PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next New Fighting Styles PEACH



Torched Forever
2015-06-13, 12:22 PM
The current fighting styles are biased towards a few stereotypes and overly common character builds. However, I think that fighting styles provide an opportunity to encourage more exotic or interesting styles. Anyway, here they are, comments and criticisms are welcome.

Opportunist (Ranger/Fighter)
While wielding a melee weapon in one hand, you gain +3 to attack rolls made using a reaction.

Versatile Style (All)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand, you gain +1 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls.

Wall of Spears (Paladin/Fighter)
While you wield a weapon with reach, creatures must spend twice the normal movement within 10ft. of you.

Master Thrower (Ranger/Fighter)
Whenever you make a ranged attack with a thrown weapon you may draw another thrown weapon as part of the attack. In addition, the ranges of your thrown weapons increase by 10ft.

Full-body Combatant (Fighter)
While you have no free hand, if you take the attack action you may make an unarmed attack as a bonus action.

Aggressive Defender (Paladin/Fighter)
If you are wielding a shield, you may use a bonus action push your shield against a creature within 5 feet. The target of this ability must make a strength save with a DC equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus & strength modifier. If they fail the save then they gain disadvantage on all attack rolls against creatures other than you.

Dexterous Loader (Ranger/Fighter)
You may reload a hand crossbow while wielding a light melee weapon or hand crossbow in place of a free hand. While wielding a hand crossbow you may load two bolts instead of one as part of an attack. This consumes one more ammunition, grants disadvantage on the attack roll, but deals double damage on a hit. (WIP & needs better wording)

Iaijutsu (In place of versatile for wuxia)
While both of your hands are free and not in heavy armor, you gain +2 AC. When you attack with a versatile weapon, if you drew it this turn you gain +2 to attack and damage.

Versatile Alternate (In place of versatile for those who wanted it this way)
You gain +1 to attack and damage while wielding a versatile weapon in two hands.

Lunging Fencer (In place of dueling)
If you are wielding a melee weapon in one hand and no weapon or shield in your other hand, you may increase your reach to 10 feet. Also, you gain the ability to take the dodge and disengage actions as a bonus action.

WIP (Paladin/Fighter)

I know this might provide a few too many options, so feel free to pick and choose which ones to use.

spwack
2015-06-13, 01:19 PM
Massive list, good job. The only thing that doesn't make much sense is Full-body Combatant. I sort of get what it does, but the wording of "no free-hand" comes across as a little strange. Balance-wise, that one also seems a little off. Using a Bonus Action every turn to deal 1 extra damage seems... well. I don't really know. But it seems off to me, somehow. Sorry for being vague, all the other fighting styles were well written and unique. I can't speak for balance (I'm terrible at that) but it seems in line with the rest.

Torched Forever
2015-06-13, 05:25 PM
Full-body Combatant deals 1+Strength as a bonus action. Considering you may do this while wielding any weapon combination it provides a fairly balanced source of damage. The no free hand idea comes from using your whole body in combat (ie. Utilizing your arms to strike with a sword and then kicking the opponent).

ZenBear
2015-06-13, 06:09 PM
Why can't you gain +1 AC from Versatile Style in heavy armor?

Leuku
2015-06-13, 07:14 PM
I have issue with Aggressive Defender.

On-demand, at-will Disadvantage condition against 1 creature every round with no save?

Protection fighting style has got nothing on that.

spwack
2015-06-13, 10:02 PM
@Torched Forever, from my understanding a Bonus Action unarmed attack would not normally have the Strength added to the damage. So long as it's made apparent in the description, that sounds fine to me.

@Leuku, it does say Aggressive Defender. How does "Until your next turn, the target of this bonus action has advantage on attack rolls against yourself, and disadvantage against other targets." sound to you?

TheOldCrow
2015-06-13, 11:21 PM
I think Master Thrower is a bit lacking. With that Fighting Style you're still worse off then a bow user who doesn't even have a Fighting Style. Maybe give them the same +2 to hit.

Torched Forever
2015-06-14, 08:32 AM
@TheOldCrow:
I'm hesitant to give +2 for master thrower because of throwing's versatility. I might give it +1 though.
Throwing vs. Ranged
+Can melee
+One handed
+Ammo doesn't break*
-More expensive ammo
-Less range
-2 accuracy
-1 damage**
*At least I think so
**Unless you fix trident
@spwack & Leuku
I'll update the OP with the unarmed strike. With aggressive defender the thought was you press your shield into the enemy which restricts their ability to fight back or target anyone else. Giving the target advantage against you doesn't make sense with the flavor. However, I do realize that in its current state it is overpowered. I'll add a save to it.

@ZenBear
First of all, it is needed for balance. +1 AC and +2 to hit are fighting styles of their own. For versatile I balanced it by weakening them in return for versatility. As for the flavor behind it, the style is all about versatility(both in name and function) and heavy armor doesn't provide that.

Demonic Spoon
2015-06-14, 02:48 PM
Remember to keep in mind how these interact with other fighting styles. Multiclassing as well as Champion could result in multiple style


Versatile Style (All)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and not in heavy armor, you gain +1 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls.


this needs some verbiage to stop someone from attacking with 2h and saying that they release the second hand at the end of their turn. Presumably they should be locked into 1h or 2h from the start of their first turn to the start of their next.

What if the 1-hand benefit was changed to "If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and no other weapons or shields in the other, you get +2 to AC".

As-written, there is no benefit to using 1h versatile. Because donning a shield takes an action, no one will bother using versatile style 1-handed, since using it 2h is stronger overall and the cost of switching mid-fight is too high. If someone wanted to use versatile weapons 1-handed regularly, then they'd just be better off taking dueling style.

With my suggested change, using a versatile weapon is equivalent to using a weapon + shield, but that's all you get for your fighting style (a dueling style sword + board does more damage).

When using it 2-handed, you're a bit worse than a greatsword-wielder with GWF style, but still competitive.

ZenBear
2015-06-14, 05:22 PM
@ZenBear
First of all, it is needed for balance. +1 AC and +2 to hit are fighting styles of their own. For versatile I balanced it by weakening them in return for versatility. As for the flavor behind it, the style is all about versatility(both in name and function) and heavy armor doesn't provide that.
How does heavy armor not offer versatility? Mechanically you have more versatility in heavy armor because it only requires STR to move at full speed as opposed to medium and light armor which require DEX of 14-20 to have a decent AC. IRL heavy armor isn't really that heavy, many have pointed out that full plate weighs less than a modern soldier's pack and is distributed across the body, allowing full mobility if not flexibility. As for balance, I don't see a problem. There's already a fighting style that grants +1 AC to anybody in armor. Limiting the style to medium and light armor means more MADness and less versatility.

Remember to keep in mind how these interact with other fighting styles. Multiclassing as well as Champion could result in multiple style



this needs some verbiage to stop someone from attacking with 2h and saying that they release the second hand at the end of their turn. Presumably they should be locked into 1h or 2h from the start of their first turn to the start of their next.

What if the 1-hand benefit was changed to "If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and no other weapons or shields in the other, you get +2 to AC".

As-written, there is no benefit to using 1h versatile. Because donning a shield takes an action, no one will bother using versatile style 1-handed, since using it 2h is stronger overall and the cost of switching mid-fight is too high. If someone wanted to use versatile weapons 1-handed regularly, then they'd just be better off taking dueling style.

With my suggested change, using a versatile weapon is equivalent to using a weapon + shield, but that's all you get for your fighting style (a dueling style sword + board does more damage).

When using it 2-handed, you're a bit worse than a greatsword-wielder with GWF style, but still competitive.

Wielding a versatile weapon two-handed offers +1 average damage, less than the Duelist fighting style does and still allows you to wield a shield. Perhaps if Versatile Style instead offered +1 AC when wielding one-handed and +1 to hit when wielded two-handed?

Amnoriath
2015-06-14, 06:51 PM
How does heavy armor not offer versatility? Mechanically you have more versatility in heavy armor because it only requires STR to move at full speed as opposed to medium and light armor which require DEX of 14-20 to have a decent AC. IRL heavy armor isn't really that heavy, many have pointed out that full plate weighs less than a modern soldier's pack and is distributed across the body, allowing full mobility if not flexibility. As for balance, I don't see a problem. There's already a fighting style that grants +1 AC to anybody in armor. Limiting the style to medium and light armor means more MADness and less versatility.


Wielding a versatile weapon two-handed offers +1 average damage, less than the Duelist fighting style does and still allows you to wield a shield. Perhaps if Versatile Style instead offered +1 AC when wielding one-handed and +1 to hit when wielded two-handed?

1. No what it means that one option of the two ended fighting style isn't as effective by the numbers of a fighting style that only offers one if they are using one kind of armor.
2. Except many versatile weapons are iconic in use with a shield so barring its effectiveness there goes against many stories as well as reality in the styles themselves.

Torched Forever
2015-06-14, 07:33 PM
The idea behind versatile was not necessarily rapid switching between the two but to have options. You enter the room and decide, do I need AC or DPR this battle. The fighting style is balanced for that. I'm not quite sure how to word the anti-use-two-drop-for-AC phrase.

Dueling does provide superior damage output, but changing it to +2 with no shield doesn't change anything about that. I honestly dislike the dueling style because it functions in three ways: effectively +2 AC, 2hing in one hand, or silly bonus damage with some cheese. This puts it far ahead of the other styles and all but one use is far from its intention.

I'm not sure how to fix this problem. I might just use a variant of dueling that lets you use a 2h melee in one hand, but another solution would be helpful. Also, should master thrower get +1 to attack?

Submortimer
2015-06-14, 08:22 PM
The "Versatile" Style I made, Hand and a Half Fighting, reads like this:

Hand-and-a-half
- When using a versatile Weapon in two hands, you gain a +1 to hit and +1 to damage.

This sits comfortably between Dueling and archery, and gives someone a compelling reason to two-hand a Longsword instead of a greatsword. Additionally, I made up a feat to go along with this (Which I'm still looking for a better name for)

Kenjutsu
- When using a weapon with the versatile trait in two hands, You gain a +1 to your AC.
- You may wield any weapon with the versatile trait as if also had the finesse trait.
- You may use the Disengage action as a bonus action on your turn.

This puts a Two-handed longsword fighter up there next to TWF in regards to damage vs. AC.

Amnoriath
2015-06-14, 09:02 PM
The "Versatile" Style I made, Hand and a Half Fighting, reads like this:

Hand-and-a-half
- When using a versatile Weapon in two hands, you gain a +1 to hit and +1 to damage.

This sits comfortably between Dueling and archery, and gives someone a compelling reason to two-hand a Longsword instead of a greatsword. Additionally, I made up a feat to go along with this (Which I'm still looking for a better name for)

Kenjutsu
- When using a weapon with the versatile trait in two hands, You gain a +1 to your AC.
- You may wield any weapon with the versatile trait as if also had the finesse trait.
- You may use the Dodge action as a bonus action on your turn.

This puts a Two-handed longsword fighter up there next to TWF in regards to damage vs. AC.
While the style is alright the Dodge action as a bonus action from that feat makes it the best defensive style in the game that it is still decently offensive. Not to mention when Rogue dipping your original style now really comes second to GWF because that feat gives an explicit RAW way to combo with Sneak Attack damage die.

Submortimer
2015-06-14, 09:13 PM
While the style is alright the Dodge action as a bonus action from that feat makes it the best defensive style in the game that it is still decently offensive. Not to mention when Rogue dipping your original style now really comes second to GWF because that feat gives an explicit RAW way to combo with Sneak Attack damage die.

You're totally correct: That should have been Disengage, not Dodge. it's changed now.

On your second point, I don't really find that to be an issue. Attacking with 1d10 + Dex + Sneak attack is only a point or two worse than attacking with 1d8 + dex + sneak attack, and TWF is pretty much always going to be better for sneak attacks because you get more chances to hit.

The most broken thing I can think of with it is using it with a quarterstaff, but even this isn't so bad. Since we're getting into it about rogues, I'll use two different builds:

1 Ftr/1 Rog
Human, Feat: PM
16 dex
FS: Hand and a half
Quarterstaff
Studded Leather Armor

Attacks: 1d8+4+1d4+4 (Avg 15), +6 to hit, 16 AC

1 Ftr/1 Rog
Human, Feat: Dual Wielder
16 dex
FS: Two-weapon fighting
2 x rapiers
Studded Leather Armor

Attacks: 1d8+3+1d8+3 (avg 15), +5 to hit, 17 AC

Bump it up to level 5
1 Ftr/4 Rog
Human
Feats: PM, Kenjutsu
16 dex
FS: Hand and a half
Quarterstaff
Studded Leather Armor

Attacks: 1d8+4+1d4+4 (Avg 15), +7 to hit, 17 AC

1 Ftr/1 Rog
Human, Feat: Dual Wielder
18 dex
FS: Two-weapon fighting
2 x rapiers
Studded Leather Armor

Attacks: 1d8+4+1d8+4 (avg 17), +7 to hit, 18 AC

ZenBear
2015-06-14, 09:32 PM
1. No what it means that one option of the two ended fighting style isn't as effective by the numbers of a fighting style that only offers one if they are using one kind of armor.
2. Except many versatile weapons are iconic in use with a shield so barring its effectiveness there goes against many stories as well as reality in the styles themselves.

Ok if I didn't put my points to numbers you shouldn't number yours and assume I'll know what they are directly referencing. This is a really confusing post in more ways than one.

It makes sense that a fighting style designed for versatility shouldn't be as effective as a specialized one in its field of speciality. It should, however be equally effective in the sum of its parts. Defensive Fighting Style is pretty crap, only Champions take it as their second FS, Paladins who want to DW, and Rangers who want S&B. That's not the FS I'm balancing it against. Duelist, Archery and Great Weapon are the bar that the Versatile FS(VFS) has to meet.

If someone uses a versatile weapon with a shield then they are no longer able to be versatile with it. It's just a one-handed weapon. If the VFS has a perk that only states "when wielded in one hand" then it will still gain that benefit with the shield.

IRL and in popular fiction it is very common to see a warrior wield a bastard sword in heavy armor. Why should this not be supported in the FS?

What we should be considering first and foremost is this: what is the fighter doing with his off-hand when not 2-handing his weapon? At first glance, I thought EK's would all be taking Duelist and keeping an open hand for spell components. Now most I see just take War Caster and hand-wave the material components so they can have a shield or second weapon. A versatile style might suit such warrior/caster types quite well and save them a Feat.

Amnoriath
2015-06-14, 11:24 PM
It makes sense that a fighting style designed for versatility shouldn't be as effective as a specialized one in its field of speciality. It should, however be equally effective in the sum of its parts. Defensive Fighting Style is pretty crap, only Champions take it as their second FS, Paladins who want to DW, and Rangers who want S&B. That's not the FS I'm balancing it against. Duelist, Archery and Great Weapon are the bar that the Versatile FS(VFS) has to meet.

If someone uses a versatile weapon with a shield then they are no longer able to be versatile with it. It's just a one-handed weapon. If the VFS has a perk that only states "when wielded in one hand" then it will still gain that benefit with the shield.

IRL and in popular fiction it is very common to see a warrior wield a bastard sword in heavy armor. Why should this not be supported in the FS?

What we should be considering first and foremost is this: what is the fighter doing with his off-hand when not 2-handing his weapon? At first glance, I thought EK's would all be taking Duelist and keeping an open hand for spell components. Now most I see just take War Caster and hand-wave the material components so they can have a shield or second weapon. A versatile style might suit such warrior/caster types quite well and save them a Feat.

1. So it needs to do that by stomping on Defense even though Defense still does something those other ones don't?
2. Sword and Board/Phalanx styles were one of the most prolific melee strategies in war to deny the use of a shield is an affront to history as well as story.
3. Except the Bastard Sword the way you described is more akin to what the true Bastard Sword was like, a long, large rapier. Arguably fantasy use them much more like a Greatsword and those that don't aren't in heavy armor.
4. While War Caster is useful it doesn't add much in physical fighting prowess or utility so it is understandable if a player doesn't choose it and therefore doesn't make it a reason as to why an EK wouldn't use it.

ZenBear
2015-06-15, 12:12 AM
1. So it needs to do that by stomping on Defense even though Defense still does something those other ones don't?
2. Sword and Board/Phalanx styles were one of the most prolific melee strategies in war to deny the use of a shield is an affront to history as well as story.
3. Except the Bastard Sword the way you described is more akin to what the true Bastard Sword was like, a long, large rapier. Arguably fantasy use them much more like a Greatsword and those that don't aren't in heavy armor.
4. While War Caster is useful it doesn't add much in physical fighting prowess or utility so it is understandable if a player doesn't choose it and therefore doesn't make it a reason as to why an EK wouldn't use it.

You need to read my posts more closely because your response has only the vaguest correlation to anything I said.

1. The Defense FS is crap but it applies to anybody using any weapon or armor type. It has a niche. I'm not stomping on it at all.

2. I'm not denying anybody the use of a shield. We're talking about using a versatile weapon in one and both hands; that specific situation requires the lack of a shield by choice, not force.

3. What in my post suggests using a bastard sword like a rapier?

4. I can't even decipher what you're trying to say here. I merely suggested a VFS would be attractive to EKs who don't want to take WC. What are you arguing?

You are putting words in my mouth and spouting unrelated nonsense.

Amnoriath
2015-06-15, 10:24 PM
You need to read my posts more closely because your response has only the vaguest correlation to anything I said.

1. The Defense FS is crap but it applies to anybody using any weapon or armor type. It has a niche. I'm not stomping on it at all.

2. I'm not denying anybody the use of a shield. We're talking about using a versatile weapon in one and both hands; that specific situation requires the lack of a shield by choice, not force.

3. What in my post suggests using a bastard sword like a rapier?

4. I can't even decipher what you're trying to say here. I merely suggested a VFS would be attractive to EKs who don't want to take WC. What are you arguing?

You are putting words in my mouth and spouting unrelated nonsense.
1. By allowing it to be used with heavy armor and one-handed you give them the highest base AC(aside from op-stating a Barbarian) while still being open to more offensive styles since you haven't barred any other implement being used.
2. But why would a player choose a one handed weapon to begin with mechanically at base? It is so that they can pick up a shield. The idea of the versatile weapon is that you can choose between damage, defense, or utility if you have it. Remember most shields are held through a brace and often leave the hand to be able to grasp something else. In reality it takes a feat to put heavy weapons over versatile weapons otherwise it is at best a modest damage increase for no option in the off hand.
3. I am not saying a Bastard Sword is a rapier just that an actual one looks like that and is the closest to what you are describing. Often they would have reinforced gloves to help guide the thrusting blade while the length of the blade would be better at warding the enemy while still being light enough to use easily in one hand. What we are talking though about is an English long sword which is designed to both thrust and cut often cutting better than thrusting. As such power would be transferred more to the tip and the center of balance higher on the blade. As such they are used more in conjunction with shields to give options like I said before.
4. I am saying that Dueling would be a better option if they didn't take War Caster because of its specific benefits.

ZenBear
2015-06-17, 12:19 AM
1. By allowing it to be used with heavy armor and one-handed you give them the highest base AC(aside from op-stating a Barbarian) while still being open to more offensive styles since you haven't barred any other implement being used.
2. But why would a player choose a one handed weapon to begin with mechanically at base? It is so that they can pick up a shield. The idea of the versatile weapon is that you can choose between damage, defense, or utility if you have it. Remember most shields are held through a brace and often leave the hand to be able to grasp something else. In reality it takes a feat to put heavy weapons over versatile weapons otherwise it is at best a modest damage increase for no option in the off hand.
3. I am not saying a Bastard Sword is a rapier just that an actual one looks like that and is the closest to what you are describing. Often they would have reinforced gloves to help guide the thrusting blade while the length of the blade would be better at warding the enemy while still being light enough to use easily in one hand. What we are talking though about is an English long sword which is designed to both thrust and cut often cutting better than thrusting. As such power would be transferred more to the tip and the center of balance higher on the blade. As such they are used more in conjunction with shields to give options like I said before.
4. I am saying that Dueling would be a better option if they didn't take War Caster because of its specific benefits.

I think we need to clarify what exactly you think I'm championing here. I haven't proposed a VFS myself, I only offered a modification of someone else's. I'm really not sticking to my guns on anything specific. I'm just trying to point out what the design goals of the style should be.

1. Heavy armor already gets the highest base AC. If the chosen FS grants something like +1 AC along with another boon to promote the use of versatile weapons then it's a niche style and is in no way unbalanced.

2. You choose one-handed if you want a shield or a free hand for implements, grappling, etc. You choose two-handed if you want damage. You choose dual wield if you want a middle-ground. You don't choose versatile because it isn't supported in the core rules. That's why we're talking about a Versatile Fighting Style, to make the option more viable.

3. Entirely irrelevant. This is a game, not a simulation.

4. I stated before, I expected most players would take Dueling and always have an open hand for spell components. Instead, most take War Caster and pick up a shield or second weapon. If we can come up with a viable VFS, EK's could choose it and wield their weapon one-handed when they cast spells and two-handed when they're just attacking.

Versatile needs to fit a niche. Non-divine half casters like the EK and Ranger could benefit from a style that allows them to have an open hand some of the time and still rewards them taking up their weapon in two hands. Other classes could benefit from it if they like grappling or climbing. Etc etc.

Amnoriath
2015-06-17, 12:46 AM
I think we need to clarify what exactly you think I'm championing here. I haven't proposed a VFS myself, I only offered a modification of someone else's. I'm really not sticking to my guns on anything specific. I'm just trying to point out what the design goals of the style should be.

1. Heavy armor already gets the highest base AC. If the chosen FS grants something like +1 AC along with another boon to promote the use of versatile weapons then it's a niche style and is in no way unbalanced.

2. You choose one-handed if you want a shield or a free hand for implements, grappling, etc. You choose two-handed if you want damage. You choose dual wield if you want a middle-ground. You don't choose versatile because it isn't supported in the core rules. That's why we're talking about a Versatile Fighting Style, to make the option more viable.

3. Entirely irrelevant. This is a game, not a simulation.

4. I stated before, I expected most players would take Dueling and always have an open hand for spell components. Instead, most take War Caster and pick up a shield or second weapon. If we can come up with a viable VFS, EK's could choose it and wield their weapon one-handed when they cast spells and two-handed when they're just attacking.

Versatile needs to fit a niche. Non-divine half casters like the EK and Ranger could benefit from a style that allows them to have an open hand some of the time and still rewards them taking up their weapon in two hands. Other classes could benefit from it if they like grappling or climbing. Etc etc.
1. That isn't what I am saying. The versatile you suggested on one end to be used with another weapon. If they would choose Dual-Wielder that is a magic shield worth of AC(+1 weapon A, +1 weapon B, and +1 feat) with heavy armor as well as a consistent bonus action attack. All it needs is a little multiclassing or Champion to make the extra attack better.
2. No, it is supported because a versatile weapon is the middle ground option between other one-handed weapons and two-handed weapons. This also doesn't deny what I said only a feat makes two-handed that much better.
3. Except Dueling already works there. Fighting styles are passive supplemental abilities. If you want something meaning that can compete with Great Weapon Mastery or Sharpshooter make a feat.

Torched Forever
2015-06-17, 08:20 AM
Updated the OP with a couple new styles, what do you guys think?

Demonic Spoon
2015-06-17, 09:29 AM
Wielding a versatile weapon two-handed offers +1 average damage, less than the Duelist fighting style does and still allows you to wield a shield. Perhaps if Versatile Style instead offered +1 AC when wielding one-handed and +1 to hit when wielded two-handed?

I suppose this is up to interpretation, but as far as I was ever aware, you cannot wield a sword in two hands with a shield.



The idea behind versatile was not necessarily rapid switching between the two but to have options. You enter the room and decide, do I need AC or DPR this battle. The fighting style is balanced for that. I'm not quite sure how to word the anti-use-two-drop-for-AC phrase.

Dueling does provide superior damage output, but changing it to +2 with no shield doesn't change anything about that. I honestly dislike the dueling style because it functions in three ways: effectively +2 AC, 2hing in one hand, or silly bonus damage with some cheese. This puts it far ahead of the other styles and all but one use is far from its intention.


The more I think about this, the more I think that part of your homebrew should just be removing dueling style as an option. It is the clear outlier in terms of melee fighting styles (it's strictly superior to GWF style, for example), and not having that hanging over everyone's head is going to make balancing new styles easier.

Powerful Arms is a perfect example - it's strictly superior to great weapon fighting style, and represents a large, unwarranted boost to greatsword fighters, but is actually well-balanced against Dueling style.


As far as the "alternate" versatile style goes, the whole point was that you could switch mid-combat, so switching as an action doesn't really work. That said, I'm coming around to liking the original versatile style as written.

Torched Forever
2015-06-17, 11:26 AM
The more I think about this, the more I think that part of your homebrew should just be removing dueling style as an option. It is the clear outlier in terms of melee fighting styles (it's strictly superior to GWF style, for example), and not having that hanging over everyone's head is going to make balancing new styles easier.

Powerful Arms is a perfect example - it's strictly superior to great weapon fighting style, and represents a large, unwarranted boost to greatsword fighters, but is actually well-balanced against Dueling style.


As far as the "alternate" versatile style goes, the whole point was that you could switch mid-combat, so switching as an action doesn't really work. That said, I'm coming around to liking the original versatile style as written.
I probably will remove Dueling, seeing as it does mess up quite a few things. Losing it will hurt fighter-casters who don't want to spend an ASI on war caster or who are in a featless game.

Whoops, was supposed to be attack not damage. I see the point your making with it, Dueling makes balancing a little harder. Homebrewers need to think "Should I balance this around Dueling or the other styles?" which makes a mess.

I didn't want to make the Alt Versatile style too powerful by letting you just switch to 2h for the attack and then dropping back to the AC bonus in one turn. However, I think I did over cost it, it takes the same time as just donning a shield. I'll change it to part of a move, this limits it to one switch a turn but doesn't overly hurt them. As for your second point "liking the original versatile style as written" I wrote this one so that someone can benefit from a similar idea while wearing heavy armor and without a shield.

Fyndhal
2015-06-17, 04:26 PM
Comments in line:


Opportunist (Ranger/Fighter)
While wielding a melee weapon in one hand, you gain +3 to attack rolls made using a reaction. -- Good

Versatile Style (All)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and not in heavy armor, you gain +1 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls. -- Of the variations on this listed, this is the best. Note that you may hold a Versatile weapon with 1 hand when not attacking with it, so there could be some bookkeeping issues here.

Wall of Spears (Paladin/Fighter)
While you wield a weapon with reach, creatures must spend twice the normal movement within 10ft. of you. -- Might be a bit strong? Consider making it a targeted effect?

Master Thrower (Ranger/Fighter)
Whenever you make a ranged attack with a thrown weapon you may draw another thrown weapon as part of the attack. In addition, the ranges of your thrown weapons increase by 10ft. -- Good

Full-body Combatant (Fighter)
While you have no free hand, if you take the attack action you may make an unarmed strike that deals damage equal to 1 + your strength modifier as a bonus action. -- I would say it does normal Unarmed damage, considering the Tavern Brawler Feat and Monks Unarmed bonuses.

Aggressive Defender (Paladin/Fighter)
If you are wielding a shield, you may use a bonus action push your shield against a creature within 5 feet. The target of this ability must make a strength save with a DC equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus & strength modifier. If they fail the save then they gain disadvantage on all attack rolls against creatures other than you. -- Good, an effective "Taunt" ability.

Dexterous Loader (Ranger/Fighter)
You may reload a hand crossbow while wielding a light melee weapon or shield in place of a free hand.-- brings back teh hand crossbow cheese recently errated out. Consider me skeptical on this one.

Iaijutsu (In place of versatile for wuxia)
While both of your hands are free and not in heavy armor, you gain +1 AC. When you attack with a versatile weapon, if you drew it this turn you gain +2 to attack rolls. -- Flavorful, but the base Versatile effect seems just straight up better.

Versatile Alternate (In place of versatile for those who wanted it this way)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and no weapon or shield in your other hand, you gain +2 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls. Switching between using a versatile weapon one or two handed requires an action. -- This version is too strong.

Lunging Fencer (In place of dueling)
If you are wielding a melee weapon in one hand and no weapon or shield in your other hand, you may increase your reach to 10 feet. Also, you gain +2 AC against weapon attacks. -- Consider: "As part of the Attack action, you may move up to 10' towards the first target you attack." Lunging is an inherently risky maneuver in fencing, a bonus to AC is not really thematic.

Powerful Strikes (Paladin/Fighter)
While using Strength for your attack, you gain +1 attack for each hand you wield the weapon in.. -- Thrikreen Warriors from Athas would love this...

Overall, these are quite good.

Torched Forever
2015-06-17, 07:07 PM
1. Versatile: Note that you may hold a Versatile weapon with 1 hand when not attacking with it, so there could be some bookkeeping issues here.

2. Reload: brings back hand crossbow cheese recently errated out. Consider me skeptical on this one

3. Alt Versatile: This version is too strong.

4. Fencer: "As part of the Attack action, you may move up to 10' towards the first target you attack." Lunging is an inherently risky maneuver in fencing, a bonus to AC is not really thematic
1. The style states "you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand", holding does not affect this.

2. I'll probably take out the shield bit, but a light melee weapon doesn't break hand crossbow. Due to the way crossbow expert is worded you would have two options: make X attacks with light weapon then 1 with crossbow OR X+1 attacks with crossbow. This doesn't seem too bad to me and maybe a little underpowered.

3. How? The +2 AC can't stack with a shield and otherwise it is the same as the previous version? Anyway, I was going to change the switching to part of a move because the style was pretty weak otherwise. I'll analyze each part (as it was before) for you. +2 AC with versatile in 1h nothing else (effectively a shield), +2 attack with versatile in 2h (gives damage output boost but is still weaker than greatswording), switching between the two requires an action (This is effectively donning/doffing a shield with the benefit of casting). Nothing there makes it too powerful and is honestly a little weak. Switching as part of a move allows for +2 attack then +2 AC, AC lost for +2 attack, repeat. Your getting effectively +1 AC and +2 attack with a suboptimal weapon. Not incredibly overpowering.

4. You suggestion technically needs a reword but is a good idea. My thought was more of a step forward, strike, step back fighting style then just being able to attack 10 feet sooner. The AC bonus was just an idea for a secondary benefit and I agree isn't of the best flavor. What about disengage/dodge as a bonus action to replace the AC? It is a bit better in flavor, is something new to fighting styles, and seems pretty balanced. It could use some tweaking (disengage has less value with the greater range and dodge could be crazy OP with high enough AC) but might work.

Updated OP reload (WIP buff, added hand cross bow dual wield), alt versatile (switch as a move action), and fencer (new secondary ability) Thanks for all the great feedback

ZenBear
2015-06-18, 01:36 AM
1. That isn't what I am saying. The versatile you suggested on one end to be used with another weapon. If they would choose Dual-Wielder that is a magic shield worth of AC(+1 weapon A, +1 weapon B, and +1 feat) with heavy armor as well as a consistent bonus action attack. All it needs is a little multiclassing or Champion to make the extra attack better.
2. No, it is supported because a versatile weapon is the middle ground option between other one-handed weapons and two-handed weapons. This also doesn't deny what I said only a feat makes two-handed that much better.
3. Except Dueling already works there. Fighting styles are passive supplemental abilities. If you want something meaning that can compete with Great Weapon Mastery or Sharpshooter make a feat.

Once again you put words in my mouth and knock down straw men.

1. I didn't specify this because I thought it was self-evident, but the modification I suggested clearly implied that you only benefit from it when only wielding a versatile weapon. I did not intend for TWF to be an option with this style. That being said, your math is wrong. +1 AC from VFS, +1 AC from DW Feat. You can already get this with base Fighting Styles. In fact, this is exactly what I did on my TWF Paladin; Defense Fighting Style + Dual Wielder = +2 AC on top of heavy armor for AC 20 with full plate, equal to a S&B AC but with two attacks rather than +2 to damage per hit. With Mariner style a Champion can now achieve 21 AC pre-magic with Defense, Mariner, Medium Armor Master and Dual Wielder also granting a bonus action d8 attack, no disadvantage to stealth and a climb and swim speed to boot. Heavy armor is supposed to have the highest base AC because it require STR to be used effectively. STR is already vastly inferior to DEX without also losing the AC race. This is also why I disapprove of the OP making a style that allows all versatile weapons (even Battleaxe and Warhammer) to be considered finesse; yet another reason to never bother with STR.

2. Mechanically versatile weapons are not the middle ground because they do not offer anything other than a single damage die higher than one-handed, which averages +1 dmg with no defensive benefit. DW is the middle ground between S&B and 2H. 2H has a fighting style that makes it superior to versatile when wielding a greatsword/maul. Rerolling 1's and 2's makes a significant impact when you're rolling 2d6 per hit.

3. I'm not making this FS to be competitive with GWM or SS, I'm making it competetive with Duelist and Great Weapon Fighting. A feat should be made to additionally supplement Versatile weapons to match Great Weapon Master, Shield Master, Dual Wielder and Sharpshooter.


I suppose this is up to interpretation, but as far as I was ever aware, you cannot wield a sword in two hands with a shield.

Correct. Using a shield takes up your off-hand and disallows wielding a weapon two-handed. I never claimed otherwise, you misread me.


Opportunist (Ranger/Fighter)
While wielding a melee weapon in one hand, you gain +3 to attack rolls made using a reaction.
This is cool, if situational. But that's it's charm.
Versatile Style (All)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and not in heavy armor, you gain +1 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls.
I still do not approve of disallowing heavy armor users from getting all this style has to offer. As I stated before, Heavy Armor is supposed to have higher base AC than other armors. That's why its the most expensive, inflicts disadvantage on stealth, and has a STR requirement. That's the balance.
Wall of Spears (Paladin/Fighter)
While you wield a weapon with reach, creatures must spend twice the normal movement within 10ft. of you.
Seems strong, but could be interesting.
Master Thrower (Ranger/Fighter)
Whenever you make a ranged attack with a thrown weapon you may draw another thrown weapon as part of the attack. In addition, the ranges of your thrown weapons increase by 10ft.
This is excellent. Might just houserule it as available for all thrown weapons without a fighting style.
Full-body Combatant (Fighter)
While you have no free hand, if you take the attack action you may make an unarmed strike that deals damage equal to 1 + your strength modifier as a bonus action.
Pretty cool. Just say "unarmed attack" though so Tavern Brawler and Monk multiclass can still affect the damage.
Aggressive Defender (Paladin/Fighter)
If you are wielding a shield, you may use a bonus action push your shield against a creature within 5 feet. The target of this ability must make a strength save with a DC equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus & strength modifier. If they fail the save then they gain disadvantage on all attack rolls against creatures other than you.
Redundant with Battle Master Maneuver, but nice to have from level 1 for Fighter and available without a feat for Paladin.
Dexterous Loader (Ranger/Fighter)
You may reload a hand crossbow while wielding a light melee weapon or hand crossbow in place of a free hand. While wielding a hand crossbow you may load two bolts instead of one as part of an attack. This consumes one more ammunition, grants disadvantage on the attack roll, but deals double damage on a hit. (WIP & needs better wording)
Hand crossbow cheese, as others have stated.
Iaijutsu (In place of versatile for wuxia)
While both of your hands are free and not in heavy armor, you gain +1 AC. When you attack with a versatile weapon, if you drew it this turn you gain +2 to attack rolls.
Meh. I hate it when people overvalue eastern martial arts. Western styles are just as effective.
Versatile Alternate (In place of versatile for those who wanted it this way)
If you are wielding a versatile weapon in one hand and no weapon or shield in your other hand, you gain +2 AC. While you are wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain +2 to attack rolls. Switching between using a versatile weapon one or two handed may be done as part of a move.
See the end of my post for my thoughts on this.
Lunging Fencer (In place of dueling)
If you are wielding a melee weapon in one hand and no weapon or shield in your other hand, you may increase your reach to 10 feet. Also, you gain the ability to take the dodge and disengage actions as a bonus action.
I like it. Can't say for it's balance, but definitely thematic.
Powerful Strikes (Paladin/Fighter)
While using Strength for your attack, you gain +1 attack for each hand you wield the weapon in..
Meh.

My thoughts on a versatile fighting style have changed. There's no reason to give an AC bonus when wielding a versatile weapon 1-handed. It doesn't make sense IRL and causes problems mechanically. My propositions is this:

When wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain a +1 to hit and damage.

I saw someone else post this somewhere and didn't think much of it, but upon further consideration I think it works. It's a middle ground between Archery and Duelist benefits that gives more incentive to take a versatile weapon in two hands over a two-hand-only weapon like GS/GA/Maul. When you're not wielding it in two hands you now have an open hand to pick up a shield, wield an implement, grapple, etc. which are bonus enough on their own. By not taking a standard 2-hander you keep this option open, but lose the benefits of a heavy 2-hander that comes from GWF/GWM.

Torched Forever
2015-06-18, 10:14 AM
My thoughts on a versatile fighting style have changed. There's no reason to give an AC bonus when wielding a versatile weapon 1-handed. It doesn't make sense IRL and causes problems mechanically. My propositions is this:

When wielding a versatile weapon in two hands, you gain a +1 to hit and damage.

It's a middle ground between Archery and Duelist benefits that gives more incentive to take a versatile weapon in two hands. When you're not wielding it in two hands you now have an open hand to pick up a shield, wield an implement, grapple, etc. which are bonus enough on their own. By not taking a standard 2-hander you keep this option open, but lose the benefits of a heavy 2-hander that comes from GWF/GWM.
I do agree that the AC bonus is far from perfect in flavor but it works okay. The style gives you the option to change from a more defensive style to a more offensive style. Holding the weapon in two hands meant you had more cutting power (Represented in this style) but at the cost of a shield or other off-hand item. When you choose to hold it in one hand you are purposefully sacrificing offensive power for the benefit of some off-hand item. The idea behind the AC bonus was that you are focusing on defensive capabilities (Why you switched in the first place) and thus parry/use your shield to greater effect. I don't understand how it causes mechanical problems. Yes there is the TWF cheese, but other than that it is no worse than the defensive style.

+1 hit & +1 damage in 2h does seem like a good option. I'm a little hesitant to replace versatile with this but I'll consider it.

Let's do a quick comparison. The +1 damage just turns the 2hV into a true 2h, so looking beyond that what do the two styles have to offer. +1 attack, loses Heavy, -1/-1 for AC/grapple/magic/magic item OR roughly +1 .3/+0.8 damage. The first option seems a lot better as it provides versatility, use by small creatures, and is still fairly competitive in damage output. The only real downside it has is that it doesn't gain the "power attack" from GWM. Personally I think this is a great style but it doesn't replace versatile. It doesn't quite have the same flavor of defense/offense of the original.

Hand crossbow cheese, as others have stated.

Meh. I hate it when people overvalue eastern martial arts. Western styles are just as effective.
What cheese is there with the new version? Is there something I'm missing?

First of all, how is this overvalued? It is honestly quite weaker than the current style. I purposefully made it a replacement style for people who want a more eastern influenced campaign so that there wasn't interaction between the two.

Updated OP versatile (now w/ heavy armor), alt versatile (changed to ZenBear's suggestion), full-body (allowing monk/brawler benefits), and removed powerful strikes.

Amnoriath
2015-06-18, 12:01 PM
Once again you put words in my mouth and knock down straw men.

1. I didn't specify this because I thought it was self-evident, but the modification I suggested clearly implied that you only benefit from it when only wielding a versatile weapon. I did not intend for TWF to be an option with this style. That being said, your math is wrong. +1 AC from VFS, +1 AC from DW Feat. You can already get this with base Fighting Styles. In fact, this is exactly what I did on my TWF Paladin; Defense Fighting Style + Dual Wielder = +2 AC on top of heavy armor for AC 20 with full plate, equal to a S&B AC but with two attacks rather than +2 to damage per hit. With Mariner style a Champion can now achieve 21 AC pre-magic with Defense, Mariner, Medium Armor Master and Dual Wielder also granting a bonus action d8 attack, no disadvantage to stealth and a climb and swim speed to boot. Heavy armor is supposed to have the highest base AC because it require STR to be used effectively. STR is already vastly inferior to DEX without also losing the AC race. This is also why I disapprove of the OP making a style that allows all versatile weapons (even Battleaxe and Warhammer) to be considered finesse; yet another reason to never bother with STR.

2. Mechanically versatile weapons are not the middle ground because they do not offer anything other than a single damage die higher than one-handed, which averages +1 dmg with no defensive benefit. DW is the middle ground between S&B and 2H. 2H has a fighting style that makes it superior to versatile when wielding a greatsword/maul. Rerolling 1's and 2's makes a significant impact when you're rolling 2d6 per hit.

3. I'm not making this FS to be competitive with GWM or SS, I'm making it competetive with Duelist and Great Weapon Fighting. A feat should be made to additionally supplement Versatile weapons to match Great Weapon Master, Shield Master, Dual Wielder and Sharpshooter.

1. I am not putting words in your mouth nor am I making straw men to knock down. It isn't putting words in your mouth if I am pointing out some thing you didn't intend by design but didn't qualify. For the purposes of benefiting from your fighting style you can't use a shield so unless you allow the shield to grasp the weapon you can't use the fighting style while benefiting from a shield.
2. Except Dual Wielding allows any one-handed weapon to be used so each hand grasps a longsword meaning it stacks to be 3. Even if you change that it doesn't stack it still doesn't ignore that a two-weapon user can make better use out of it.
3. And the issue is that you are looking at weapon forms using feats to complete them and not the weapons themselves. A person using a versatile weapon can choose to benefit from 4 different fighting styles without feats. Normal and Finesse weapons can only benefit from 3, Light weapons do benefit from 4, and two-handed weapons can only benefit from 2. A versatile weapon then has almost the same versatility as a light weapon but does more base damage. All I am saying here is that the benefit of a versatile weapon is because they have options for higher damage and other implements or strategies so they are the middle ground melee weapon.
4. I never said that you were(that is putting words in people's mouths) I said you ought to make a feat because as I said before they could benefit from many as it is. A two-handed weapon only deals a modest amount more damage whether the versatile weapon has Dueling or Great Weapon but the character with the versatile weapon has other options. I am not saying don't but what I am saying here is that the Fighting Styles aren't the issue here because the benefit from either one and more plus other strategies. It is the feats.