I don't think it's hard one bit.
Ok I believe you are wrong and I have yet to see any common generalizations that "more often than not" held true across multiple levels in a campaign.
Sorry but a single shot before you need to reload for a turn isn't a strong ranged option. There's no reason to assume you could close or even that it would be a good idea to.
Your premise is based on the idea the PC is weaker in ranged combat and therefore should close. A GWM-PAM does not have good ranged options either.
Also you can't reload in combat because you don't have a free hand. You only use it once.
It's also not very ranged (30 ft), not very sustainable (limited use resource), etc.
It is actually 90 feet.
Adding all that in doesn't take away the damage you've given up from no offensive fighting style, only a d8 weapon, no damage dealing feat. Assuming level 5 and GWF and GWM that's 2.5+1+3 x2 = 13 Damage per turn before accuracy adjustment.
Being less than something else does not mean being bad.
I'm going to challenge your 15 DPR. A level 5 character with +4 str/dex, a rapier and vex isn't doing 15 DPR. The absolute most I'm getting is 14.3.
It depends entirely on the number of attacks against a single enemy. If they have unlimited attacks against a single enemy it approaches 15 DPR at infinity.
I admit that is never going to get there, but as long as they attack an enemy twice it is also ALWAYS going to be statistically more than 10.2 DPR. How much more depends on what assumptions you lay down on number of consecutive attacks against a single foe.
Going 5 rounds against a Boss with 2 attacks a round and a 60% hit chance it is going to be a lot closer to 15 than it will be to 10.
I will also say in play it will
generally outrun a GWM build due to the damage riders you get from things like Hunter's Mark which are also affected by Vex.
Vex d8+4 attacks at base 60% hit rate 5% crit rate. (This is DPR over the given number of attacks, not DPR after them).
2 attacks = 12.0 DPR
4 attacks = 13.0 DPR
6 attacks = 13.4 DPR
infinite attacks = 14.3 DPR
And look with 6 attacks you are already ahead of the GWM-GWF ... which if they are a caster they don't have GWF.
I don't agree that's RAW.
When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a Light weapon, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn. That extra attack must be made with a different Light weapon
If I am holding a shield and I attack with a short sword I fulfilled the part in blue. This means I can make another attack with the Scimitar as per the part in red. There is nothing in the rules about needing to use two different hands or needing to be holding both weapons simultaneously.
Using nick you can make the extra attack without using a bonus action.
It is perhaps not RAI and I have not seen it in play, but it darn sure is RAW and was covered extensively on this board when the 2024 rules were released.
But all PC's built with more offensive options get those things as well. There's still a large damage gap there. You've given up a ton of damage to take defensive duelist and use a rapier.
No I haven't. I've given up very little damage statistically.
The more relevant question though is whether those abilities being accounted for is enough offense to outperform tanky caster options. Consider a Druid can do 3d10 with moon beam to many enemies every turn. He can also use circle of stars ability to make a d8+4 attack.
Can is not the same as do and giving up damage theoretically is not the same as giving it up in play.
Casters have a ton of options available but
generally martials do the most damage in a campaign by a large margin.
I will say the Druid in one of our campaigns has been one of the top 2 damage dealers since level 7 (we are now level 16), but she is using Conjure Woodland Beings with wild shape and a Wand of Fireballs.
The Druid is ranged, has 19 AC to 24 AC with shield spell. I don't think the martial you are describing is doing enough damage to compensate, nor does he have significantly more defense to win on that front. He's less ranged. Etc.
I think the martial is
generally going to do substantially more damage in play over the course of levels 1 to level 20.
Not just a little bit more either, but
generally substantially more damage in combat.
If casters do typical stuff like focus on control instead of damage, then yes. If they focus on damage then I think a cleric and Druid out damage that PC while being just as tanky.
You mean the stuff full casters
generally do?
Also 24 AC with the shield spell is not nearly as tanky as 23/24/25/26/27 AC without using a spell slot, or 26 AC with the Shield spell with either of these examples also having an average of 11.5 more hit points and giving the enemy disadvantage regularly. It is really not even close. A 24 AC Druid is actually closer to a 17 AC Rogue than he is to a maxed out sword and board with sap when it comes to being tanky.
As a matter of fact I would say a 9+ level GWM fighter with an 18AC and nothing else is about on par with that druid, due to the disadvantage from Sap.
Wizard will be able to with level 4 slots on summon fey. Though they probably are a bit less tanky and quite a bit less reliable given the limited number of those slots, at least for a while.
A Wizard can be the most tanky character in the game, but usually not while concentrating on summon fey. They need to concentrate on Blur, PEG or have mirror image up and those cut into damage because they take a round to cast.
Also summon Fey is not constant DPR in play. It is like action surge, you can't really count it in DPR because it is so limited use. Between it being fragile with a very low AC and concentration it is not going to last very long in combat if you are using it aggrssively. Summon Fey last longer than the other summons due to the defense afforded by the charm ability, but that is highly situational and doesn't work well with large numbers of enemies. By the time you get 4th level spells a single action by an enemy directed at the Fey is often going to kill it. As a result, either your Fey is fighting carefully and avoiding high danger, which limits effectiveness, or it is dying very quickly.
By the way I use this spell a lot on my PCs, mostly on Fey Wanderer Rangers, which is the most common class/subclass I play in both 2014 and 2024. Despite lacking the higher level slots, their kit works better with SF than the Wizard's kit does.
I don't think a bard stands much of a chance in the damage department.
Valor Bard with the 2024 rules is a high damage dealer statistically. At level 10+ Bards can get any of the Wizard, Cleric or Druid spells, so they have all those options plus a better attack action than any full caster except a Bladesinger.
The Valor Bard we had in the first 2024 campaign I played was trounced by the Champion when it came to damage though (as were all of us).
Which is what happens to the party that cannot nova hard enough in that scenario.
). He can do this all-day any-day consistently. Doesn't matter if the party cannot rest because of AB or C. 
