It doesnt take away from your point that great weapon fighting is bad, but i got a 1.4 damage diference with my own math (still got 15 without, but 16.4 with). Again not a huge deal but 0.6 felt wrong so i had to check. Great video! (Edit: spelling)
@samuelkalkman9388 yup, looks right. I double checked my stuff and there is an error on my side. My code uses the dice for crits but doesn't use the flat modifiers. Because I used a flat number for the dice it didn't pick up the crits Long story short it's 1.4 and that isn't actually that bad. Thanks for double checking me. I'll pin this comment.
Oh also best case I have found for great weapon fighting is on a champion with great weapon master and a 2d6 weapon. Without GWF:2×(0.65×(7+4+3)+0.1×7) +(1−0.9×0.9)×(0.65×(7 +4)+0.1×7)=21.0915 With:2×(0.65×(8+4+3)+0.1×8) +(1−0.9×0.9)×(0.65×(8 +4)+0.1×8)=22.6105 For those keeping track at home that's a whopping 1.519 dpr! Edit: spelling
Huh? I'm still trying to find out 1:41 where he is getting the modifiers from? Is this something he did with Barbarian. In addition to that, you don't play this game with averages. You refer to the min/max. Averages mean zilch unless you are rolling percentiles.
The buffs to the devensive duelist should probably increase the durability of the fighter by a ton. While rapier and shield is a really powerful tank, the shortsword and scimitar two weapon fighter could have both realy good damage and good durability with both the dual wielder and defensive duelist feats.
Nah, what just happens is that every DM switches to monsters that only use non-attack-roll damage to compensate for players like you who cannot stand the idea of not having broken feats to make them invincible.
@@strawbellebelle can't help but notice this is the third comment of "nobody wants to play with players like this". Just consider that there are tables for every type of player from high optimization to low optimization. Look at how many views people like D4 Deep Dive get, there is clearly an audience for it who enjoy that kind of thing and probably wouldn't mind it in their games. Every DM has the right to decide what kind of things fit in their game, so if that's not what works at your table it's totally fine.
Yea I always had wisdom saves just floating around in my builds, but never did anything with them. They are super important, but I wasn't sure where to add them in. Now I just put them in their own category and hopefully it'll help people see where some classes fail.
@@strawbellebelle that's not what they said. Not wanting to fail saving throws is a pretty typical thing. I dunno any player who WANTS to get hit with Hold Person for a whole fight.
@@strawbellebelle Man, martials are easier to frighten than wizard. That's all you need to fucking know. Martials are already weakest classes - so them having something is fine, lmao.
@@strawbellebelleAs a DM myself, please shut up. You're making mountains out of molehills, as well as interpreting that sentence so incorrectly from what he actually said, and throwing our lot in like every DM is gonna back you up. Don't do that again.
@@chrisg8989 so that's a good point. I should have mentioned it but essentially I was using Second Wind outside of combat in the build because we were using PAM for our bonus actions. But of course you could definitely give up some damage potential to heal yourself during combat too (and get some disengages).
I really like that you give a numerical value to the control and durability aspects of the character. Too many players put too much value on raw damage output. If you could also find ways to show the mobility capacities in combat, that could give as an even better picture. But great work!
Thanks! Glad you are enjoying seeing the other dimensions of characters besides damage. Mobility is probably one that is kind of intuitive for most classes, but could be a super interesting one to see too.
I love your approach to analysis; it's hard to try to objectively quantify some of these things, but I think that it's much better to try, than to just ignore it entirely.
Great video! I disagree with your interpretation of Tactical Master. I am reposting some analysis I made elsewhere. TLDR: Tactical Master does allow you to choose between Graze or Push/Sap/Slow after the attack roll. The feature says "when", not "before", you "make an attack". It is concurrent with an attack. It also does not specify "when you make an attack roll" (attack roll is defined on page 12 of the new PHB). The section "Making an Attack" (on page 25 of the new PHB) breaks down and attack into three steps. The language states: MAKING AN ATTACK When you take the Attack action, you make an attack. Some other actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions also let you make an attack. Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure: 1: Choose a Target.. . . 2: Determine Modifiers. . . 3: Resolve the Attack. Make the attack roll, as detailed earlier in this chapter. On a hit, you roll damage unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage. They did not say “before” or “when you make an attack roll” or "before you hit or miss" like they do with other features. So, “when you make an attack” includes choosing a target, determining modifiers, and resolving the attack. Thus, you can decide which WM to use at any stage of the attack, including when you are resolving the attack or rolling damage or applying "special effects" (which includes Weapon Mastery effects and by extension, Tactical Master). I assume they wrote it like this because different WM have different triggers. There are other indications that this was the intent of the designers. For example, Tactical Master allows the Cleave extra attack to Push/Sap/Slow, so allowing it to work with Graze is not unprecedented). I assume they specified that the WM is replaced for the attack so we knew that you had to make the same choice on later attacks. Furthermore, as you pointed out, the feature does not do much if the decision has to be made before the attack roll. What do you think?
I like that interpretation better personally and I could definitely see good arguments for it. Reckless Attack says when you make your first "attack roll" so that specifies before attack but this one doesn't. I hope your interpretation is true! Thanks for sharing
Important Action Surge Note: It's meaningfully worse when actually doing TWF than when attacking with Heavy Weapons, because it Nick is once per turn, so it doesn't apply on your Action Surge.
@@lucasramey6427 Nick did not exist in 2014. Action Surge being bad for TWF is true in both, but TWF has gotten a lot better in most ways, so the fact that it hasn't here is worth a note.
@@DeadmanwalkingXII mean regardless of nick existing or not both two weapon fighting and nick are a once per round thing anyways they're not getting benefitted by an additional action that's exclusive for your attack action
@@DndUnoptimized Yeah, this is where I was going with the comment originally. Action Surge is notably better if you're using a Great Weapon build than if you're doing TWF. It's certainly still good with TWF, but when comparing the two builds, it's an advantage to the Great Weapon build and one worth bearing in mind.
One point for Tactical Mastery; this is really good if you're mounted and using a Lance. Lances are a big build-around weapon; both GWM and Dueling will be active when you use it properly. The Topple effect is probably the strongest in the game, but you can only knock a target Prone once. Once you knock them down, hopefully on the first hit, you would then be able to Slow and Push them. That guy ain't moving.
New charger feat deserves a mention too, especially once the fighter gets easy access to Push for level 9 and beyond and can reliably get it every turn. It’s a decent bump, probably 3rd in priority for damage for most melee builds.
I think tactical master is better than you give it credit for. Especially at range. Acess to push without the crossbow feats is really good, and sap at range is great support and impossible without that feature.
Yea that is a fair argument. I think in practice it'll probably be pretty helpful. Ranged weapons as you said, and slow is a good mastery, but not a lot of good weapons have it, and I'm sure there are a bunch of situations like that.
@@DndUnoptimized i also think it's unrealistic to expect a really powerful feature at the same level you already get indomitable lol. I like tactical master alot, but even without it 9th level is super strong, so tactical master is exactly as strong as it should be for level 9 imo.
RE mental saves: 1) Paladions can also be mentally durable. 2) Gnome Eldritch knight is my pick for 2024 fighter of the year. ( 3 lvl dip for thief rogue, 1 lvl dip for wizard by lvl 10) Then you are a 3rd level caster, and can use magic items limited to wizards... you can also bonus action use your say, wand of fireballs, then action attack with a cantrip and a weapon... plus you have good skills, Dex 14... and absorb elements, defensive deulist and warcaster... now your aC is amazing and by lvl 12 you can grab Resilient Wisdom...
Nice breakdown! Random thing about Interception: it can be really good when used in combination with damage resistance or a rogue's Uncanny Dodge. I got crit by the *same* cultist (I forgot the exact stat block) FOUR times in an encounter, but I'd use Uncanny Dodge and they'd use Interception and barely stayed alive. Definitely strange how strong it seems at low levels and how useless it seems at high levels. 2024 Protection seems much better.
Four times by the same cultist?! They really had it out for you. I'll have to look up the order, but wouldn't the interception damage come off before uncanny dodge? But depending on the order it'll ether make it better or worse.
Excellent work. I would ahve liked more specifics: do a ranged build, a GWM build, a APM build, a 2 weapon fighting build... really be exhaustive... then apply subclasses...
29:00 question, are you factoring in your reaction/opportunity attacks with pole arm master when calculating cpr? Or maybe you can grab sentinel and the push mastery, instead of a con asi boost. I remembered these tactics from your weapon mastery video where you mentioned these options for the weapon masteries, and thinking how strong or useful they would be to protect a party.
Super good questions. For the OAs, I am doing topple on all those. As for those great combos, yes we would definitely increase our CPR with those and you have a ton of potential. It just ends up becoming more and more niche and less general. For these "Stereotypical" builds I'll try to make them as ... Boring as possible? You can build something that deals way more damage or does much more control than these builds. I think if we do a video on 'how much control can you possibly do as a fighter?" it'll look much different and take advantage of all that stuff.
Polearm master reaction attack isn't an opportunity attack but it is still good to incorporate stuff like prone for them same with sentinel's revenge attack
I want to do new builds but it'll probably be after I've done this series since I've committed to it. Glad you enjoy the zany things I create though! Anything in particular you want to see?
There is a fundamental issue with Interception and Protection (and WotC's apparent aversion to group tactics, martials and tanking, really), imo. Movement. If you to shield your allies, you have to stay very close to them, which means you're not in the fight unless they're in melee with... And if they need protection because their AC is low, melee is exactly where they *shouldn't* be xD And the more allies are within Interception or Orotection range, the higher a grenade magnet you are. I wish those options were LoS instead of distance based...
Line of sight protection would be pretty crazy! Personally I don't mind being close to the person you are defending because it feels like you are the mother Hen and they have to stay close to survive, which is the feeling I want while playing a tank. "Stay with me if you want to live!"
@@DndUnoptimized absolutely, but if you're doing fighter things and your backline is raided, you won't be mothering no wizards xD And if your wizards want to be mothered, they'll have to be much closer to the melee than they might be comfortable with.
Elf fighter with double bladed scimitar is looking well pretty good guaranteed damage with great weapon fighting turning anything below a 3 into a 3 on a die if you wanted to spec defense you could go the route of revenant blade-> defensive duelist-> heavy armor master however if you want to boost your damage you could replace h.a.m. with great weapon master, definitely at some point you should pick up elven Accuracy depending on your subclass choice to determine how early you pick it up (samurai you know) however at later levels there's a built in advantage on next attack after missing feature so you'd get good use out of the feat, champion got some good touch ups so that'd be a subclass you invest later with elven Accuracy, eldritch knight is good simple as, can't go wrong with spell extra attack
Additionally I should note while they didn't give double bladed scimitar a weapon mastery there's nothing stopping you from just giving it cleave or something
Echo Knight is the best fighter in the game, so mix that in with new fighter base class and it'll be really dang good. When I get to subclasses, I won't be reviewing the old ones because it'll be too much work, but I have no doubt Echo Knight is still the strongest.
The way to optimize 2014 damage was not just to use GWM/SS by itself, but to pair it with advantage or say archery/bless and then additional feats (Elven accuracy). If you run these calculations with advantage you will see 2014 takes a huge bump in effectiveness. Yes, I know you need external factors (unless you are a samurai) but this was the way.
Yes that is very true. Those boosts to accuracy will also help with 2024 GWM, but at low levels 2014 will out-power 2024, especially since it only works on the attack action.
OTOH the simple fact that you don't need to build towards +hit so hard to take advantage of those feats is really nice (for example you won't be harassing your poor cleric to cast bless every combat, even if it's still a fantastic use of concentration)
It is silly, but it ALSO seems to be rules as written and as intended. So it isn't surprising to me that players are coming to that conclusion. It also isn't surprising that many DMs will ban it or limit it in many ways because it feels bad.
@@DndUnoptimized RAW, yes, but about RAI, I am not sure. In an exception-based system like DnD, it is hard to predict all the implications of rules. So I guess the designer has not foressen the consequences of these rules, in the case of this design team, that is nothing new. On the other hand, there are DnD players whose greatest fun is to find such loopholes. As long as they have fun and I do not have to DM for them, all is good. BTW considering the name of your channel, you are talking a lot about numbers.
@@kallebuchholz2156 It kind of silly, but i really love it tbh. It gives martial some level of turn per turn descision making - they don't have many of those, so might as well use it. I really want to make Figter 1/Element Monk X gunk with Heavy Crossbow (Push) + Musket (Slow) - change between two weapons and use BA elemental unarmed strikes for tons of enemy movement. You don't even need CBE or Gunner for this - just use each weapon once per attack action.
Can a Champion fighter with 3 fighting styles (Dueling, Two WF, and Thrown WF) juggle 2 light thrown weapons in one hand and get all +2 +2 +Ability Mod? 😂
Dueling was already used for thrown weapons before the fighting style even existed so yeah you can have a +4 to damage as long as you're only ever holding one weapon before making an attack
Yup! I'll definitely get to them all. Ranger is next then we will do a vote on what people want to see after that. I hope to do the martials first then casters
I may be alone in this but I have a problem with the way Nick interacts with Dual Wielder. The whole point of the Dual Wielder feat is to add additional options to your Two Weapon Fighting. You can do a dex build with Rapier and Short Sword for example for swashbuckling fun; you can also do a Str build with Longsword and Short sword (and live out your Samurai fantasy wielding Katana and Wakizashi). There are many possible combos there. The problem is that Nick is mathematically the best version of TWF if it gains a second extra attack from Nick with the Dual Wielder feat. To paraphrase Treantmonk, if one style of fighting is superior to the others, it becomes the only used style of TWF fighting. As a result, Dual Wielder does not add additional TWF options. It reduces your options to one. The only people who will choose the other options are (1) those that consciously decide to use an inferior style because of their play narrative or (2) those that are unaware that Nick + Dual Wielder is the mathematically superior playstyle. And if those unaware people are playing alongside someone using Nick, this could potentially ruin their D&D experience. It feels bad to be less good than other players due to ignorance. Nick is meant to be used to free up the Bonus Action for other things such as casting/moving your Hunter's Mark, or Tactical Mind/Second Wind, or Smite spells, etc. In this way it frees up options and that's the way Nick should be used. With no Dual Wielder extra attack for Nick, Longsword/short sword does more damage but you give up the freedom to cast smite or hunter's mark. So, in my games I am not going to allow this interaction between Dual Wielder and Nick. I view this as bad design.
I see what you are saying. I think it's still worthwhile to Nick without DW. Especially think of a rogue. Additional attacks are extremely important but give diminishing results. With two attacks you are very likely to land a sneak attack, but increasing it to three doesn't give that much more chance. So you could all but guarantee a sneak attack if you end up going DW, but having that cunning action is probably more important. Anyone else that has a consistent use of BAs can benefit from it but probably don't want DW. Like Paladins, Rangers, Rune Knights, Valor Bard, etc.
Yeah, I have a buddy who is a ranger/psi rogue combo who does a first attack with a light weapon, stowing it, picking up nick with a second, then a psi dagger attack with his second attack and a bonus psi dagger attack. He's deadly with it and absolutely doesn't need dual wielder.
The blind fighting isn't actually that good since you can just get blind sight from a bat familiar with your ba every turn since the new find familiar spell doesn't make you blind or deaf when you share senses with your familiar
So you like Blind sight but you don't like the investment of a fighting style to get it is what you are saying? I suppose fighters can pick up find familiar with their lvl 1 feat and do that instead. Honestly, I kind of hate it when familiars are used like that though (or things like generate advantage every turn). But it is a fair point. Thanks for sharing.
Just because it comes up in this video and I think it's a piece of (potential) misinformation that has been spreading throughout the 5e community due to poor wording choices: I'm fairly certain that this so-called weapon-juggling is not possiible. The way the draw/stow clause is written for the attack action implies that you can only do so once per action, but at any attack that is part of that action (because you're using the free object interaction that you only have once per your turn and needs to be taken with either movement or action, during combat). Specifically, it uses the wording "one weapon", not "a weapon". The difference between these words seems insignificant, but in this case it is very much not. Of course, it is kind of debatable, due to the poor language WotC has been showing off since 5e, but I think in this case the difference between 'one' and 'a' is important. :)
Interesting! I haven't seen an argument that weapon juggling isn't actually allowed RAW. In D&D's own video about weapon masteries, they specifically give an example of stowing one weapon and drawing a new weapon for extra attack. So I think it is intended to allow juggling (and I think it is RAW too), but I'm all for DMs banning it partially or in entirety because they don't like it. Thanks for sharing that argument though!
by definition dual wielding means using two weapons with one weapon in each hand at the same time, any other interpretation is malicious misinterpretation
True, I can see that argument for Dual Wielder because it's in the flavour text, but what about Two Weapon Fighting? It is still two even if you are using the same hand. Also I'm totally fine with not allowing that interaction. I think it's silly.
You are Lvl 5 Fighter with Dual Wielder feat, TWF, Nick and Vex masteries and a Scimitar (light and nick) and a shortsword (light and vex). SO LETS GO: First turn: Attack Action - d6 Vex Weapon - light + mod Extra Attack from Attack Action - (Advantage) - d6 Vex weapon - light + mod Nick extra attack - (Advantage) - d6 Nick Weapon - light + mod Bonus Action Attack from DW feat - d6 Vex Weapon - light (+ mod JC recent rulling) second turn: Attack Action - (Advantage) - d6 Vex weapon - light + mod... Light property + TWF + Dual Wielder feat + Nick mastery = lvl 5 fighter = 2 weapons one nick and another non-nick but light= 3 attacks with your action, one must be from the Nick weapon, and a bonus action attack from DW feat, that adding your mod to the damage due to TWF that states that all off-hand attacks get mod damage
Gets a bit of a boost if you take Eldritch knight and war caster because at level 7 you can replace one attack with a cantrip probably not the strongest build but very fun if you want to go the gish route
@@DndUnoptimized I think in the 2024 rules it actually holds its own ,I think that most tables are going to ban conjure minor elementals , so while the valor bard gets its blade singer extra attack a level earlier that Eldritch knight the EK gets normal extra attack before the valor bard gets it second attack. Even though not a full caster I think it's the gish with the highest skill potential because of the extra feats a fighter gets especially if you go human to get the second origin feat.
Any player who tries to do "weapon juggling" will be banned from my game. The player. Because that kind of munchkin sheit destroys the verisimilitude of the game for everybody, for your personal selfish min-maxing. That makes you a toxic player, and I don't want that at my table. You all can do it how you want. Your fun is not wrong. But if you try to pull weapon juggling without your game table agreeing they don't care how stupid and unrealistic it is, you may be in for some consequences for being a selfish, toxic powergamer.
Yeah juggling a single weapon back and forth in your hands is a grave misuse of wording just have a second weapon(although I wouldn't go as far as banning someone I'd just make it clear not to do that and if they blatantly ignore me it's their consequences)
Since it is RAW, probably just give a heads up that it isn't allowed at your tables and hopefully you'll be fine. I don't think it breaks the game, but I can see people not liking the idea of it.
It doesnt take away from your point that great weapon fighting is bad, but i got a 1.4 damage diference with my own math (still got 15 without, but 16.4 with). Again not a huge deal but 0.6 felt wrong so i had to check. Great video!
(Edit: spelling)
Thanks for checking that. Would you mind sharing the math you did for it?
@@DndUnoptimized of course!
Without: 2(0.65(7+4)+0.05(7))=15
With: 2(0.65(8+4)+0.05(8))=16.4
@samuelkalkman9388 yup, looks right. I double checked my stuff and there is an error on my side. My code uses the dice for crits but doesn't use the flat modifiers. Because I used a flat number for the dice it didn't pick up the crits
Long story short it's 1.4 and that isn't actually that bad. Thanks for double checking me. I'll pin this comment.
Oh also best case I have found for great weapon fighting is on a champion with great weapon master and a 2d6 weapon.
Without GWF:2×(0.65×(7+4+3)+0.1×7)
+(1−0.9×0.9)×(0.65×(7
+4)+0.1×7)=21.0915
With:2×(0.65×(8+4+3)+0.1×8)
+(1−0.9×0.9)×(0.65×(8
+4)+0.1×8)=22.6105
For those keeping track at home that's a whopping 1.519 dpr!
Edit: spelling
Huh? I'm still trying to find out 1:41 where he is getting the modifiers from? Is this something he did with Barbarian. In addition to that, you don't play this game with averages. You refer to the min/max. Averages mean zilch unless you are rolling percentiles.
15:58 depends, a Dex fighter can't use push, Sap or Slow because those masteries are in Str based weapons
That's a fair point too. People here are changing my mind on tactical master
@@DndUnoptimized now that I think better, push + ranged weapon is like a warlock's repelling blast
The buffs to the devensive duelist should probably increase the durability of the fighter by a ton.
While rapier and shield is a really powerful tank, the shortsword and scimitar two weapon fighter could have both realy good damage and good durability with both the dual wielder and defensive duelist feats.
Yup, very true! Defensive duelist is a huge feat. Mix it with battle master bait and switch and you have CRAZY high AC
Devensive duelist and dual wielder are my two favorite feats for fighters, It will be hard to decide which to take first when I build. .
Nah, what just happens is that every DM switches to monsters that only use non-attack-roll damage to compensate for players like you who cannot stand the idea of not having broken feats to make them invincible.
@@strawbellebelle can't help but notice this is the third comment of "nobody wants to play with players like this". Just consider that there are tables for every type of player from high optimization to low optimization. Look at how many views people like D4 Deep Dive get, there is clearly an audience for it who enjoy that kind of thing and probably wouldn't mind it in their games.
Every DM has the right to decide what kind of things fit in their game, so if that's not what works at your table it's totally fine.
Ooooo you added mental resistance? This is the first 5.5e one I've watched. Love the addition!
Yea I always had wisdom saves just floating around in my builds, but never did anything with them. They are super important, but I wasn't sure where to add them in. Now I just put them in their own category and hopefully it'll help people see where some classes fail.
The Fighter’s new Indomitable is my favorite feature in the game. I never want to fail a saving throw again.
It's so good!
No DM ever wants to play with someone like you at their table who gets outraged by the idea of their PC not being invincible at everything.
@@strawbellebelle that's not what they said. Not wanting to fail saving throws is a pretty typical thing. I dunno any player who WANTS to get hit with Hold Person for a whole fight.
@@strawbellebelle Man, martials are easier to frighten than wizard. That's all you need to fucking know. Martials are already weakest classes - so them having something is fine, lmao.
@@strawbellebelleAs a DM myself, please shut up. You're making mountains out of molehills, as well as interpreting that sentence so incorrectly from what he actually said, and throwing our lot in like every DM is gonna back you up. Don't do that again.
I think Interception is better on low lvls, and Protection is mandatory since lvl 9. But now you swap you FS whenever you gain a lvl
Oh shoot! You are right thanks!
Thanks, great content. There’s a lot to sort out in 5.5 and I’m happy to add your channel to my go-to optimization resources
Thanks for the kind words! ❤️
Really appreciate the circle graph at the end to directly compare different classes
Thanks! There are some neat visualization tools out there so I thought that might be a fun one to look at
@29:15, you forgot to include 2 uses of Second Wind. That healing would increase durability for sure.
@@chrisg8989 so that's a good point. I should have mentioned it but essentially I was using Second Wind outside of combat in the build because we were using PAM for our bonus actions. But of course you could definitely give up some damage potential to heal yourself during combat too (and get some disengages).
I really like your channel, breakdowns, and approach. So rare to find someone who does actual math.
Thanks! Glad I'm not the only one here who enjoys it!
I really like that you give a numerical value to the control and durability aspects of the character. Too many players put too much value on raw damage output. If you could also find ways to show the mobility capacities in combat, that could give as an even better picture.
But great work!
Thanks! Glad you are enjoying seeing the other dimensions of characters besides damage.
Mobility is probably one that is kind of intuitive for most classes, but could be a super interesting one to see too.
I have already gotten in the habit of calling the latest revision 5.24 & the revision released in 2014 5.14, but YMMV, so enjoy.
5.24 can work, and might be the best option if we get another big revision. I don't mind it honestly, but I think 5.5 sounds nicer
I love your approach to analysis; it's hard to try to objectively quantify some of these things, but I think that it's much better to try, than to just ignore it entirely.
Thanks! Yea none of these things will be perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but they give a rough idea. Glad you enjoyed!
Great video! I disagree with your interpretation of Tactical Master. I am reposting some analysis I made elsewhere. TLDR: Tactical Master does allow you to choose between Graze or Push/Sap/Slow after the attack roll.
The feature says "when", not "before", you "make an attack". It is concurrent with an attack. It also does not specify "when you make an attack roll" (attack roll is defined on page 12 of the new PHB). The section "Making an Attack" (on page 25 of the new PHB) breaks down and attack into three steps. The language states:
MAKING AN ATTACK
When you take the Attack action, you make an attack. Some other actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions also let you make an attack. Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure:
1: Choose a Target.. . .
2: Determine Modifiers. . .
3: Resolve the Attack. Make the attack roll, as detailed earlier in this chapter. On a hit, you roll damage unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage.
They did not say “before” or “when you make an attack roll” or "before you hit or miss" like they do with other features. So, “when you make an attack” includes choosing a target, determining modifiers, and resolving the attack. Thus, you can decide which WM to use at any stage of the attack, including when you are resolving the attack or rolling damage or applying "special effects" (which includes Weapon Mastery effects and by extension, Tactical Master).
I assume they wrote it like this because different WM have different triggers. There are other indications that this was the intent of the designers. For example, Tactical Master allows the Cleave extra attack to Push/Sap/Slow, so allowing it to work with Graze is not unprecedented). I assume they specified that the WM is replaced for the attack so we knew that you had to make the same choice on later attacks. Furthermore, as you pointed out, the feature does not do much if the decision has to be made before the attack roll.
What do you think?
I like that interpretation better personally and I could definitely see good arguments for it. Reckless Attack says when you make your first "attack roll" so that specifies before attack but this one doesn't.
I hope your interpretation is true! Thanks for sharing
@@DndUnoptimized That is my thought too! WotC is very specific in other areas, so I think it is reasonable.
Great video.
I like the details. Keep it this complex please 😊
Thanks! I'll try to strike that balance of complexity and accessibility.
love your approach!
Thanks!
Important Action Surge Note: It's meaningfully worse when actually doing TWF than when attacking with Heavy Weapons, because it Nick is once per turn, so it doesn't apply on your Action Surge.
Absolutely no change then from 2014, that was already how it worked
@@lucasramey6427 Nick did not exist in 2014. Action Surge being bad for TWF is true in both, but TWF has gotten a lot better in most ways, so the fact that it hasn't here is worth a note.
@@DeadmanwalkingXII mean regardless of nick existing or not both two weapon fighting and nick are a once per round thing anyways they're not getting benefitted by an additional action that's exclusive for your attack action
That's true because you can only Nick once and only get one BA. Meanwhile 2HW still does great because you get the GWM bonus on your action surge too
@@DndUnoptimized Yeah, this is where I was going with the comment originally. Action Surge is notably better if you're using a Great Weapon build than if you're doing TWF. It's certainly still good with TWF, but when comparing the two builds, it's an advantage to the Great Weapon build and one worth bearing in mind.
One point for Tactical Mastery; this is really good if you're mounted and using a Lance.
Lances are a big build-around weapon; both GWM and Dueling will be active when you use it properly. The Topple effect is probably the strongest in the game, but you can only knock a target Prone once.
Once you knock them down, hopefully on the first hit, you would then be able to Slow and Push them. That guy ain't moving.
That's a great point!
New charger feat deserves a mention too, especially once the fighter gets easy access to Push for level 9 and beyond and can reliably get it every turn. It’s a decent bump, probably 3rd in priority for damage for most melee builds.
@@zSavageWolves yea charger is a good one too!
@@zSavageWolves Great weapon master with a great sword + charger, you miss, get grace, you hit, get push
I think tactical master is better than you give it credit for. Especially at range. Acess to push without the crossbow feats is really good, and sap at range is great support and impossible without that feature.
Yea that is a fair argument. I think in practice it'll probably be pretty helpful. Ranged weapons as you said, and slow is a good mastery, but not a lot of good weapons have it, and I'm sure there are a bunch of situations like that.
@@DndUnoptimized i also think it's unrealistic to expect a really powerful feature at the same level you already get indomitable lol.
I like tactical master alot, but even without it 9th level is super strong, so tactical master is exactly as strong as it should be for level 9 imo.
RE mental saves: 1) Paladions can also be mentally durable. 2) Gnome Eldritch knight is my pick for 2024 fighter of the year. ( 3 lvl dip for thief rogue, 1 lvl dip for wizard by lvl 10)
Then you are a 3rd level caster, and can use magic items limited to wizards... you can also bonus action use your say, wand of fireballs, then action attack with a cantrip and a weapon... plus you have good skills, Dex 14... and absorb elements, defensive deulist and warcaster... now your aC is amazing and by lvl 12 you can grab Resilient Wisdom...
Yea, Thief is pretty dang good now if you've got some decent magic items!
Nice breakdown!
Random thing about Interception: it can be really good when used in combination with damage resistance or a rogue's Uncanny Dodge. I got crit by the *same* cultist (I forgot the exact stat block) FOUR times in an encounter, but I'd use Uncanny Dodge and they'd use Interception and barely stayed alive. Definitely strange how strong it seems at low levels and how useless it seems at high levels. 2024 Protection seems much better.
Four times by the same cultist?! They really had it out for you.
I'll have to look up the order, but wouldn't the interception damage come off before uncanny dodge? But depending on the order it'll ether make it better or worse.
Excellent work. I would ahve liked more specifics: do a ranged build, a GWM build, a APM build, a 2 weapon fighting build... really be exhaustive... then apply subclasses...
That's a lot of iterations. Wish I had the time to do that all!
29:00 question, are you factoring in your reaction/opportunity attacks with pole arm master when calculating cpr? Or maybe you can grab sentinel and the push mastery, instead of a con asi boost.
I remembered these tactics from your weapon mastery video where you mentioned these options for the weapon masteries, and thinking how strong or useful they would be to protect a party.
Super good questions. For the OAs, I am doing topple on all those. As for those great combos, yes we would definitely increase our CPR with those and you have a ton of potential. It just ends up becoming more and more niche and less general. For these "Stereotypical" builds I'll try to make them as ... Boring as possible? You can build something that deals way more damage or does much more control than these builds.
I think if we do a video on 'how much control can you possibly do as a fighter?" it'll look much different and take advantage of all that stuff.
Polearm master reaction attack isn't an opportunity attack but it is still good to incorporate stuff like prone for them same with sentinel's revenge attack
@@lucasramey6427 very true. It's a "reaction attack" not an Opportunity Attack. Doesn't make much difference normally, but important distinction.
I'm so excited to see new goofy builds, do you have any in the works yet?
I want to do new builds but it'll probably be after I've done this series since I've committed to it. Glad you enjoy the zany things I create though!
Anything in particular you want to see?
There is a fundamental issue with Interception and Protection (and WotC's apparent aversion to group tactics, martials and tanking, really), imo.
Movement.
If you to shield your allies, you have to stay very close to them, which means you're not in the fight unless they're in melee with... And if they need protection because their AC is low, melee is exactly where they *shouldn't* be xD
And the more allies are within Interception or Orotection range, the higher a grenade magnet you are.
I wish those options were LoS instead of distance based...
Line of sight protection would be pretty crazy! Personally I don't mind being close to the person you are defending because it feels like you are the mother Hen and they have to stay close to survive, which is the feeling I want while playing a tank. "Stay with me if you want to live!"
@@DndUnoptimized absolutely, but if you're doing fighter things and your backline is raided, you won't be mothering no wizards xD
And if your wizards want to be mothered, they'll have to be much closer to the melee than they might be comfortable with.
@@talscorner3696 true enough!
Elf fighter with double bladed scimitar is looking well pretty good guaranteed damage with great weapon fighting turning anything below a 3 into a 3 on a die if you wanted to spec defense you could go the route of revenant blade-> defensive duelist-> heavy armor master however if you want to boost your damage you could replace h.a.m. with great weapon master, definitely at some point you should pick up elven Accuracy depending on your subclass choice to determine how early you pick it up (samurai you know) however at later levels there's a built in advantage on next attack after missing feature so you'd get good use out of the feat, champion got some good touch ups so that'd be a subclass you invest later with elven Accuracy, eldritch knight is good simple as, can't go wrong with spell extra attack
Additionally I should note while they didn't give double bladed scimitar a weapon mastery there's nothing stopping you from just giving it cleave or something
Yea sounds like a good combo!
Would like to see how well the Echo Knight does with all the 2024 changes in comparison to the base line stats.
Echo Knight is the best fighter in the game, so mix that in with new fighter base class and it'll be really dang good. When I get to subclasses, I won't be reviewing the old ones because it'll be too much work, but I have no doubt Echo Knight is still the strongest.
Will you be doing a build series for all chars including sub classes? Would be really helpful...
I'm planning on a doing this analysis on all classes and subclasses.
But do you mean a full optimized build for each subclass?
Tactical Master is not only great for magic weapon users but also for a fighter who has lost their equipment or has a spell cast on their weapon.
Sure, that might make sense if you have your weapon "heat metal"ed you can still use that mastery perhaps.
@@DndUnoptimized or something as simple as the light cantrip being on your weapon
The way to optimize 2014 damage was not just to use GWM/SS by itself, but to pair it with advantage or say archery/bless and then additional feats (Elven accuracy). If you run these calculations with advantage you will see 2014 takes a huge bump in effectiveness. Yes, I know you need external factors (unless you are a samurai) but this was the way.
Yes that is very true. Those boosts to accuracy will also help with 2024 GWM, but at low levels 2014 will out-power 2024, especially since it only works on the attack action.
OTOH the simple fact that you don't need to build towards +hit so hard to take advantage of those feats is really nice (for example you won't be harassing your poor cleric to cast bless every combat, even if it's still a fantastic use of concentration)
There are tables on which weapon juggling is not allowed. (my, for example). And there, the Tactical Master is worth a lot.
Yea that makes a lot of sense for sure.
@@DndUnoptimized Unlike weapon juggling. The whole idea is so silly that I am surprised that so many players are coming to this reading of the rules.
It is silly, but it ALSO seems to be rules as written and as intended. So it isn't surprising to me that players are coming to that conclusion.
It also isn't surprising that many DMs will ban it or limit it in many ways because it feels bad.
@@DndUnoptimized RAW, yes, but about RAI, I am not sure. In an exception-based system like DnD, it is hard to predict all the implications of rules. So I guess the designer has not foressen the consequences of these rules, in the case of this design team, that is nothing new.
On the other hand, there are DnD players whose greatest fun is to find such loopholes. As long as they have fun and I do not have to DM for them, all is good.
BTW considering the name of your channel, you are talking a lot about numbers.
@@kallebuchholz2156 It kind of silly, but i really love it tbh. It gives martial some level of turn per turn descision making - they don't have many of those, so might as well use it. I really want to make Figter 1/Element Monk X gunk with Heavy Crossbow (Push) + Musket (Slow) - change between two weapons and use BA elemental unarmed strikes for tons of enemy movement. You don't even need CBE or Gunner for this - just use each weapon once per attack action.
I love fighters!
Me too. It's one of my favourites, but I often feel bored playing them. Now I think there's a lot more to love!
Can a Champion fighter with 3 fighting styles (Dueling, Two WF, and Thrown WF) juggle 2 light thrown weapons in one hand and get all +2 +2 +Ability Mod? 😂
Yes... As long as your DM agrees that you can use dueling for thrown. It's pretty crazy
Dueling was already used for thrown weapons before the fighting style even existed so yeah you can have a +4 to damage as long as you're only ever holding one weapon before making an attack
I really hate that when I search for your channel, it gets autocorrected to "D&D optimized"
I KNOW WHO I WANT TO SEE, DON'T TELL ME WHAT I WANT
Haha that happens to me too! I'm actually thinking of renaming my channel, but not sure... Shh don't tell anyone.
Can you please make a old vs new paladin by the numbers? thanks
Yup! I'll definitely get to them all. Ranger is next then we will do a vote on what people want to see after that. I hope to do the martials first then casters
I may be alone in this but I have a problem with the way Nick interacts with Dual Wielder. The whole point of the Dual Wielder feat is to add additional options to your Two Weapon Fighting. You can do a dex build with Rapier and Short Sword for example for swashbuckling fun; you can also do a Str build with Longsword and Short sword (and live out your Samurai fantasy wielding Katana and Wakizashi). There are many possible combos there. The problem is that Nick is mathematically the best version of TWF if it gains a second extra attack from Nick with the Dual Wielder feat. To paraphrase Treantmonk, if one style of fighting is superior to the others, it becomes the only used style of TWF fighting. As a result, Dual Wielder does not add additional TWF options. It reduces your options to one.
The only people who will choose the other options are (1) those that consciously decide to use an inferior style because of their play narrative or (2) those that are unaware that Nick + Dual Wielder is the mathematically superior playstyle. And if those unaware people are playing alongside someone using Nick, this could potentially ruin their D&D experience. It feels bad to be less good than other players due to ignorance.
Nick is meant to be used to free up the Bonus Action for other things such as casting/moving your Hunter's Mark, or Tactical Mind/Second Wind, or Smite spells, etc. In this way it frees up options and that's the way Nick should be used. With no Dual Wielder extra attack for Nick, Longsword/short sword does more damage but you give up the freedom to cast smite or hunter's mark. So, in my games I am not going to allow this interaction between Dual Wielder and Nick. I view this as bad design.
I see what you are saying. I think it's still worthwhile to Nick without DW. Especially think of a rogue. Additional attacks are extremely important but give diminishing results. With two attacks you are very likely to land a sneak attack, but increasing it to three doesn't give that much more chance.
So you could all but guarantee a sneak attack if you end up going DW, but having that cunning action is probably more important.
Anyone else that has a consistent use of BAs can benefit from it but probably don't want DW. Like Paladins, Rangers, Rune Knights, Valor Bard, etc.
Yeah, I have a buddy who is a ranger/psi rogue combo who does a first attack with a light weapon, stowing it, picking up nick with a second, then a psi dagger attack with his second attack and a bonus psi dagger attack. He's deadly with it and absolutely doesn't need dual wielder.
It cannot be D&D 2024 if the core books are not released until 2025.
It can be the PHB 2024, but 5.5e is much easier.
I agree! I think we should settle on 5.5
The blind fighting isn't actually that good since you can just get blind sight from a bat familiar with your ba every turn since the new find familiar spell doesn't make you blind or deaf when you share senses with your familiar
So you like Blind sight but you don't like the investment of a fighting style to get it is what you are saying?
I suppose fighters can pick up find familiar with their lvl 1 feat and do that instead. Honestly, I kind of hate it when familiars are used like that though (or things like generate advantage every turn).
But it is a fair point. Thanks for sharing.
Isn't graze once per turn/round?
Edit: got it mixed with cleave.
Nope, it's every attack! Only Cleave and Nick are once a turn.
Just because it comes up in this video and I think it's a piece of (potential) misinformation that has been spreading throughout the 5e community due to poor wording choices: I'm fairly certain that this so-called weapon-juggling is not possiible. The way the draw/stow clause is written for the attack action implies that you can only do so once per action, but at any attack that is part of that action (because you're using the free object interaction that you only have once per your turn and needs to be taken with either movement or action, during combat).
Specifically, it uses the wording "one weapon", not "a weapon". The difference between these words seems insignificant, but in this case it is very much not. Of course, it is kind of debatable, due to the poor language WotC has been showing off since 5e, but I think in this case the difference between 'one' and 'a' is important. :)
Interesting! I haven't seen an argument that weapon juggling isn't actually allowed RAW.
In D&D's own video about weapon masteries, they specifically give an example of stowing one weapon and drawing a new weapon for extra attack. So I think it is intended to allow juggling (and I think it is RAW too), but I'm all for DMs banning it partially or in entirety because they don't like it.
Thanks for sharing that argument though!
by definition dual wielding means using two weapons with one weapon in each hand at the same time, any other interpretation is malicious misinterpretation
True, I can see that argument for Dual Wielder because it's in the flavour text, but what about Two Weapon Fighting? It is still two even if you are using the same hand.
Also I'm totally fine with not allowing that interaction. I think it's silly.
What about throwing two knives with one hand in succession? Is that two weapon fighting?
You are Lvl 5 Fighter with Dual Wielder feat, TWF, Nick and Vex masteries and a Scimitar (light and nick) and a shortsword (light and vex).
SO LETS GO:
First turn:
Attack Action - d6 Vex Weapon - light + mod
Extra Attack from Attack Action - (Advantage) - d6 Vex weapon - light + mod
Nick extra attack - (Advantage) - d6 Nick Weapon - light + mod
Bonus Action Attack from DW feat - d6 Vex Weapon - light (+ mod JC recent rulling)
second turn:
Attack Action - (Advantage) - d6 Vex weapon - light + mod...
Light property + TWF + Dual Wielder feat + Nick mastery = lvl 5 fighter = 2 weapons one nick and another non-nick but light= 3 attacks with your action, one must be from the Nick weapon, and a bonus action attack from DW feat, that adding your mod to the damage due to TWF that states that all off-hand attacks get mod damage
Yup! That's as lot of damage at low levels
Gets a bit of a boost if you take Eldritch knight and war caster because at level 7 you can replace one attack with a cantrip probably not the strongest build but very fun if you want to go the gish route
@glitchking666 I love EK. I thought it was going to be such a good gish, but then every other gish has to outshine it like crazy
@@DndUnoptimized I think in the 2024 rules it actually holds its own ,I think that most tables are going to ban conjure minor elementals , so while the valor bard gets its blade singer extra attack a level earlier that Eldritch knight the EK gets normal extra attack before the valor bard gets it second attack. Even though not a full caster I think it's the gish with the highest skill potential because of the extra feats a fighter gets especially if you go human to get the second origin feat.
Any player who tries to do "weapon juggling" will be banned from my game. The player. Because that kind of munchkin sheit destroys the verisimilitude of the game for everybody, for your personal selfish min-maxing. That makes you a toxic player, and I don't want that at my table.
You all can do it how you want. Your fun is not wrong. But if you try to pull weapon juggling without your game table agreeing they don't care how stupid and unrealistic it is, you may be in for some consequences for being a selfish, toxic powergamer.
Yeah juggling a single weapon back and forth in your hands is a grave misuse of wording just have a second weapon(although I wouldn't go as far as banning someone I'd just make it clear not to do that and if they blatantly ignore me it's their consequences)
They deliberately changed the rules to make it possible lol.
have fun.
Since it is RAW, probably just give a heads up that it isn't allowed at your tables and hopefully you'll be fine. I don't think it breaks the game, but I can see people not liking the idea of it.
11:24 shouldn't that be 4d10+20+24? Why is it +21 at the end? (Im assuming that extra damage is coming from the new gwm)
Ah shoot typo. Thanks for the catch!