fighting style feat

[Spacehamster]

Would a half feat that gives +1 STR or DEX and a fighting style be worth taking/be balanced?

[X3r4ph]

Would a half feat that gives +1 STR or DEX and a fighting style be worth taking/be balanced?

I would allow it.

[Waazraath]

I think it's balanced. Worth taking: yeah, sometimes.

[DanyBallon]

I would allow it, but with a restriction, you can’t take this feat if you already have a fighting style.

I must say that I don’t allow getting a second figthing style when you MC as I think having two figthing style should be reserved for the Champion.

[X3r4ph]

I must say that I don’t allow getting a second figthing style when you MC as I think having two figthing style should be reserved for the Champion.
But... this gimps a multiclass Champion as well???

[Spacehamster]

I would allow it, but with a restriction, you can’t take this feat if you already have a fighting style.

I must say that I don’t allow getting a second figthing style when you MC as I think having two figthing style should be reserved for the Champion.

Curious why you would do that? Fighting styles are not super powerful in any way and most of them does not work together xcpt mariner + defense for a medium or light armor
user. :)

[Anonymouswizard]

Worth taking, yes. It allows stuff like Bards, Rogues and Barbarians with Fighting Styles without forcing a dip in Fighter.

Balanced? Probably. Maybe a bit strong, maybe a bit weak, depending on what style is taken. However it looks on part for a half feat.

[Spacehamster]

Worth taking, yes. It allows stiff like Bards, Rogues and Barbarians work Fighting Styles without forcing a dip in Fighter.

Balanced? Probably. Maybe a bit strong, maybe a bit weak, depending on what style is taken. However it looks on part for a half feat.

My thought is to use it on a halfling barbarian to get 16 STR and dual wielder so sub optimal but would make dual wielding possible as
a barb. :)

[X3r4ph]

My thought is to use it on a halfling barbarian to get 16 STR and dual wielder so sub optimal but would make dual wielding possible as
a barb. :)

Dual wielder? Then you need all the help you can get.

[Spacehamster]

Dual wielder? Then you need all the help you can get.

How so? Should be the best option for a halfling barbarian(and would get the combat style at level 1 cus
my group ditches v-human and lets everyone pick a feat at 1 to combat the feat starvedness of 5e)?

[X3r4ph]

How so? Should be the best option for a halfling barbarian(and would get the combat style at level 1 cus
my group ditches v-human and lets everyone pick a feat at 1 to combat the feat starvedness of 5e)?

Halfling Barbarian. Hmm. I think Sword and Board and Dueling would be better. As soon as you get frenzy, or I dunno, War Cleric, and those Bonus Action attacks line up, then +2 damage begin to equal out damage wise. Also you have the added benefit of more AC.

But if you are dead set on Dual Wielder then you most definitely need the Figting Style.

[DanyBallon]

Curious why you would do that? Fighting styles are not super powerful in any way and most of them does not work together xcpt mariner + defense for a medium or light armor
user. :)

It's not about power but mostly to keep something unique for Champions and, up to a certain point, limiting some level dip. I feel that Champions need all the love we can give them, because, while mechanically decent, they feel bland, and when unique feature as being the only ones that can get 2 fighting styles get removed as soon as MC is involved, is just bad for them. So allowing a feat to do the exact same (and giving an ability bonus on top of it) is just making the Champion even more uninteresting. :smallfrown:

If you don't have the same concerns that I do about Champions, then I think the feat is balanced and there won't be too much abuse, as you can't take a feat twice, unless noted in the feat description.

[JNAProductions]

It's not about power but mostly to keep something unique for Champions and, up to a certain point, limiting some level dip. I feel that Champions need all the love we can give them, because, while mechanically decent, they feel bland, and when unique feature as being the only ones that can get 2 fighting styles get removed as soon as MC is involved, is just bad for them. So allowing a feat to do the exact same (and giving an ability bonus on top of it) is just making the Champion even more uninteresting. :smallfrown:

If you don't have the same concerns that I do about Champions, then I think the feat is balanced and there won't be too much abuse, as you can't take a feat twice, unless noted in the feat description.

The solution is not to depower everyone else, it's to empower the Champion.

I personally find the Champion just fine as-is, but there are a couple good fixes floating around the Playground, if you like.

[X3r4ph]

The solution is not to depower everyone else, it's to empower the Champion.

Couldn't agree more. Actually. Giving it access to all fighting styles through its progression would be pretty cool.

[DanyBallon]

The solution is not to depower everyone else, it's to empower the Champion.

I personally find the Champion just fine as-is, but there are a couple good fixes floating around the Playground, if you like.

I strongly disagree, preventing Fighting Style to be taken if you already have one, is not depowering anyone, the game is balanced exactly this way (do I need to remember you that the core balance do not include MC, and only the Champion is allowed by core?)
By allowing everyone to take a second fighting style, you depower the Champion, and create a trend for power creep. You get the same trend when you try to boost "half-feat" in order to make them as advantageous as PAM, GWM, SS, etc.

Yet again this is just my opinion, and regarding how to balance options, I'm often in minority :smallbiggrin:

[ZorroGames]

The solution is not to depower everyone else, it's to empower the Champion.

I personally find the Champion just fine as-is, but there are a couple good fixes floating around the Playground, if you like.

Champions are goood to go, as is, for me.

I tend to favor Mountain Dwarf Champions because it allows me to role play (no accents!) out of combat the veteran - not eager to fight but willing to defeat Evil and protect the young, old, and weak of groups not at war with dwarf/human/gnomes/even (groan) halflings. If I ever did not have elves or half-elves in my party it would stop there but there are almost always multiple lf/halfeelf PCs in the party, sigh.

In combat I am frequently one of the one or two martial characters in the party so I just “defend and deal damage” which can be hairy enough with two or three arcane casters in a party. “Incoming” even if “friendly” can be just a bit tense.

Champions are the PBI (Poor Bloody Infantry) but without such martials the arcane casters would be bleeding instead of sweating.

I get the point but it seems like it would need extensive play test before ever seeing wide application. Maybe require the Weapon Master feat for non-martial classes as a prerequisite?

[Kuulvheysoon]

I’ve had one player choose to play a champion. What I didn’t was to let him switch the second fighting style on a long rest. That way he could be flexible, and tailor his character to the needs of the table that night and whatever items he found.

[Deleted]

I would allow it, but with a restriction, you can’t take this feat if you already have a fighting style.

I must say that I don’t allow getting a second figthing style when you MC as I think having two figthing style should be reserved for the Champion.

Champion is a horrible subclass and shouldn't be the basis for any rules going forward. That subclass needs so much work to begin with. I'm all for simple characters, but that doesnt mean you can't gain cool and useful things (second fighting style won't come up as often as people think and waitimg 10 levels is horrible as people don't play past level 8-ish all that much).

[Dr.Samurai]

I would grab Mariner for my barbarian! :smallbiggrin:

[DanyBallon]

Champion is a horrible subclass and shouldn't be the basis for any rules going forward. That subclass needs so much work to begin with. I'm all for simple characters, but that doesnt mean you can't gain cool and useful things (second fighting style won't come up as often as people think and waitimg 10 levels is horrible as people don't play past level 8-ish all that much).

I won't argue with you on this, as you are equally right as I am. As from various thread we commented, it appear we have not the same objective and opinion on what D&D should be and how it should be balanced :smallwink:

Like I said, I know I'm a minority in regard of my opinions :smallbiggrin:

[miburo]

Would a half feat that gives +1 STR or DEX and a fighting style be worth taking/be balanced?

For most fighting styles I think it would be fine. The only one I worry is with the Archery fighting style. If you start with an odd Dex score, you could be getting a +3 to hit with one feat which seems like a lot.

Although what's a half feat? I guess that just means half Str/Dex increase, half fighting style?

[Malifice]

Would a half feat that gives +1 STR or DEX and a fighting style be worth taking/be balanced?

Yep. I have it my games.

Call it 'Warrior born'

[DracoKnight]

Yep. I have it my games.

Call it 'Warrior born'

We have it in our games too. It’s pretty awesome, since there’s a couple martial classes that don’t get a fighting style. Though, we call it Martial Training.

[Malifice]

We have it in our games too. It’s pretty awesome, since there’s a couple martial classes that don’t get a fighting style. Though, we call it Martial Training.

Warrior Born just sounded more bad-ass for my games.

[DarkKnightJin]

Sounds fair to me.
If you worry about people doubling up, can make the pre-req that the character can't already have a Fighting Style. That way the Champion is safe, there's a -very- small window for Paladin or Ranger to pick up the feat and game the system.. and it allows other classes access to a Fighting Style without having to dip Fighter and slow their progression.

[Spacehamster]

For most fighting styles I think it would be fine. The only one I worry is with the Archery fighting style. If you start with an odd Dex score, you could be getting a +3 to hit with one feat which seems like a lot.

Although what's a half feat? I guess that just means half Str/Dex increase, half fighting style?

Half feat is a feat that gives a boon and +1 on an ability score. Observant and the resilient feats are half feats for example

[Malifice]

Monks have fighting style feets.

And hands.

[Deleted]

I won't argue with you on this, as you are equally right as I am. As from various thread we commented, it appear we have not the same objective and opinion on what D&D should be and how it should be balanced :smallwink:

Like I said, I know I'm a minority in regard of my opinions :smallbiggrin:

Well, if you're not going to argue with me on that, I'll argue with you on the fact that you won't argue with me on that!

:smalltongue:

Honestly, my issue isn't really the champion but the base fighter itself. If the base fighter was well built I would actually support a champion subclass that was very similar to what's there (crit fisher) if only Remarkable Athlete made the fighter a remarkable athlete (coughExpertisecough).

[djreynolds]

It is actually more expensive than taking a level of fighter.

I mean there are so many other feats out there. And you are spending one of the possible five you get when you could just grab a single level of fighter for so much more.

You are obviously going to have a 13 in strength or dexterity.

I could see a bard snagging this for archery style, like a valor bard who wouldn't get much for a dip of fighter because they have medium armor and martial weapon proficiencies... okay

A rogue could snag this for TWF or archery style but would lose out on increased weapon selection, but then again you have rapier and short sword already.

And a barbarian who is dreaming of that primal champion capstone

I could see this as a benefit to those 3 classes.

[DracoKnight]

It is actually more expensive than taking a level of fighter.

I mean there are so many other feats out there. And you are spending one of the possible five you get when you could just grab a single level of fighter for so much more.

You are obviously going to have a 13 in strength or dexterity.

I could see a bard snagging this for archery style, like a valor bard who wouldn't get much for a dip of fighter because they have medium armor and martial weapon proficiencies... okay

A rogue could snag this for TWF or archery style but would lose out on increased weapon selection, but then again you have rapier and short sword already.

And a barbarian who is dreaming of that primal champion capstone

I could see this as a benefit to those 3 classes.

It's also a solid pick for a fighter who's not a champion and wants a second fighting style.

Oh, no! They could then do something that only the champion can do! Well, there's the feat that gives Battle Master maneuvers. Also, a champion could pick up this feat to have three fighting styles.

[Vaz]

If you think 1 d6 superiority dice/short rest makes a BattleMaster, you haven't played a BM.

[DracoKnight]

If you think 1 d6 superiority dice/short rest makes a BattleMaster, you haven't played a BM.

I have played a Battle Master. And by no means does havingthe feat make you a Battle Master. Nor does having two Fighting styles make you a champion.

[DanyBallon]

I have played a Battle Master. And by no means does havingthe feat make you a Battle Master. Nor does having two Fighting styles make you a champion.

Effectively, because with the feat you have no where near all the options Battle Master gets (increasing Superiority Dice, much more tricks), while by allowing a feat to pick a second fighting style, you get the exact same thing what a Champion gets. While having two fighting style may not be the staple of the Champion, it is one of the unique thing he gets, if you consider core only. Champion already lacks appeal, why is it a good idea to allow them to become more bland with MC and a feat that emulates one of its unique ability?

[Spacehamster]

Effectively, because with the feat you have no where near all the options Battle Master gets (increasing Superiority Dice, much more tricks), while by allowing a feat to pick a second fighting style, you get the exact same thing what a Champion gets. While having two fighting style may not be the staple of the Champion, it is one of the unique thing he gets, if you consider core only. Champion already lacks appeal, why is it a good idea to allow them to become more bland with MC and a feat that emulates one of its unique ability?

Having two fighting styles is a small boon, and the staple of the champ is critting. And nothing stops the champion from taking the feat and get three fighting styles so he will still have more potential styles lol

[Anonymouswizard]

Effectively, because with the feat you have no where near all the options Battle Master gets (increasing Superiority Dice, much more tricks), while by allowing a feat to pick a second fighting style, you get the exact same thing what a Champion gets. While having two fighting style may not be the staple of the Champion, it is one of the unique thing he gets, if you consider core only. Champion already lacks appeal, why is it a good idea to allow them to become more bland with MC and a feat that emulates one of its unique ability?

Actually, outside of TO I've never seen anybody else take a Battlemaster, but have seen people take Champions. Mainly for the level 3 ability, the increased crit range feels more powerful than Superiority Dice and their manoeuvres.

Champion is a big pile of meh, but people look at it and see reliable meh, compared to the Champion where the thought is 'how will I know to spend dice'.

Now I certainly think the Champion could be made better, the first thing I'd do is move the second Fighting Style to level six and give it alongside Remarkable Athlete. I'd also specify that RA applies to initiative checks, that means I just need one ability to slot in and I'll have a Champion I think is more worthwhile.