Fighter Math

[RobbyPants]

Sounds good!

[bkdubs123]

So, now having considered a lot of basic Fighter math, I think what I'm going to do is build a basic warrior class that deals enough damage to drop an "average bruiser" of equivalent CR in two hits and gains class feature to ensure that he is able to compete with the "average tricks" of beatsticks of equivalent level. In a few words, the class will hit really hard and have a limited but generally effective toolbox built to summarily deal with monsters in the SRD.

So HERE are the fruits of me labors, so far. The Bladelord is a work in progress and deserves a better name.

[Andras]

An effective 10th level Fighter should be dealing roughly 60-100 damage per round. This means that a Half-Orc Warblade dealing 9d6+18 damage per round against a single target (min 27, max 72) is SORELY inadequate.

An effective 15th level Fighter should be dealing something like 100-150 damage per round. Unfortunately, a Warblade dealing even 18d6+27 damage per round against a single target (min 45, max 135) is a bit behind the curve.

An effective 20th level Fighter should be dealing something like 150-300 damage per round. Using Diamond Nightmare Blade a Warblade can deal this kind of damage, and Strike of Perfect Clarity is barely dealing minimum appropriate damage per round, but all other maneuvers at this level are not even close.

[...]

Does it have to be a fighter?

My Rogue is easily doing this much and more damage. I keep track of his best damage in a round, and he hit 189 points w sneak and 143pts w/o sneak dice, he just hit 15th level so those are from 14th or earlier. (Dwarf Rogue 11/Ftr 4 w 2 large Waraxes*, oversized 2w fight, melee weapon mastery, str 24)

[*using the sizing enhancement and strongarm bracers]

In a previous campaign my high level Barbarian was easily doing over 250 a round by 18th (200+ damage on a single charge attack), and IIRC he did well over 400pts to a dragon in one round.

[Kormoran]

AFAI Remember...

an Ogre Barbarian - Frenzied Berserker with a greataxe and "minimum" magical items were able to hit 50hp damage (mid-low value) PER ATTACK... around ECL 12-14 and doing 3-5 attks/rnd... well ABOVE OT numbers.

A "normal" fighter 14th+2 Exotic Weapon Master, 20str., using "only" 7 feats  (of his 12)  (GreaterFocus + GreaterSpecialization + WeaponMastery + Ambidexterity + TwoWeaponFightingx3) with a +3/+3 double blade of speed effect (nothing overpowered) can dish out =
+30/+28/+28/+22/+22/+17/+17/+12 with damage: 1d8+14 main hand / +11 offhand = minimum 111hp maximum 167hp so in the window 100-150 as stated by OT.

The matter of a melee vs. a magic user is always the same: at high level wizards do almost everything and it's REALLY difficult for a fighter reaching them at close combat range... but if ever it happens, rarely a squishy wizard can sustain full damage attack by a fighter.

[bkdubs123]

Does it have to be a fighter?

My Rogue is easily doing this much and more damage. I keep track of his best damage in a round, and he hit 189 points w sneak and 143pts w/o sneak dice, he just hit 15th level so those are from 14th or earlier. (Dwarf Rogue 11/Ftr 4 w 2 large Waraxes*, oversized 2w fight, melee weapon mastery, str 24)

[*using the sizing enhancement and strongarm bracers]

In a previous campaign my high level Barbarian was easily doing over 250 a round by 18th (200+ damage on a single charge attack), and IIRC he did well over 400pts to a dragon in one round.

Certainly it doesn't have to be a Fighter.

The numbers I'm talking about though should be average damage per round, not maximum, and shouldn't require a specific build type to do either. I know that a blender Rogue with a wand of Wraithstrike can do it with relative ease and an uber-charge Barbarian can shatter these numbers, but again those are specific builds.

an Ogre Barbarian - Frenzied Berserker with a greataxe and "minimum" magical items were able to hit 50hp damage (mid-low value) PER ATTACK... around ECL 12-14 and doing 3-5 attks/rnd... well ABOVE OT numbers.

And again this is a very specific build. The idea would be an average Fighter dealing average damage, if his job is to kill stuff in roughly 2 rounds, should be dealing the kind of damage I showed in the original post.

A "normal" fighter 14th+2 Exotic Weapon Master, 20str., using "only" 7 feats  (of his 12)  (GreaterFocus + GreaterSpecialization + WeaponMastery + Ambidexterity + TwoWeaponFightingx3) with a +3/+3 double blade of speed effect (nothing overpowered) can dish out =
+30/+28/+28/+22/+22/+17/+17/+12 with damage: 1d8+14 main hand / +11 offhand = minimum 111hp maximum 167hp so in the window 100-150 as stated by OT.

This is true, but 1) that Fighter doesn't necessarily have the attack bonus to hit CR 15 foes (and certainly not with all of those attacks) and 2) a Warblade doesn't even do enough damage, but at least he's much more mobile then the Exotic Weapon Master who's trying to stand there and full attack every round.

The matter of a melee vs. a magic user is always the same: at high level wizards do almost everything and it's REALLY difficult for a fighter reaching them at close combat range... but if ever it happens, rarely a squishy wizard can sustain full damage attack by a fighter.

Also, remember, this fight is strictly NOT about the gap between melee and magic users. It's just an exploration. Most people probably wouldn't even agree with the idea that a Fighter's job is kill stuff in 2 rounds. But, running with that premise, this idea is seeking to show how much damage such a Fighter would need to deal.

If anyone has any ideas on how to change combat rules, or Fighter feats, or other things to make any average warrior type more able to, not simply deal that kind of damage, but also actually reach and hit his foes. I think now would be time to brainstorm toward that effort. We know how much damage needs to be done, now we need to get a sword & board Fighter dealing that kind of damage and against brutes throughout the levels.

[Kormoran]

I know that the need of a full round action hampers badly mobility, but granted a "normal" availability of magic, better than a speed weapon is something with haste spell on command: this will allow a full attack + a move action.

Remaining on heavy multi attack, surely not all attacks will hit, but at CR15 I do not remember a lot of AC above 35 (dragon @ 30-35AC are Old with a CR in the 16-20 window). Vs. AC35 previously noted routine will mean as a mid value, a hit chance of 75%/65%/65%/40%/40%/15%/15%/5% so around 3-4 hit/round... nothing exceptional, but still 60hp/round as a mid value.

A caster can go far over this number... IF pierce SR and IF target fails SR. As a fighter need to HIT, the same goes for a wizard with SR, ST and sometime touch attack. A wizard can easily cast up to 3 spell / round (standard + hasted standard + quickened spell) but draining badly his resouces when a fighter will do the same numbers over and over and over. To everyone, his talents and flaws.

Going further to max number "single hit", do not forget Overpowering Attack @16th in place of the bonus feat.
Coupled with Monkey Grip (using a sigle max BAB attack rarely you'll miss even with -2 malus) Defensive sweep and may be combat reflexes for some more AoO... against a single foe who does not move you can do 2 full BAB atts doing double damage with both using a 2-hander 1 size larger than you...
Numerical example: large greatsword 3d6.
Granted a mid use of Power Attack -5/+10 & @ 16th Str.22 means +6 with spec/g.spec/mastery another +6 and then +4 magical bonus (nothing OP) = 3d6+26 x2 = 70-75 per hit x2 hits... all of this with around Att. +25. Nothing exceptional, but easily buffable.

Side note: 50+ damage per hit means too a ST for massive damage.

[bkdubs123]

I know that the need of a full round action hampers badly mobility, but granted a "normal" availability of magic, better than a speed weapon is something with haste spell on command: this will allow a full attack + a move action.

That just isn't true. Haste. [/eyebrow]

Remaining on heavy multi attack, surely not all attacks will hit, but at CR15 I do not remember a lot of AC above 35 (dragon @ 30-35AC are Old with a CR in the 16-20 window). Vs. AC35 previously noted routine will mean as a mid value, a hit chance of 75%/65%/65%/40%/40%/15%/15%/5% so around 3-4 hit/round... nothing exceptional, but still 60hp/round as a mid value.

But even if you go with just an AC of 30 you're still using full attack actions to deal exorbitantly less damage than the average warrior-type "should" be dealing per round if he wants to kill things in 2 rounds. Which is what the whole thread is about.

A caster can go far over this number... IF pierce SR and IF target fails SR. As a fighter need to HIT, the same goes for a wizard with SR, ST and sometime touch attack. A wizard can easily cast up to 3 spell / round (standard + hasted standard + quickened spell) but draining badly his resouces when a fighter will do the same numbers over and over and over. To everyone, his talents and flaws.

As the original post states this thread is NOT about whether or not a Wizard is better at killing stuff in 2 rounds than a Fighter. The Wizard is. Everyone at BG should know that. This thread IS about showing the kind of damage an average Fighter "should" be capable of dealing if we accept that his job is to kill brute monsters in 2 rounds. You don't have to accept that premise. I don't know if I do. But that's what this thread is about exploring.

Going further to max number "single hit", do not forget Overpowering Attack @16th in place of the bonus feat.

Still a full round action.

Coupled with Monkey Grip (using a sigle max BAB attack rarely you'll miss even with -2 malus) Defensive sweep and may be combat reflexes for some more AoO... against a single foe who does not move you can do 2 full BAB atts doing double damage with both using a 2-hander 1 size larger than you...
Numerical example: large greatsword 3d6.
Granted a mid use of Power Attack -5/+10 & @ 16th Str.22 means +6 with spec/g.spec/mastery another +6 and then +4 magical bonus (nothing OP) = 3d6+26 x2 = 70-75 per hit x2 hits... all of this with around Att. +25. Nothing exceptional, but easily buffable.

An interesting thought, but hardly your "average" Fighter build. I do like it though.

Side note: 50+ damage per hit means too a ST for massive damage.

A rule I've seen go thoroughly ignored by all DMs ever. At 15th level there isn't a single monster in the SRD or Monster Manual that won't succeed on that saving throw on everything but a 1. And since a proper Fighter should trigger that kind of damage on every single hit all that would do is mean that every hit carries a 1 in 20 chance to auto-kill the target. Since a "proper Fighter" should kill the target in 2~4 hits anyway that seems to be a very moot point to me.

[Kormoran]

Indeed I do not remember where I got a second standard action... too much time I did not play.

On "Killing in 2 rounds"... A Wizard is capable? Surely... if pierce SR and usually beat ST. Necrotic Termination is something of most damaging spell (die or damage, no SR) but it has noted limit... the cyst. Anyway it deals at minimum caster level 17th 17d6 = 60hp as a mid value. With Greater Metamagic Rod (Maximise)... 102hp, and I'd not consider a such an "average build".
A "standard" Meteor Swarm could do (granted 4 ranged attacks) 8d6 + 24d6 with ST to halve = 112hp w/o any save till a minimum of 42hp (no hit & all saved) - SR aside.

Moreover. Is it really his job to kill stuff in 2 rounds?

Note the fighter build... indeed it was born around a "tanking" (sorry for MMORPG term) fighter, using longsword (or large with Monkey Grip), Tower Shield w/plate armor, Overpowering Blow + Defensive Sweep + Active Shield Defense & fighting defensively.
It worked nicely blocking a passage even 3 square wide, with enormous AC (with expertise hit above AC30 without any magical bonus. With improved expertise and reasonable magical items... far more) and doing AoO with dmgx2.
Create 2 fighter like this... and the could protect (and hurt) an area 9 meters wide against plenty of melee attackers.

[LordBlades]

On "Killing in 2 rounds"... A Wizard is capable? Surely... if pierce SR and usually beat ST. Necrotic Termination is something of most damaging spell (die or damage, no SR) but it has noted limit... the cyst. Anyway it deals at minimum caster level 17th 17d6 = 60hp as a mid value. With Greater Metamagic Rod (Maximise)... 102hp, and I'd not consider a such an "average build".
A "standard" Meteor Swarm could do (granted 4 ranged attacks) 8d6 + 24d6 with ST to halve = 112hp w/o any save till a minimum of 42hp (no hit & all saved) - SR aside.

A wizard doesn't kill in 2 rounds by casting damage spells (even optimized damage casters, which are usually sorcs fall behind optimized battlefiled control casters). A wizard 'kills' stuff by using save or die/suck effects(many monsters have a pretty big chance of failing saves vs optimized DCs on their weakest saves and for all intents and purposes a stunned/paralyzed/petrified/etc monster is dead) or, at higher levels no save just suck effects (for the most simplistic example, consider casting Forcecage on something without teleportation).

Also, between the amount of good no SR spells and the amount of ways to bypass SR, it's largely a non-issue.

[Kormoran]

Question 1.
pretty good chance of beating ST it's not an assurance.
If the target (let's say an heavy damage dealer) saves and close range (or he's a ranged damage dealer, an archer?)... the caster risks seriously to die (a Wiz/Sor 20th even with a nice Con 16 has more or less 90hp).

Question 2.
Forcecage... yes nice... to run away: it's not exactly a fight winning spell... especially granted that a damn disintegrate is sufficient to break it.
If you use the closed wall version, you cannot do anything to the target.
If you use the barred version, he has plenty ways to slip out.

As far as I remember, one single balance breaking (especially in 1v1 situations) is Death by Thorns (BoVD) granted that even on save, incapacitate the target.
But indeed it's a Corrupt Spell... I'd dare to say it'll be really rare to see.

More in general... I'd say that if "monsters have pretty big chance of failing saves vs optimized DCs on their weakest saves", the caster needs to be quite specialized.
Granted the enormous options in D&D, every player with a bare minumum of experience can create a build + gear and an "action sequence" granting almost 100% success vs. a choosen enemy. But it's completely situational.

[veekie]

Question 1.
pretty good chance of beating ST it's not an assurance.
If the target (let's say an heavy damage dealer) saves and close range (or he's a ranged damage dealer, an archer?)... the caster risks seriously to die (a Wiz/Sor 20th even with a nice Con 16 has more or less 90hp).

The problem. Look at the damage output. To begin with, the 'tank' isn't going to survive that either. To follow up, its also why a good number of casters open/precede fights with buffs like Invisibility, Blur, Mirror Image, Blink and stuff like that. Most of those last long enough that if you expect a fight in the near future putting it up wouldn't be unwise.
This tends to happen as soon as the slots can be spared. Conjurors can also get Abrupt Jaunt and fast summons to use a straight no-sell ability or an alternative target, respectively.

Question 2.
Forcecage... yes nice... to run away: it's not exactly a fight winning spell... especially granted that a damn disintegrate is sufficient to break it.
If you use the closed wall version, you cannot do anything to the target.
If you use the barred version, he has plenty ways to slip out.

Yes, a single disintegrate destroys it....how many monsters have it, that you would want to encase them? Brute types are removed by the closed cage, you deal with them at your leisure later, and against caster types the action they spent disintegrating the cage or teleporting out is an action they aren't using to tear you a new one.

As far as I remember, one single balance breaking (especially in 1v1 situations) is Death by Thorns (BoVD) granted that even on save, incapacitate the target.
But indeed it's a Corrupt Spell... I'd dare to say it'll be really rare to see.

Try better spells like Solid Fog(no teleportation? Too bad, enjoy being sidelined from the fight for the next two rounds while they pound you from outside the fog with AoEs), Holy Word/Blasphemy. Or Shivering Touch(save half? who cares, halving the dex damage still takes out 80% of monsters). Thats taking a direct conflict approach, going around the problem is available via invisibility, illusions, teleportation, divination, Calling spells etc.

More in general... I'd say that if "monsters have pretty big chance of failing saves vs optimized DCs on their weakest saves", the caster needs to be quite specialized.
Granted the enormous options in D&D, every player with a bare minumum of experience can create a build + gear and an "action sequence" granting almost 100% success vs. a choosen enemy. But it's completely situational.

Situational...no either.
All you really need is to put your highest stat in your casting. If you're an arcane caster, this means you can afford to ditch Str and either Cha or Int completely, so getting a starting 18 isn't difficult. Then you put your stat increases from level into it. Then you throw in a +X Enhancement to the same. Then you grab Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus(which is not a problem, because most spell schools allow you to target a variety of saves, and the bonus applies generally). You already have a high enough DC to get 70-80% failure chance if you target the monster's weakest save(which you should be managing on everything but outsiders). Thats basic spellcasting optimization, you hadn't even touched hijinks.
So the caster's "situational" win is the "situation" where they have an applicable spell from their favorite school. This is easily 100% of situations, unless you're playing an immunizable type of caster like an Enchanter(and even then you can dominate NPCs and critters to deal with the problems you can't) and Necromancers(see above, but replace with animate zombies).

[bkdubs123]

Indeed I do not remember where I got a second standard action... too much time I did not play.

On "Killing in 2 rounds"... A Wizard is capable? Surely... if pierce SR and usually beat ST. Necrotic Termination is something of most damaging spell (die or damage, no SR) but it has noted limit... the cyst. Anyway it deals at minimum caster level 17th 17d6 = 60hp as a mid value. With Greater Metamagic Rod (Maximise)... 102hp, and I'd not consider a such an "average build".
A "standard" Meteor Swarm could do (granted 4 ranged attacks) 8d6 + 24d6 with ST to halve = 112hp w/o any save till a minimum of 42hp (no hit & all saved) - SR aside.

Moreover. Is it really his job to kill stuff in 2 rounds?

Why are we still talking about Wizards? The thread is Fighter Math. We're here to discuss the Fighter's job, whether or not he's any good at performing his job, and what sort of numbers and tools he might need to be better at his job. As far as this thread is concerned the Wizard need not exist.