogues sometimes miss sneak attacks often on the 1st round due to winning initiative. The 3rd way of building this the Rogue levels are just a dip level on a primarily fighter chassis. The Rogue dip is just for expertise in athletics and you get an extra dice of damage via sneak attack vs prone targets. This is more of a theory build atm but the 1 level dip each way seems like a good idea.
Why is the trade off between damage and +2 AC not worth it?
+2 AC is pretty huge in this edition, ie, bumping yourself up from to 21AC at lower levels (using defensive fighting style) after you get plate will make you a very hard target to hit. Go EK or Abjurer Fighter/Wizard and getting the shield spell makes you very tanky, compared with an 18AC Great Weapon Master Fighter.
The game isn't all about damage. I've seen extremely tanky AC21 sword and board builds that have stood up to lots of punishment.
For the ultimate tank though you want to look at a Barbarian/Rogue with uncanny dodge. I've seen one of those (her name was Tinkerbell) run with a Battlemaster GMW fighter in the party, and she still did respectable damage, but could tank *way* more effectively. In fact in one battle involving a Maralith the GMW Fighter had to retreat while she stood fast.
Thoughts on Making Sword and Board Viable
DaveDash wrote:
The duelist, battlemaster with defensive duelist feat at mid to high levels is pretty cool. Great AC especially vs. 1 attack, and each attack does strength bonus +2, plus if you use a maneuver that adds to damage you can roll an additional d8, d10 or d12 (depending on level).
The damage potential will always fall somewhat short of the greatweapon fighter though, but the duelist battlemaster has more options and more utility (and definitely better AC).
Zardnaar wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
High AC enemies make power attacks useless, and if your only measure of "viable" is based on comparing to a power-attacking great weapon user, that might be the solution.
You don't need to have optimized DPR to be viable. Viability is not a particularly high bar.
Karnos wrote:
Karnos wrote:
There are no feats directly for a one-handed weapon. But if you compare a GWF fighter who takes no feats, a GWM fighter who takes his feat at level 4 (so not a variant), and a one-handed fighter who takes Sentinel at level 4 you get some interesting numbers. Taking the bonus action attack on a crit into account (and assuming the fighter isn't a Champion although it certainly makes GWM better) and assuming a round where the Sentinel duelist gets his extra attack...
What you get is a duelist whose damage holds up really well until the fighter gets his 4th attack at 20. At low levels the GWM fighter is weak as his hit chance is just too low and the duelist walks all over the other two if he gets his extra attack and is at 70% of the GWf if he doesn't.
By level 8 the GWM has caught up to the GWF (mostly because they both have 20 STR and the GWF guy in this example doesn't have a damage feat). The duelist is 25% ahead of the GWF and either equal to (at low AC) or far ahead (high AC) of the GWM. With no extra attack he's at 85% of the GWF.
By level 11 the GWM is either walking all over the GWF or equal to the GWF. He's only behind at AC levels the PCs likely won't be facing. The duelist is 15% ahead of the GWF and either modestly behind (low AC) or modestly ahead (high AC) the GWM.
At level 20 the GWM is far ahead of the GWF basically everywhere. He hits so often the -5 is only a penalty at AC levels well into the 20s. The duelist with sentinel active is only 7% ahead of the GWF so the GWM is also far ahead of he duelist.
For what it's worth, featless GWF fighting a duelist with defensive duelist (because in a 1v1 duel sentinel is useless) wins at lower levels but loses by level 8. Versus a GWM using the -5/+10 part of the feat the defensive duelist never loses assuming both have decent armor.
I'd consider homebrewing a sword and board feat that lets you a) Mark a foe 4e-style, b) shield bash as a bonus action, and c) defend another easily. Saves included.
Then, you'd have something that rivals the typical high damage fighter builds.
No one wants to sword and board at my table, though...
Seti, you can already do b and c with a PC taking protection and shield mastery. One work as a reaction and the other as a bonus action.
I just built a Hill Dwarf EK 6/Abjurer5.
- Started at Fighter 1.
- He has a truckton of hitpoints (117 HP), more effective hitpoints than a Fighter 11 due to Arcane Ward.
- 21AC. Plate, Shield, and Defensive Fighting Style. In tough fights you could boost this up to 28 AC with Haste and Shield.
- Dumped Str (Dwarf doesn't need it) and Cha, went Con 18, Dex 16, then Int 14 and Wis 14. Picked up resiliant (Wisdom). If your DM was anal about casting components then you'd swap that out for Warcaster and probably start with Wizard 1 instead (for Wisdom saving throw proficiency).
- Can do a reasonable amount of damage (much more than a Lore Bard/Blade lock due to action surge) at ranged or in close, and has a much better spell select than a pure EK.
- Has a bit of self healing with Arcane Ward recharge and Second Wind.
- You have 4/3/3/1 spell slots (better than pure EK) and I'd pick spells like: Shield, Misty Step, Blink, Mirror Image, Haste, Protection from Evil, Magic Weapon, Longstrider, Counterspell.
- Arcane recovery will give you back three shield spells per day. You could easily afford to cast shield in every fight per day.
- Get an Owl familiar to give you the help action. Advantage on your attack rolls (for as long as it lives at least). Or just get it to annoy the hell out of your enemies.
- Other ritual casting goodness.
To progress him (or her) you'd just keep going Abjurer all the way to level 14. That would give you some nice dispel/counterspell ability, a decent Arcane Ward that you can put on other party members, and resistance to all spell damage and advantage on all spell saving throws.
Pretty viable I reckon. I'd play him in a campaign for sure.
guachi wrote:
I think a change to protection style would boost sword and board quite a bit - change it so you can declare it's use after the attack has hit, rather than before. I've played a fair bit of protection style, and while it's good at first, if you use the optional flanking rules it becomes a real opportunity cost - flank or grant protection? Additionally, the protection aspect is less effective once you start meeting foes with 2 or more attacks. We tried it with the above mod and it works much much better (negates crits, for one!)
The thing about boosting AC in 5e is that with bounded accuracy, and flanking.... high AC never really gets THAT high. With flanking there is always a pretty good chance of being hit, even with 20-22 AC.... So... your own HP, and the damage you cause, become more important than attempting to tank (or in my experience at least).
So if you're keen on sword and board, I recommend duelist paladin with smite burst, or if going fighter, human duelist with savage attacks feat at level one (roll 2d8 once per round and pick the best for damage). So you should consistently get high dmg rolls at least, which will help you keep up with the big hitters, but then you can also pick up shield mastery for good dex saves and knock prones, and sentinel for further off turn reaction attacks, again creeping closer to GWF damage. Note sentinel doesnt work with another sentinel user, so if your GWF guy has it already, there is less utility in you also getting it. Depends on the overall party makeup.
FFSAA wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Waitaminute!
Didn't we just see a Zard post last week about how a Shield Master feat character that was going around knocking everything prone so all his allies could murderize 'em? That the whole crew's uber-combo hinged on that pivotal sword-n-boarder?
Now I'm cornfused...
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Sure... Thus my confusion as to why he suddenly thinks sword-n-board fails...
Every build has a weakness. All of them. So that can't be the key issue, can it?
ChrisCarlson wrote:
It's viable as-is. Which Zard knows as he was posting how awesome it can be just last week. He's just, as usual, stirring the pot for attention.
It's OK Zard, we'd love you even if you didn't intentinally stir the pot.
mellored wrote:
Caliburn wrote:
shpelley wrote:
mellored wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
mellored wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
In my haste to reply to him, I erred on placing the billion on the wrong side. Fixed above.
Serves me right for rushing to post...
Zardnaar wrote:
mellored wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
No. I thought you were wrong.
+1 billion
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
I have played a sword and board Battle Master fighter, and was often out-damaged by the Barbarian in the group (hmm, imagine that!).
However, I took less damage than her, basically all the time.
Overall, I think it evened out quite nicely. Thus, I don't think any mechanics need to be changed to make this a viable fighting style. The options you presented are interesting, but are by no means the best/only options for an effective sword and board combatant.
Either way...just my 2 cp
Brock_Landers wrote:
feartheminotaur wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Nah. I ran the numbers. The math says it would take me 1.13766 billion years to believe it. So I was right.
Zardnaar wrote:
57% of all statistics are made up.
Brock_Landers wrote: