Aug 16, 2022·edited Aug 16, 2022Liked by DragnaCarta
Really good article!
However, I'm surprised there are little mentions to the warlock, as it is seen by the optimization community as the DPR baseline or "warlock baseline", as presented by Treantmonk here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg0bAl1WPGQ .
Essentially, you calculate the dpr of a warlock casting hex + eldritch blast (with agonizing blast), applying the chance to hit and assuming the warlock will increase their charisma every ASI (so that they have a constant 60-65% chance to hit a generic enemy of the appropriate CR) and you obtain the baseline damage any character should do. The warlock does this with a no-brain effort, so any build that falls below this baseline without doing anything else of value is suboptimal
Glad you liked it! And very good point about the warlock - the main reason it's not included in this analysis is that I haven't had a chance to analyze a benchmark warlock for my Challenge Ratings 2.0 project. I'm hoping to get to them soon, though!
Keep in mind, this is not peak Warlock, this is warlock baseline. The point of this is to have an idea of what a character can do by spending as little resources as they can to do consistently decent damage. You can tell a level 9 warlock that's still concentrating and spending slots on Hex isn't optimal, the point is that if someone does the math for something else and finds out they're doing less than that (and not doing something in return), they should stop that strategy.
Oooh, I'm really looking forward to your Challenge Ratings 2.0 update! specially in regards to Agency (I read some of your comments on that) and Short Rests (I'm the one who wrote you about them on reddit hehe), which I guess are big talking points in regards to the Warlock, because there is a crazy difference between 2 Hypnotic Pattern per day vs 6.
Probably should have dropped my comments here instead of spamming your twitter.
In my playtest the easiest way to balance Martial vs Caster discrepancy is
* Shorten short rest to 5mins. (You mentioned this before and my playtest agree with you)
* Give all Fighters and Barbarians access to battle master style maneuvers(been using LaserLlama's alternative class series to test this)
* Make Ranger a prepared caster class and buff their spell list.
* Dump GWM and Sharpshooter. Replace it with a general game feature that you can subtract your proficiency bonus from the attack roll to add double that to the damage roll.
* Bonus feat a level 1 and every four character levels.
Does that fix everything? No. Monk and Rouge are still the odd mans out as they don't use spells and if there is a way to shove maneuvers into their base class I haven't seen it yet. But I think its the right track. Martials need a shared power system like casters have so roles are separated from classes and power can be added organically to martials over time. A shared system also allows players to choose how much complexity they want to deal with, instead of having that choice made for them the instant they pick a class.
Those are some interesting changes for sure! I'd definitely be curious to see how a "shared martial" system might work, though I think it'd be tricky to fit with half-casters, like rangers and paladins. Would you envision maneuvers as fulfilling this role?
The basic idea is that full martial(Fighters and Barbarians) get the 3rd level Battle Master subclass feature rolled into their base class. Everyone gets Battle Maneuvers. You can make this as complicated or simple as you want to. Some homebrews go into depth about which subclass can take which maneuvers, some just slap them on, some have "advanced" maneuver's with level restrictions and prerequisites.
Half-caster classes like Paladin and Ranger only get access to these maneuvers through certain subclasses. They already have access to spells so unless the subclass is specifically trying to evoke a more martial feel, the half-casters are mostly left as is.
Hybrid classes like Rouge/Monk present their own challenges. I have yet to see a homebrew try to give these classes battle maneuvers but I know many dms do. It appears those DMs just slap the Battle Masters class feature onto those classes.
The basic idea is that maneuvers let you allow martials to customize their role in the party. You can already do with with Battle Master. Some battle masters are built to be Warlords, some are built for pure dps, some are built to be defenders/tanks, etc. Maneuvers allow you to add options to all martial classes without limiting those options to a particular subclass.
One of the other benefits of maneuver's I have come to be impressed with is the way they let you add options to martials without making them MAD. Look at Menacing Attack. Since its a maneuver the DC is based on STR/DEX but it requires the target to make a WIS save and it inflicts fear. That's cool. Tactical Assessment lets you add the superiority dice roll to an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check. Suddenly playing the streetwise investigator archetype becomes possible without investing too much in INT.
I've added a number of hacks at my table to address this problem. I won't be going too deeply into each thing, so if you see nitpicks which don't make sense, it's because I'm not explaining everything, though if anyone would like to know more, I'll be happy to explain.
First, I accentuate the difference in hp between the martials and the casters, while making Constitution less of a god stat. To make it short, d6 classes get 3 hp/level, d8 6 hp/level, d10 9 hp/level, and d12 12 hp/level. This makes the squishiness of the caster classes, which tend to have lower hit dice, much more meaningful.
I also allow martials to spend a bonus action to mark (like Cavalier's Mark) a creature they've hit, with a save to resist, and I've added a bunch of feats that help martials draw more aggro.
In addition, spellcasters have extended casting times, as per the Slow spell, meaning that they have a round in which they are vulnerable and their spellcasting can be interrupted. This means that the ability of the frontline to protect them is enhanced, and gives them a stronger identity and role. Spellcasters also can only benefit from armor granted by their class or subclass, meaning they can't dip a level in fighter, and have just as high an AC as the fighter does.
Characters have vitality reserves, each one letting them heal a quarter of their hit points, and they can spend two as part of a healing surge, allowing them to manage their own healing and for the martials to be a lot more tanky when they need to be.
All of these together accentuate the party's need for tanks, and makes the role feel a lot more meaningful overall.
Those are definitely some fascinating changes. Curiously enough, you're not the only person who I've seen suggest extended casting times! Combined with the opportunity for tanks to feel like real tanks, I think it could really make for a more interesting and satisfying tactical combat.
Really good article!
However, I'm surprised there are little mentions to the warlock, as it is seen by the optimization community as the DPR baseline or "warlock baseline", as presented by Treantmonk here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg0bAl1WPGQ .
Essentially, you calculate the dpr of a warlock casting hex + eldritch blast (with agonizing blast), applying the chance to hit and assuming the warlock will increase their charisma every ASI (so that they have a constant 60-65% chance to hit a generic enemy of the appropriate CR) and you obtain the baseline damage any character should do. The warlock does this with a no-brain effort, so any build that falls below this baseline without doing anything else of value is suboptimal
Glad you liked it! And very good point about the warlock - the main reason it's not included in this analysis is that I haven't had a chance to analyze a benchmark warlock for my Challenge Ratings 2.0 project. I'm hoping to get to them soon, though!
Keep in mind, this is not peak Warlock, this is warlock baseline. The point of this is to have an idea of what a character can do by spending as little resources as they can to do consistently decent damage. You can tell a level 9 warlock that's still concentrating and spending slots on Hex isn't optimal, the point is that if someone does the math for something else and finds out they're doing less than that (and not doing something in return), they should stop that strategy.
Oooh, I'm really looking forward to your Challenge Ratings 2.0 update! specially in regards to Agency (I read some of your comments on that) and Short Rests (I'm the one who wrote you about them on reddit hehe), which I guess are big talking points in regards to the Warlock, because there is a crazy difference between 2 Hypnotic Pattern per day vs 6.
Probably should have dropped my comments here instead of spamming your twitter.
In my playtest the easiest way to balance Martial vs Caster discrepancy is
* Shorten short rest to 5mins. (You mentioned this before and my playtest agree with you)
* Give all Fighters and Barbarians access to battle master style maneuvers(been using LaserLlama's alternative class series to test this)
* Make Ranger a prepared caster class and buff their spell list.
* Dump GWM and Sharpshooter. Replace it with a general game feature that you can subtract your proficiency bonus from the attack roll to add double that to the damage roll.
* Bonus feat a level 1 and every four character levels.
Does that fix everything? No. Monk and Rouge are still the odd mans out as they don't use spells and if there is a way to shove maneuvers into their base class I haven't seen it yet. But I think its the right track. Martials need a shared power system like casters have so roles are separated from classes and power can be added organically to martials over time. A shared system also allows players to choose how much complexity they want to deal with, instead of having that choice made for them the instant they pick a class.
Those are some interesting changes for sure! I'd definitely be curious to see how a "shared martial" system might work, though I think it'd be tricky to fit with half-casters, like rangers and paladins. Would you envision maneuvers as fulfilling this role?
The basic idea is that full martial(Fighters and Barbarians) get the 3rd level Battle Master subclass feature rolled into their base class. Everyone gets Battle Maneuvers. You can make this as complicated or simple as you want to. Some homebrews go into depth about which subclass can take which maneuvers, some just slap them on, some have "advanced" maneuver's with level restrictions and prerequisites.
Half-caster classes like Paladin and Ranger only get access to these maneuvers through certain subclasses. They already have access to spells so unless the subclass is specifically trying to evoke a more martial feel, the half-casters are mostly left as is.
Hybrid classes like Rouge/Monk present their own challenges. I have yet to see a homebrew try to give these classes battle maneuvers but I know many dms do. It appears those DMs just slap the Battle Masters class feature onto those classes.
The basic idea is that maneuvers let you allow martials to customize their role in the party. You can already do with with Battle Master. Some battle masters are built to be Warlords, some are built for pure dps, some are built to be defenders/tanks, etc. Maneuvers allow you to add options to all martial classes without limiting those options to a particular subclass.
One of the other benefits of maneuver's I have come to be impressed with is the way they let you add options to martials without making them MAD. Look at Menacing Attack. Since its a maneuver the DC is based on STR/DEX but it requires the target to make a WIS save and it inflicts fear. That's cool. Tactical Assessment lets you add the superiority dice roll to an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check. Suddenly playing the streetwise investigator archetype becomes possible without investing too much in INT.
I've added a number of hacks at my table to address this problem. I won't be going too deeply into each thing, so if you see nitpicks which don't make sense, it's because I'm not explaining everything, though if anyone would like to know more, I'll be happy to explain.
First, I accentuate the difference in hp between the martials and the casters, while making Constitution less of a god stat. To make it short, d6 classes get 3 hp/level, d8 6 hp/level, d10 9 hp/level, and d12 12 hp/level. This makes the squishiness of the caster classes, which tend to have lower hit dice, much more meaningful.
I also allow martials to spend a bonus action to mark (like Cavalier's Mark) a creature they've hit, with a save to resist, and I've added a bunch of feats that help martials draw more aggro.
In addition, spellcasters have extended casting times, as per the Slow spell, meaning that they have a round in which they are vulnerable and their spellcasting can be interrupted. This means that the ability of the frontline to protect them is enhanced, and gives them a stronger identity and role. Spellcasters also can only benefit from armor granted by their class or subclass, meaning they can't dip a level in fighter, and have just as high an AC as the fighter does.
Characters have vitality reserves, each one letting them heal a quarter of their hit points, and they can spend two as part of a healing surge, allowing them to manage their own healing and for the martials to be a lot more tanky when they need to be.
All of these together accentuate the party's need for tanks, and makes the role feel a lot more meaningful overall.
Those are definitely some fascinating changes. Curiously enough, you're not the only person who I've seen suggest extended casting times! Combined with the opportunity for tanks to feel like real tanks, I think it could really make for a more interesting and satisfying tactical combat.
you lack the avoidance for tanks , how do you calcuylate HP ?
i don't get why monk is more than 1500 hp.
how do you calacultate DPR ?
on how many stats ?
from wich sources ?
why you don't include bonus check to group utility like paladin's aura in your calculation ?